RE: Best CI for process

From: Eric Neilsen ^lt;[email protected]>
Date: 10/02/05-10:09:15 PM Z
Message-id: <20051003040917.3211226AD08A@spamf3.usask.ca>

Where did you get this exposure scale for palladium?

Eric Neilsen Photography
4101 Commerce Street, Suite 9
Dallas, TX 75226
214-827-8301
http://ericneilsenphotography.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sandy King [mailto:sanking@clemson.edu]
> Sent: Sunday, October 02, 2005 10:36 PM
> To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
> Subject: Re: Best CI for process
>
> You make a very good point.
>
> However, assuming that the radiums of the curve is set at 2.0
> log
> units from 0.1 over B+F this leaves us still well within the
> exposure
> scale of pure palladium, which is in the 1.75-1.85 range.
>
> Still, I am inclined to agree with you that a better indication
> of
> effective printing density might be obtained if we were to
> extend the
> radius of the curve beyond log 2.0.
>
> Sandy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> >If, as Richard says, the length of the portion of the curve
> for which
> >the slope is calculated to arrive at CI was set at 2.0 because
> that
> >range was deemed adequate to cover conventional printing
> materials,
> >does it make sense to apply it to platinum, which has a longer
> range?
> >
>
>
>
> >
> >
Received on Sun Oct 2 22:09:32 2005

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