on 5/19/01 2:46 PM, Richard N. Moyer at firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> If you (John Brownlow below) could talk in terms of digital imaging
> terms, maybe I could understand precisely what you are talking about.
> The word "tone" means almost anything, depending on the background of
> the individual.
> Tone to me is gamut accuracy (meaning
> chroma and hue angle). But more than that it is the ability to
> accurately capture "chromas" and "hue angles" at resolutions that
> match the best film recording media; i.e. Ektachrome,
Tone to me is the look of a correctly exposed non t-grain bw 4x5 negative
developed using a compensating developer and printed on unglazed glossy FB
paper. Quite what that has to do with chroma and hue angle I'll leave you to
figure out. But it is a fundamental mistake to think that 'accurately'
capturing chromas and hues is where the game is at photographically. Yes,
maybe it is for certain kinds of product shot, but throughout history
photographers have cherished and exploited the non-linearities of their
medium. Why else do we use different emulsions?