From: Judy Seigel (jseigel@panix.com)
Date: 07/19/02-02:35:22 PM Z
On Thu, 18 Jul 2002, Richard Knoppow wrote:
> What bothers me is that Anchell has become an "authority" despite that
> much of what he wrote comes from other sources and is indefinite in the way
> this statement is.
And this goes for a couple of other "authorities," as I seem to have
ruffled some feathers by pointing out on this very list a while back. I
think in alt photo especially, it is CRUCIAL to distinguish between one's
own personal first-hand TESTING or observation of process, and "RESEARCH"
that consists of copying/footnoting or just having read "the literature."
When we speak of Kodak "research," we generally mean actual stuff people
employed by Kodak actually did. When Mr. X, who shall in this example be
nameless, cites his "research," however, it turns out he means stuff he
read somewhere, often garbled in translation, not fully applicable to the
case, imperfectly understood, and/or bacocked to begin with.
cheers,
Judy
> If you want to see extensive research on tonal rendition of B&W look up
> the old papers by Lloyd A. Jones, of Kodak Laboratories, and his various
> associates. From about 1920 to the late 1950's he published extensively in
> this area. Most of the key papers were published in the Journal of the
> Franklin Institute.
> ----
> Richard Knoppow
> Los Angeles, CA, USA
> dickburk@ix.netcom.com
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 09/19/02-11:11:01 AM Z CST