Re: Digital negative novice needs help.

Ryuji,

I'm mad at you (myself actually), I was trying to say something along those
line and in just a few words you basically resume all I was trying to say.
Ok I'll stop crying and just add a little comment.

In general, in science we need to be abstract, theorical and absolute, in
engeneering we need to find practical applications to scientific theories,
in the technical world we need to make these applications work and in the
artistic world we need to throw most of this out the window and let our
emotions speak as loud as possible.

Regards
Yves

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ryuji Suzuki" <rs@silvergrain.org>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca>
Sent: Saturday, April 22, 2006 1:56 AM
Subject: Re: Digital negative novice needs help.

> From: Gregory Popovitch <greg@gpy.com>
> Subject: RE: Digital negative novice needs help.
> Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 21:21:15 -0400
>
> > Also, there are some facts. Ektaflex prints known to resolve 20 lp/mm
> > are visibly less sharp to the eye that other types of RA4 paper prints
> > resolving 65 lp/mm. How do you explain this if 10 lp/mm is the
resolution
> > limit of the eye?
>
> Again, resolution limit and accutance are very different matters. You
> should be discussing these matters in terms of MTF (modulation
> transfer function) instead of resolvability and accutance, both of
> which are rather subjective matters. (resolvability is often given in
> numbers but there is no single established scientific method to
> measure those numbers without human judgement, not that it matters a
> lot in most practical cases.)
>
> There are two important papers on this topic published in volume 15,
> issue 2 of Photographic Science and Engineering (1971). One is by
> Nelson and the other Higgins.
>
> > I think that your statement "increased resolution does
> > not necessarily mean the edge contrast is greater", while correct,
> > is misleading. I doubt that in practice you will be able to produce
> > high acutance, low resolution prints. If the resolution is low, then the
> > edge sharpness will not be satisfactory to the eye, and I think that's
> > what Ctein was saying.
>
> It's easy to make high accutance, low resolution image. Using
> old technology film developed in accutance developers, and then
> magnify by a large factor.
>
> On the other hand, if you develop T-MAX 100 in D-76 and print it at
> moderate magnification, you get low accutance, high resolution image.
>
> With digital signal processing based image processing on computers,
> any of these things is possible.
Received on Sat Apr 22 07:17:03 2006