RE: Best CI for process

From: Eric Neilsen ^lt;[email protected]>
Date: 10/01/05-08:35:38 PM Z
Message-id: <20051002023528.27FBD267163A@spamf3.usask.ca>

Two things, first _ Ryuji I to would like very much to see your paper on CI.

Second_ if the CI is "The straight line is drawn between two points on the
D-log H curve that represents the highest (D-max) and the lowest (D-min)
useful densities on the characteristic curve."

This was quoted from the site referenced by Michael. Perhaps this is the
problem when talking about exposing prints. What is useful in silver
printing is not the same as what is useful for platinum printing. The
straightness of the line may differ but the underlying theme of useful
remains.

I find that there is a big leap of faith that needs to be made by some that
rely too heavily on the world of numbers when making prints and exposing
film. This is an art form and let's face it, some people can feel "it" and
others can not. I have not read up on CI in a number of years and I don't
teach it to my workshop students because if they want to get into crunching
numbers and living and dying by them, they may miss the forest for the
trees. You have (IMHO) got to feel it to make IT work. And IT is the
expression of GETTING IT on paper. Sure we use exposure meters,
thermometers, measuring devices for liquids and solids, but at the end of
the day, you need to get IT. And it should not be the determining factor as
to whether someone qualifies to explore photographic print making. This is
also the reason that two practitioners can be doing the say thing, yet two
different systems and term are used to describe it.

 So a discussion of density range may be more appropriate than the CI for in
camera negatives intended for use in platinum/palladium printing?

Eric Neilsen Photography
4101 Commerce Street
Suite 9
Dallas, TX 75226
http://e.neilsen.home.att.net
http://ericneilsenphotography.com
 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ryuji Suzuki [mailto:rs@silvergrain.org]
> Sent: Saturday, October 01, 2005 7:19 PM
> To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
> Subject: Re: Best CI for process
>
> From: Richard Knoppow <dickburk@ix.netcom.com>
> Subject: Re: Best CI for process
> Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 16:36:06 -0700
>
> > Is it possible for you to post it on your web site
> > perhaps as a PDF, I think it would be of considrable value.
>
> PDF papers are ideal in my view but I am reluctant to do this to my
> photographic paper file. I'd rather mail a photocopy to someone in
> serious, legitimate need of the information.
>
> Although I might not condemn anyone putting scans online quietly, I
> probably don't want to know if my copy has anything to do with it.
Received on Sat Oct 1 20:35:46 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 11/07/05-09:46:18 AM Z CST