also, how to tell one and two coat emulsions
rich
On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 1:08 PM, Richard Lahrson <gtripspud@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
I recently asked a question about Tri-X and got no response.
It is about Tri-X being a 2 coat emulsion. What's the difference
between one and two coat manufacturing of film?
rich
On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 1:03 PM, Richard Lahrson <gtripspud@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
recent news: imitation eggs from mung beans
On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 10:16 AM, Redacted sender msampson45 for DMARC <
dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Philsophically,things are what they are. Approximation, simulations,
imitations, seldom work out. Decaf coffee, diet soda, N/A beer, and soy
sausages come to mind. They have their reasons to exist but can not equal
the experience of the original. Digital and film record the world
differently and the both have their place (obviously).
I prefer film for my personal and creative efforts, but have no problem
with the way a modern digital camera renders the world. So I won't try to
make those images look like film.
With one caveat- I love the low saturation, contrasty color of the
earliest Kodachrome, 1930s-50s. But I haven't tried to get my digital
images to look like that... yet.
Mark Sampson
-----Original Message-----
From: Myron Gochnauer <goch@xxxxxx>
To: Pure Silver group <pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Fri, Jul 20, 2018 8:15 am
Subject: [pure-silver] Film look?
As long as we’ve sort of strayed over the pure-silver line…
What are your views of what gives film its appealing look? Or
alternatively, why is it *so* difficult to produce a true film look with a
purely digital process?
My experience with every film-mimicking plugin or action for Photoshop
has been disappointing. The results, when tweaked, can be quite nice, and
sometimes even ‘better’ than film, but I’ve never had a “Wow! That is just
like Try-X!” moment.
Perhaps the greatest fault I find with simulations is that, from my
perspective, they underexpose and overdevelop B&W films, so you end up with
too many blocked shadows and in general a calk-and-coal pushed look. (Using
0.1 above base + fog density as my ‘speed point’, I normally exposed the
1970’s version of Tri-X Pro at 250 or 200 instead of 320, and developed
accordingly for a diffusion enlarger.)
For what it is worth, True Grain by Grubba Software is the best film
simulation software I have run across. Unfortunately, it does not run as a
Photoshop plugin, so it’s harder to use for try-this-and-try-that
experimentation. It uses scans of developed film, so the data for each film
is typically in the order of 80-90MB.
Myron
