[pure-silver] Re: Agfa Paper Equivalent
- From: "Richard Knoppow" <dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2008 20:27:18 -0700
----- Original Message -----
From: "john stockdale" <j.sto@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, June 09, 2008 3:55 PM
Subject: [pure-silver] Re: Agfa Paper Equivalent
At 08:17 AM 10/06/2008, Richard wrote:
.
At one time AGFA contrast numbers were one number
higher than Kodak for the same contrast, i.e., AGFA No.3
was the same as Kodak No.2 but AGFA changed this many
years ago (1980s I think but am not certain).
---
Richard Knoppow
Maybe that has something to do with their film development
instructions leading to eccessive contrast. I'm sure that
turned many people off Agfa films, quite unnecessarily.
I dont' think so because the descriptions of the grades
were correct, i.e., No.3 was described as Normal.
I don't know what AGFA's target gamma was for its
development. Late film data is for a gamma of about 0.6
which is OK for contact printing or diffusion enlarging.
However, gamma and Contrast Index or Average Contrast can
not in general be compared. Usually, for a given printing
contrast CI will be lower than Gamma but it depends on the
film curve.
---
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.
Other related posts:
