35mm on grade 3 explained

"Uranium Committee" wrote in message
om...

I try very hard to make negatives that basically print themselves. I
have no desire to spend countless hours in the darkroom trying to
print a negative that is fundamentally flawed. This approach allows me
to get gorgeous prints without having to be one of the best printers
in the world.

In that respect, you are no different than the so-called Zone System mavens.
Different means to the same end. Some make a religion of the methods. Don't
go there. If you intuit the method, more the better.

Best,
John

"jjs" wrote in message ...
"Uranium Committee" wrote in message
m...

I have seen my prints and I have seen the prints of many others. Mine
are always better. I offer you a chance to see one. Yes or no?

I have seen the prints of thousands; having been a photo editor helped in
that regard, so has decades of interest. I was once considered a good enough
printer to be chosen as a custom B&W printer at the most prestigious custom
wet printing facility in the country. And STILL I would never claim to be
"the best printer on the planet" as you have, nor even the best printer I
know. Not ever. Why? Because it's a plain fact that there are always better
printers. Period.

If one thinks he is the best, then he has lost the critical mindset which
allows one to become better, indeed even to retain what already has. It's
called The Learning Mindset. Without it there is no hope. From humility
comes learning, then reflection/critique, and the circle continues, and
maybe, just maybe we do something good.

Humility. Tattoo that word somewhere so you can see it.

I said 'one of the best', for the record.

"jjs" wrote in message ...
"Uranium Committee" wrote in message
m...

I have seen my prints and I have seen the prints of many others. Mine
are always better. I offer you a chance to see one. Yes or no?

I have seen the prints of thousands; having been a photo editor helped in
that regard, so has decades of interest. I was once considered a good enough
printer to be chosen as a custom B&W printer at the most prestigious custom
wet printing facility in the country. And STILL I would never claim to be
"the best printer on the planet" as you have, nor even the best printer I
know. Not ever. Why? Because it's a plain fact that there are always better
printers. Period.

If one thinks he is the best, then he has lost the critical mindset which
allows one to become better, indeed even to retain what already has. It's
called The Learning Mindset. Without it there is no hope. From humility
comes learning, then reflection/critique, and the circle continues, and
maybe, just maybe we do something good.

Humility. Tattoo that word somewhere so you can see it.

I said 'one of the best', for the record.

"jjs" wrote in message ...
"Uranium Committee" wrote in message
m...

I have seen my prints and I have seen the prints of many others. Mine
are always better. I offer you a chance to see one. Yes or no?

I have seen the prints of thousands; having been a photo editor helped in
that regard, so has decades of interest. I was once considered a good enough
printer to be chosen as a custom B&W printer at the most prestigious custom
wet printing facility in the country. And STILL I would never claim to be
"the best printer on the planet" as you have, nor even the best printer I
know. Not ever. Why? Because it's a plain fact that there are always better
printers. Period.

If one thinks he is the best, then he has lost the critical mindset which
allows one to become better, indeed even to retain what already has. It's
called The Learning Mindset. Without it there is no hope. From humility
comes learning, then reflection/critique, and the circle continues, and
maybe, just maybe we do something good.

Humility. Tattoo that word somewhere so you can see it.

I said 'one of the best', for the record.

In article ,
(Uranium Committee) wrote:

I try very hard to make negatives that basically print themselves.

"WOW"-Thats one heck of a technique!!! Do you offer them treats or how
exactly does that work?

In any event, the negatives I make today are much, much better than I
made 35 years ago.

Apparently there was lots of room for improvement.

Since they print themselves,... maybe you should also consider what I
read on one of the digital NGs' a while back someone suggested the need
to build a robotic camera on treads that would free the photographer
from the actual picture taking. That is when doing travel photography at
scenic locations like the great wall and such ;-)

--
LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918

In article ,
(Uranium Committee) wrote:

I try very hard to make negatives that basically print themselves.

"WOW"-Thats one heck of a technique!!! Do you offer them treats or how
exactly does that work?

In any event, the negatives I make today are much, much better than I
made 35 years ago.

Apparently there was lots of room for improvement.

