Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

   


   


   















      :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: filmscanners: RE: filmscanners: RE: filmscanners: Pixels per inch vs DPI



As a result of the continuing and escalating acrimony between Austin and
myself, and his incessant nitpicking of my postings, I do not intend to
respond directly either publicly or privately to his postings in the
future.  I bring this to the attention of the other members so that you
understand that my silence to Austin's challenges is not necessarily
because I am unable to defend my position on either technical or other
merits, but because I simply have decided his challenges are not worth
my time to pursue.

Further, the issues he has brought up to question below were asides and
tangential to the main points I was making in my post which were
concerning the discussion comparing color dye clouds and capture of
images digitally, not black and white developing, and my principle point
was that grain was randomly distributed throughout the film emulsion and
no process allowed for dye clouds to be moved or lined up within the
emulsion during processing, and therefore there was also a built in
error factor in grain/dye clouds as there is in digital imagine with its
fixed pixels.  As I also explained, the order of magnitude of error
related to the size and density of grain versus pixels, and as pixels
were made smaller and packed more densely, this error factor would lessen.

Art

Austin Franklin wrote:

 >>Austin Franklin wrote:
 >>
 >>  >>Very simply, grain, or dye clouds are predetermined in their location
 >>  >>and shape and are not relocated by picture content.
 >>  >>
 >>  >
 >>  > What about development?
 >>  >
 >>
 >>Also, some developing techniques can somewhat alter the shape or size of
 >>the dye clouds...
 >>
 >
 > Somewhat?
 >
 >
 >>However, most of this type of thing is done in custom film development
 >>of black and white film,
 >>
 >
 > You can alter the grain of B&W film by at least two to four times 
simply by
 > developer choice, dilution, temperature and technique.  It certainly 
isn't
 > "custom", most anyone who uses B&W has their favorite
 > developer/dilution/temperature and technique that suits their
 > needs/style/experimentation.  It is VERY critical when talking about film
 > grain to discuss development AND even exposure (as you mentioned 
push/pull
 > too)...since the same film can give such drastically different 
results...and
 > more so even if you are using Zone system compensation development.
 >
 >
 >>because the need to control so many other
 >>variables within color film development doesn't allow for much playing
 >>around. Most color film processing is fairly uniform in its method...
 >>
 >
 > Not quite true...see below...
 >
 >
 >>This is why almost all
 >>color film is souped in one of two basic color chemistry types (C-41 or
 >>E-6).
 >>
 >
 > There are different E-6 and C-41 processes.  Different chemical AND 
entirely
 > different developments, as well as techniques.  E6 can be 3 bath or 6 
bath,
 > and C-41 can be 2 bath or 3 bath.  All of this plays a SIGNIFICANT 
role on
 > the shape and size of the dye clouds.
 >
 > It can be far more significant than you made it out to be.
 >
 >
 >>However, I know of no color development technique that is capable of
 >>moving film grain or dye clouds within the emulsion so that they can
 >>line up the grain as a result of the image content. If you do, I'd like
 >>to here about it.
 >>
 >
 > I don't believe anyone ever suggested that at all...
 >
 > .
 >
 >







 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.