ðòïåëôù 


  áòèé÷ 


Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

  óôáôøé 


  ðåòóïîáìøîïå 


  ðòïçòáííù 



ðéûéôå
ðéóøíá












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

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

[filmscanners] Re: Black and white scans on LS4000 ED andotherissues



Bob,

    For what little my opinion may be worth, Ansel Adams was one of the
early pioneers of the use of diffuse light sources in the darkroom. If you
have any doubts that diffuse light sources can deliver sharp images, just
look at some of his work. His prints are sharp as tacks. I have been
shooting large format (4x5) black and white for over 20 years and teach the
zone system in a local school of photography where I live. As long as you
expose and develop your negatives for the light source you print with, you
should be able to produce identical images from a condenser or diffuse light
source.
    There was a time when the pros debated back and forth whether the
diffuse light source delivered better images. Fred Picker up in Vermont was
a cold light acolyte and defended them with an evangelical fervor. He
claimed you just couldn't produce as good an image with a condenser as you
could with cold light. Howard Bond wrote a series of articles for Creative
Darkroom Techniques (now Photo Techniques) a number of years ago disputing
this. The article included a number of prints used to illustrate his points.
This lead to an interesting exchange between the two, some of which Photo
Techniques published. For those of you old enough to have known Picker you
know he doesn't give up easily and ultimately he never conceded the point.
Up until this time I was solidly in Picker's camp, instructing my students
using his views. Bond's arguments persuaded me to change my mind, however
and I now believe that a black and white photographer that has a solid
knowledge of how to manipulate exposure and development controls can achieve
the same contrast and tonalities from either light source.
    It may sound like a contradiction but it seems to be true.

just my 2 cents worth.

Brian
--------------------------------------------------------------
respond to bdplikaytis@bellsouth.net


----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Frost" <bob@frost.name>
To: <bdplikaytis@bellsouth.net>
Sent: Friday, June 28, 2002 5:29 AM
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Black and white scans on LS4000 ED
andotherissues


Austin,

I'm not an expert on this; although I've spent many, many hours peering down
a light microscope and playing with condensers etc. I'll chew over what you
have said.

Isn't there a contradiction in your two comments below? If not please
elucidate.

Bob Frost.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Austin Franklin" <darkroom@ix.netcom.com>

> You do NOT get softer images with less contrast
> from a diffuse (typically called "cold") light source.


> Personally, I believe cold light heads give better tonality for B&W
chemical
> darkroom printing, having spend some 25+ years printing fine art B&W
> prints...


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title
or body


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe 
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or 
body



 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.