Since they print themselves,... maybe you should also consider what I
read on one of the digital NGs' a while back someone suggested the need
to build a robotic camera on treads that would free the photographer
from the actual picture taking. That is when doing travel photography at
scenic locations like the great wall and such ;-)

--
LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918

In article ,
"jjs" wrote:

If you intuit the method, more the better.

Ok just wear a blindfold in the darkroom or learn to
load film in your camera with your eyes closed or or
walk around downtown with the blindfold and camera in
hand,...prefocus is the word,...just listen for screeching wheels
when you cross the street :-)

--
LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918

In article ,
"jjs" wrote:

If you intuit the method, more the better.

Ok just wear a blindfold in the darkroom or learn to
load film in your camera with your eyes closed or or
walk around downtown with the blindfold and camera in
hand,...prefocus is the word,...just listen for screeching wheels
when you cross the street :-)

--
LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918

In article ,
"jjs" wrote:

If you intuit the method, more the better.

Ok just wear a blindfold in the darkroom or learn to
load film in your camera with your eyes closed or or
walk around downtown with the blindfold and camera in
hand,...prefocus is the word,...just listen for screeching wheels
when you cross the street :-)

--
LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918

I've done my best to stay out of this scarpitti troll but I find that I can no
longer do so.

I know that Paul has responded to this post stating that scarpitti is
misrepresenting the results of his test. While I believe that so I do have to
note that about a month ago scarpitti was going around quoting a book from Kodak
that he found claiming that development time should be kept the same. The reason
he claimed was that by altering development time the midtones would be effected
making images look unnatural.

Now I see that he's changed his mind and has decided that altering development
time has no effect on tonal distribution. This new claim agrees with something
I, zone system users and even A.A. have known for years. I do know for a fact
however that adjusting development time effects the highlights of the prints.
This I have proven through testing.

As usual with scarpitti the truth must always give way to the current troll.


Michael Scarpitti wrote:
: "Jan T" wrote in message li.nl...
: "PGG" schreef in bericht
: newsan.2004.09.10.20.47.28.229000@NO_SP_A_Myahoo .com...
: I think it is a hard tradeoff to make. Developing less reduces grain.
: However printing at a higher grade seems to makes grain more noticeable.
:
:
: Exactly. But in the same degree? Maybe Kodak's solution was favorable for
: the end result, that is: if the 'loss' of grain is greater on film
: developped softly than the 'gain' of grain when increasing print contrast.

: That's the point, and knowledgeable 35mm workers have practiced this
: for decades. The loss of contrast is less than the reduction of grain.
: Using condensers helps to restore much of the contrast.

: Second drawback: tonality: a negative developped to be printed on #2 and
: printed on #2 has a different tonality than a negative wich is developped
: softer and printed on a higher grade. Don't ask me why, but Adams knew why.
: And I believe Ralph W. Lambrecht has given a good explanation in "Way Beyond
: Monochrome".

: It really should make no significant difference. See below.

: See:

: http://www.butzi.net/articles/zoneVC.htm

: Acording to Paul Butzi, developing less and printing with higher
: contrast paper gives essentially the same tonal distribution. He
: states:

: Paul Butzi: "Let's start with the biggie - Tonal distribution. I
: believe that if you closely examine the scans above, you'll see
: differences in the tonal distribution of each print. Remember, the
: original scene (the step wedge) was exactly the same for each print,
: so any differences we find are from the changes in development and
: print contrast.

: Paul Butzi: "From visual examination, the print from N-2 development
: and the print from N development are identical in tonal distribution.
: The contrast of the highlights and lowlights, and the contrast and
: tone of the mid-tones, are all the same."


: And I noticed it in practice. Even on 35 mm I prefer (you see, it's a bit
: personal too) a real 'N' development and a print on 2-2,5. Since I had my
: APX100 calibrated (in ID-11), my prints got that extra twinkle. Imagine I
: was once asked (by a 4 x 5" user BTW) if a certain picture was taken with 4
: x 5 "!
:
: Third drawback: a little loss of speed.

: Yes, but not much. Maybe 1/2 stop. My prints are gorgeous!

--




Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
-------------------