From: Judy Seigel (jseigel@panix.com)
Date: 09/10/02-11:06:03 PM Z
On Tue, 10 Sep 2002 Ender100@aol.com wrote:
> Even more on topic and more serious, someone mentioned earlier in a post (and
> I lost the post) that they had been working one a Photoshop curve for gum.
> I would be interested in hearing more on their findings.
In my experience a "photoshop curve for gum" would be like trying to pin
down a shadow. You can of course make a curve for gum (I've made one --
all I have to do is figure out how to save it and apply subsequently to
the next negative -- a not insignificant detail NOT covered in the manual,
or in Burkholder either as far as I can tell).
Granted I'm at the bottom of the learning curve "curvewise," but it's been
clear from the outset from comparison tests that any "curve" would vary
with the substrate you're making the negative on, as they print with
different contrast ranges, also the printer you're printing it with, plus
of course your style of gum -- what paper, one coat or many, color sep or
monochrome, ratio of sensitizer, method of development, etc. etc. etc.
etc. etc. Gum isn't platinum printing ya know.
You also have to decide whether your "curve" would be to get all the tones
in one coat, in which case it would be flat indeed, or to permit adding in
more steps with subsequent coats, which can be used to add colors, tone
shadows, increase density, do highlight detail, & so forth -- which are
much easier to achieve with a negative that's contrastier than a single
coat.
In short, a one-curve-fits-all for gum sounds like a contradiction in
terms.
Judy
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 10/01/02-03:47:09 PM Z CST