"Donald Qualls" wrote in message
news:xc3Yc.84832$mD.72353@attbi_s02...
Alan Smithee wrote:

I'm going to attach the example. I'm not sure if this will show up since
this is not a binary group. The first is roughly what it looks like on
my
monitor (calibrated with OptiCal) and the "b" version is roughly what I
get
in the darkroom.

Would have been better to post a link to a webspace somewhere with those
images -- but...

This looks to me like a fine example of why people consider TMX fussy;
it continues to record detail long past what you can print, so the
negatives look okay to the (uncalibrated) eye, but are very hard to print.

.....
uh, where do I get me one of those eye calibrators you're talking about? ;^j