>>Dan insists that you could use a monochrome monitor
>to do color corrections. Now, I admit I haven't
>tried that. But it is quite a provocative claim,
>and follows logically from Dan's numerical approach.
This is absolutely true--if you've been trained in the classic (largely Old
World) tradition of the color engraver. Possibly Margulies was, or was
trained by one or several.
I'm not going to tell one of my tales here (listen to the cheers from the
Lurker Galleries!), but I *do* have one that will go untold. :-)
My counter-claim to this is that color is *so* subjective that you can't
quantify it. Ever. A badly-shot slide or neg might have beauty that you only
imagined when you shot the picture! Your twists and tweaks can take a
picture with every merit *except* color to heights of artistry.
As a painter, I prefer to work from B/W--my color is personal, and I don't
want it confused by "facts." :-) In point of truth, every photographer can
work from the same premise: you can set the light and color, you can tweak
the light and color, or you can sit in rising/setting sunlight and wait for
it to happen...but the artistry of the film itself is limited. Yours, OTOH,
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com