RE: Best CI for process

From: Eric Neilsen ^lt;[email protected]>
Date: 10/02/05-09:19:24 AM Z
Message-id: <20051002151913.7F7F0269AC90@spamf3.usask.ca>

Sandy, I know they are.

Eric Neilsen Photography
4101 Commerce Street
Suite 9
Dallas, TX 75226
http://e.neilsen.home.att.net
http://ericneilsenphotography.com
 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sandy King [mailto:sanking@clemson.edu]
> Sent: Saturday, October 01, 2005 11:03 PM
> To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
> Subject: RE: Best CI for process
>
> Eric,
>
> Density range (DR) and contrast index (CI) are closely related.
>
> Read about it.
>
> Sandy
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> >
> > 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 Sun Oct 2 09:19:28 2005

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