[pure-silver] Re: contrast changes

  • From: "Ralph W. Lambrecht" <info@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2010 18:14:15 +0100

Harry

What is the technical explanation you were given?





Regards



Ralph W. Lambrecht

http://www.darkroomagic.com


This electronic message contains information that is confidential, legally privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure. This information is intended for the use of the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, printing or any other use of, or any action in reliance on, the contents of this electronic message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender and destroy the original message immediately.

P don't print this e-mail unless you really have to






On Feb 28, 2010, at 18:05, harry kalish wrote:

There is a technical explanation for the reason why greater enlargements loose contrast. For greater enlargements, I have found that better prints
can be produced from contrastier negs (or a highter contrast filter if
printing on MG paper).

Harry


On 2/27/10 5:10 PM, "Richard Knoppow" <dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


----- Original Message -----
From: "Shannon Stoney" <shannonstoney@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, February 27, 2010 11:51 AM
Subject: [pure-silver] contrast changes


I've been making "work prints" for the first time:  that
is, enlarging to a print on 8x10 paper and getting
contrast right before bumping up to the more expensive
11x14. Usually this works pretty well.  But in my last
printing session, it didn't:  the big print looked a lot
"flatter" than the little print, which looked fine, at the
same paper grade.

I guess I could have agitated less, but I made two big
prints and made a point of agitating the second one so
that this wouldn't be a problem. Could larger paper be
subtly different in contrast?  Or could a bigger print
just "look" flatter?

--shannon

    Shannon, I think this is an optical illusion, its
fairly well known. One way of proving it is to overlay the
small print on the large one and see if there is a visible
difference in the shadow densities. The eye is pretty good
at matching brightness of adjacent areas so one can make
such comparisons visually with good precision.
    There may be other effects such as a reciprocity
failure in the paper but the comparison should helf find if
that is happening.

--
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.


= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = ====================================================================== 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: