jjs wrote:
Be careful when comparing manufacturer's curves. A visual glance at the
chart can give misimpressions. You have to plot each film using the same X,Y
metrics. Further, you do not know what kind of light was used. And finally,
some charts go off the scale of usable density.



That's good advice, and I'll add that curves that I produce myself give
me better information than ones produced by manufacturers, since I know
the conditions of the test, and it takes into consideration my
photographic system (exposure, development,...)

I'll add that a number of enlarging papers from major manufacturers have
reduced highlight contrast. Using a film/development combo with reduced
highlight contrast (i.e. a shoulder) can result in overly flat high
print values. I had that problem with PMK. It's a fine developer, but
it didn't give me what I wanted with the film and paper that I wanted to
use.

As usual, Mikey doesn't know what he's talking about. At best, he's
overgeneralizing tremendously, and no amount of name-calling is going to
change that. Sure, if you want do reportage style photos in full sun of
a polar bar at the zoo while guessing at exposure, Mikey's forte, then
TMY might not be the best choice. The best choice would be for Mikey to
stay home and take his meds.

-Peter