[pure-silver] Re: 35 MM T-MAX 100 IN PYROCAT?

Richard, EXCELLENT!
Jonathan

-----Original Message-----
From: pure-silver-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:pure-silver-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Richard Knoppow
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2008 10:30 AM
To: pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [pure-silver] Re: 35 MM T-MAX 100 IN PYROCAT?


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "BOB KISS" <bobkiss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2008 5:55 AM
Subject: [pure-silver] Re: 35 MM T-MAX 100 IN PYROCAT?


> DEAR JONATHAN,
> Here are some definitions (curious choice of words!) of 
> acutance.
> 1) "A measure of the sharpness with which a film can 
> reproduce the edge of
> an object" (Dictionary.com)
> 2) The measure of lens performance or of picture quality, 
> in terms of the
> sharpness of the transition across the boundary between 
> the images of light
> and dark areas. (Photographic Optics; Cox)
> I have much more sophisticated definitions in Neblette and 
> Mees &
> James but the above cover it.
> ******For an excellent example please see the following 
> link.
> http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/sharpness.htm
> Scroll down (about mid page) to the close up images of the 
> man's
> sweater.  The images clearly show the difference between 
> resolution (ability
> to reproduce fine detail) and acutance (perceived 
> sharpness, often due to
> edge effects).
> Soooooooooooooo, as mentioned, although the T-max 100 35mm 
> negs I
> have processed with other developers held lots of fine 
> detail, there was an
> overall lack of sharpness.
> CHEERS!
> BOB

    The term acutance was invented by Kodak to describe the 
contrast at the edges of sharply focused bright and dark 
areas on film. Edge sharpness of the image due to film 
characteristics is separate from the edge contrast of the 
image from the lens. Acutance is partly a characteristic of 
the film and partly its determined by processing. The edge 
contrast on a negative may be in excess of the contrast of 
the image generating it. Acutance is lowered by scattering 
of light in the emulsion (irradiance) and can be increased 
by edge/border effects in development and also by optical 
effects in film that has been processed in a tanning 
developer. The edge or border effects can increase the 
contrast at a sharply defined transition because the 
reaction products of the developer can diffuse sideways in 
the emulsion. So, at the border, reaction products from the 
denser areas tend to diffuse to the lower density area thus 
reducing the amount of development while fresh developer 
from that area diffuses into the dense area tending to 
increase development there. The scale of the effect depends 
on the rate of diffusion in the emulsion, the thickness of 
the emulsion, and the nature of the developer. The reaction 
products of some developers have little effect on the rate 
of development, in others a relatively large effect. The 
reaction products of Metol, for instance, are restrainers, 
those of hydroquinone are accelerators.
     Since sulfite, or other preservatives which become 
sulfite in reaction, are oxygen absorbers they tend to 
prevent the generation of reaction products by selective 
absorption of oxygen. This is actually one reason for the 
presense of sulfites in developers. Developers with much 
sulfite tend to produce relatively weak acutance effects.
     Also, the concentration of developing agents and 
sulfite has an effect: dilute developers tend to produce 
stronger edge effects than stronger ones. As an example 
developers like D-76 or Microdol-X have very little edge 
effect when used full strength but both will generate strong 
effects when diluted 1:3. Rodinal generates strong acutance 
effects at around 1:100.
     Agitation also has an effect. Since the acutance effect 
is due to "exaustion" of the developer (really a misnomer) 
rapid agitation tends to reduce the effects although it can 
not overcome the minimal effect due to the diffusion rate of 
the emulsion.
     Where a tanning developer has been used there is a 
slight variation in index of refraction and in emulsion 
thickness dependant on the amount of tanning. This can have 
an effect similar to acutance at the edges of dense vs: 
light areas.
     Keep in mind that acutance is an optical illusion. It 
depends on a characteristic of vision which tends to 
interpret contrast as sharpness. Actually, strong acutance 
effects can _reduce_ resolution. This is a problem in 
photographic sound recording and in microfilm. However, the 
eye is relatively insensitive to resoltion and will see an 
image with relatively poor resolution but strong edge 
contast as sharp.
     Note also that acutance is fixed in scale so it can be 
quite noticable in images made from 35mm film but is of 
virtually no importance for 4x5 negatives.
     I find too much acutance to be rather unpleasant.
     Another note: a sharply defined grain pattern also 
gives the illusion of sharpness to otherwise somewhat blurry 
images. This is one reason 35mm users sometimes like grain: 
it helps cover up poor optics or poor film resolution.

---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 

============================================================================
=================================
To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your
account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you
subscribed,) and unsubscribe from there.

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG. 
Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.24.3/1472 - Release Date: 5/29/2008
7:27 AM
 

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG. 
Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.24.3/1472 - Release Date: 5/29/2008
7:27 AM
 

=============================================================================================================
To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your 
account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,) 
and unsubscribe from there.

Other related posts: