Sandy King wrote:
> And there is the crux. We determine to test either, a) the material,
> or b) the material given certain parameters, i.e. "in real life."
>
> But, since "in reality" there is no "real life", other than multiple
> options from which we choose *one*, "what do we test?
>
> Testing film in the camera seem intuitively correct, and it works
> reasonably well in practice, but for comparing EFS and CI with
> different films this method is for all practical purposes useless.
Right, so to compare *films*, one needs to use identical situations for
each film.
On the other hand, once one has selected a film, and wants to be able to
expose and print "by the numbers" ala BTZS, you might run in camera
curves for each lens under low, medium and high flare situations.
At some point, this gets a bit ridiculous, as you can spend more time
testing and calibrating than taking actual pictures and making real
prints.... it is at this time that development by inspection starts to
look very attractive :-))
Jonathan
Received on Thu Nov 11 20:56:21 2004
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 12/08/04-10:51:33 AM Z CST