Regarding the PS--I'm Grace Taylor, but Grace to the list.
On Monday, November 28, 2005, at 11:44 PM, Judy Seigel wrote:
>
> On Mon, 28 Nov 2005, Grace Taylor wrote:
>
>> Judy, there's still a WHOLE lot I don't know about getting the best
>> results for alt-photo printing from digital negatives, so I still
>> have a lot of learning to do. I have a question. Would the
>> print-out you suggest be an ink-jet printout, or a Van Dyke print of
>> the step tablet? It has been the Van Dyke print of the step tablet
>> (along with an image) that I have used to adjust the curve, using a
>> percentage guess as to how much to adjust. Then adjusting again on
>> the next VD printout until the result looks the way I want it to.
>> I've never used a densitometer, but it would certainly be more
>> accurate than eyeballing.
>
> Hi Taylor, I took your mention of posterizing to mean you meant the
> original digital file onscreen. You clearly only began with that...
> APOLOGIES !
>
> True, I find the densitometer a great help-- tho you almost don't need
> it with the 21-step... which is also calibrated, that is, a benchmark
> or "absolute."
>
> Interestingly, a sensitometry book I once actually read points out
> that early densitometers worked exactly by eyeballing -- the operator
> had to compare or match two tones by eye. And the author noted that
> human eye is still the most sensitive.... !!!
>
> PS. You're "Taylor," not "Grace"? ( Or "Grace," not "Taylor"???)
>
> J.
>
Received on Tue Nov 29 09:02:47 2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 12/01/05-02:04:51 PM Z CST