Okay, so then I take it the term "dry-down" technically only refers
to the increase in optical density in the highlights, although
people also use "dry-down" to describe the decrease in density in the
shadows?
Katharine
On Jul 21, 2006, at 9:00 AM, wcharmon@wt.net wrote:
> Katherine,
>
> It depends on which end of the scale you are talking about. The
> highlights dry
> down darker than when they are wet, and the shadows lose reflective
> density as
> they dry.
>
> Clay
>
> Quoting Katharine Thayer <kthayer@pacifier.com>:
>
>
>> On Jul 20, 2006, at 2:13 PM, Ryuji Suzuki wrote:
>>
>>> There is no question of what the dry down is phenomenologically.
>>> It's
>>> the increase of optical density once the material dries.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jul 21, 2006, at 4:11 AM, BOB KISS wrote:
>>
>>> I mentioned in a post about 1 1/2 to two years ago that I found
>>> that prints
>>> from digital negatives had a curious drying phenomenon that prints
>>> from
>>> camera original negs did not. In prints from digital negs, the
>>> shadows lost
>>> density but so did the highlights...they both got lighter!!! In
>>> prints from
>>> camera original negs the dry down was more standard, i.e. the
>>> highlights got
>>> darker and the shadows lighter.
>>>
>>
>> Sorry, I'm confused... not being a platinum printer I don't know
>> the answer to this question from experience, and reading the
>> discussion isn't helping, given the seemingly opposite descriptions
>> sampled above: does dry-down in pt/pd usually result in increased
>> DMax, or decreased DMax, compared to the wet print? Thanks,
>> Katharine
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.
>
>
Received on 07/21/06-10:54:38 AM Z
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : 08/31/06-12:23:48 PM Z CST