From: Clay (wcharmon@wt.net)
Date: 01/12/03-09:15:45 PM Z
> The way to get the right contrast is in the negative. And it ain't even
> difficult to do.
No argument there. I rarely use any contrast agent myself. But every
now and then, a screw up occurs, and I'm happy to have the Na2. I
haven't had the tonality problems you mentioned, but I use Na2 diluted
to 10%, and as sparingly as I can. I have found graininess to be as
much due to paper type and drying methods as anything else. But your
point is certainly true: if you can get a good negative in the first
place, life is good.
Speaking of good negatives, I want to chime in on one of Sandy's
recommendations vis a vis the BTZS palm pilot program. For grins,
recently I did duplicate exposures and development of some TMY
negatives in D-76 1:1 according to its recommendations, and they were
exactly right: shadow densities of .25, highlights densities of 2.1.
This was not based on any personal testing. I just blindly followed its
exposure and development recommendations and used the incident metering
method that Phil Davis recommends, and I got perfect negatives on a
very high contrast scene. I was impressed.
Clay
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 02/21/03-10:44:16 AM Z CST