From: Jeffrey D. Mathias (jeffrey.d.mathias@worldnet.att.net)
Date: 03/09/01-03:32:30 PM Z
Pam Niedermayer wrote:
> ... When it comes to technology, I have a theory that the more you know
> the less capable your equipment need be. ...
> I'm brand new to pt/pd and other alternative processes. I can't see
> that it would hurt (as long as I don't have to spend much) to take a
> few measurements while learning. Probably after a while working in
> this area, I won't need such devices.
But it does hurt. It hurts ones ability to train their eye to read the
densities, not to the number given by some device, but to the feeling of
what must be right to produce desired results. A densitometer device is
not needed at all to produce the finest photographs. It may be nice for
plotting curves and studying the mathematics of density relationships,
but this is far different from understanding the relationships of scene,
film, and print. It is really only after one has mastered these
relationships that the densitometer might prove useful, and then one
realizes that the eye is more accurate anyway. (Try the two hole
comparison method to compare a density to a known standard.) Working
with a densitometer can easily prevent or hinder a novice from
understanding the relationships of scene, film, and print because they
become involved in understanding the densitometer instead.
A corollary to your theory might be that the less capable one is, the
simpler their equipment should be.
-- Jeffrey D. Mathias http://home.att.net/~jeffrey.d.mathias/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 04/02/01-09:55:25 AM Z CST