RE: Step test and ES apples to apples

I had a response to digital wedge test but trashed it because it sat in the
draft folder and the other that happened, I sent it several times and it
showed up on the list twice. Long and the short, I have only done a few
digital negatives and got close enough but didn't run a full test. It is a
frustration, that of making digital negs, that has nothing to do with
printing and everything to do with software companies, ink suppliers and
working out side their desired product support. I print with Cone inks,
Image Print and they don't get along. So back to the other side of
printing, a traditional silver quest.

Eric Neilsen Photography

4101 Commerce Street

Suite 9

Dallas, TX 75226

http://e.neilsen.home.att.net

http://ericneilsenphotography.com

  _____

From: Ender100@aol.com [mailto:Ender100@aol.com]
Sent: Monday, October 03, 2005 7:58 PM
To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
Subject: Re: Step test and ES apples to apples

Gentlemen! START YOUR DENSITOMETERS!

heheheeh actually I am enjoying this thread. As Joe pointed out there are
2-3 different standards besides the ANSI standards, which I think are quoted
both in Dick Arentz's Platinum & Palladium Printing and in Phil Davis's
Beyond The Zone System.

Sandy made a good point regarding digital negatives. Since you can apply a
Process Adjustment Curve, you can get separation up closer to DMax. So it
would seem that another standard might be applied to using digital
negatives. I do a similar calibration to Sandy, going pretty high up on the
shoulder of the PD curve for my print DMax.

Best Wishes,
Mark Nelson
Purchase the eBook & PDN System for Your Own Custom Digital Negative
Workflow @
Precision Digital Negatives <http://www.precisiondigitalnegatives.com/>
PDN's Own 31-Step Tablet Now Available-produced by Stouffer Industries
Coming Soon-Curve Calculator II will let you choose your toes!
www.MarkINelsonPhoto.com <http://www.markinelsonphoto.com/>

In a message dated 10/3/05 5:55:33 PM, e.neilsen@worldnet.att.net writes:

you have posted there that the Kallitype step test with an exposure by the
URI super actinic gave you an ES of 2.4. Well that is close to what mine
step test look like. Unlike your posted image that should only an ES of 1.8
for your platinum/palladium. I don't think we are not talking apples to
apples, I think that we are talking difference in process that is so great
as to seem like a whole different kind of apple. Do you have the reflected
data for those tests? That way we can compare real numbers to real numbers
within the measuring ability of the densitometers at hand.
Received on Mon Oct 3 19:18:58 2005