Why do some photographers use sensitometry?

[steve simmons]

Yes, I do think the previous thread was much more civil and I should not have reacted to Butzi's name calling, Jorge's belittling, etc. etc. I came down to their level of discourse and I now regret doing so. Both Butzi and Jorge have personal issues with me, right or wrong, and get too emotional when they should remain cooler and calmer. Neither seem to read the previous posts but come out shooting.

It is a challenge to have them continually attack View Camera for spurious reasons. Believe me I have held my tongue more than once with Butzi. The game he played a few years ago with View Camera was about as ugly and hypocritical as possible.

My first post in the previous thread was perhaps my best one on this topic. I never said that anyone in either of these threads said densitometry was necessary. This is a baiting question with no purpose but to narrow the argument so the poster can win. I was reacting to what I felt was an overall tendency by some to use the perceived need for hard science as a gate keeping procedure that might intimidate some and keep them from picking up a large format camera. I never accused anyone in either of these threads of making any such statement in either of these threads.

With regards to posting a photo how do I do this and I will be happy to.

steve simmons

[Kirk Keyes]

Jorge wrote:

"The article was not perfect
I agree, Kirk Keyes gave me a very through critique and pointed the parts where I could have done better. "

This is true. I did read it and I thought it was very interesting and that it would have made a fine addition to VC's collection of articles. As Jorge said, I did think there were a couple of things that could have been rewritten to make a stronger article, but overall, I think it was 95% of the way there.

I really could not understand why Mr. Simmons claims it was an unreadable article. At least all the paragraphs were there and followed each other in the proper order.

[Michael Kadillak]

About a year ago I took the BTZS book I purchased years ago off of the shelf and over a cold spell when I could not photograph I read it. I found it to be actually the most important photography reference I have read because Phil Davis explains in detail the pros and cons of all aspects of the controls that folks use in photography (including the ZSone system) and offers it in an unbiased approach for any to take or leave it.

Sandy is absolutely correct that it is quick and easy and is not Rocket Science in the context that was mentioned.

It just works and that is all that needs to be said.

Cheers!

[Kirk Keyes]

Mark wrote, "Perhaps at next June's View Camera Conference, a purely technical "shoot-out" would be interesting. Two negatives to be made, each from a given spot of a given subject with a "normal" focal length lens, one in mid-day sunlight, one in subdued light. BYO film and developer, all to be printed on a common, neutral paper, (Ilford MGIV?). Negatives and prints all displayed, blind judging, only the top finishers' names announced publicly, so no humiliation no matter how bad my, I mean, anyone's prints are. "

Why not make it really interesting - give the participants a Mystery Film (notch code removed and replace with a plain code), a Mystery Developer, and a Mystery Graded Paper and Print Developer, and then have them test them and see who can make prints from a N-2 and a N+3 situation with the least amount of testing.

[Kirk Keyes]

Steve Simmons wrote, "Yes, you need to know how to use the camera, load the film, manage to get it processed somehow but you do not need to study metalurgy to be a metal sculpture."

No, but you will have to have some understanding about the properties of the different metals and alloys that you will be working with. You will have to know which metals can be welded, which can be brazed, what the melting points are, which metals can be in contact with each other so you don't have adverse reactions like galvanic action... And then you will have to know about the elemental compsition of your welding and brazing rods, and their melting properties, what gases you may want to use when welding or brazing... It just goes on and on. Seems kind of technical to me.

There are just so many of these things about metal that you would want to know to become a top artist in this field that I'm sure we as photographers just have no clue as to what they are.

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

Why not make it really interesting - give the participants a Mystery Film (notch code removed and replace with a plain code), a Mystery Developer, and a Mystery Graded Paper and Print Developer, and then have them test them and see who can make prints from a N-2 and a N+3 situation with the least amount of testing.

This is a great idea! I would propose the participants be given only 6 sheets of the mystery film and 2 sheets each of the graded and VC. This would be all that I would need to make the testing and make the first print.

[Chad Jarvis]

Eliminate the guesswork, and develop by inspection.

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

Yes, I do think the previous thread was much more civil and I should not have reacted to Butzi's name calling, Jorge's belittling, etc. etc.

What?!?.....this is typical of you, you love to dish it out but when someone gives you some of your own medicine, you immediately climb on your soap box and start whining. Go back and read who started posting insulting and belittling posts in this thread. I will help you out with some examples.

Don't you ever give another lecture on why sensitometry is necessary or helpful. This post you made undoes all your claims of precision or the love of craft.

This is your first post directed to me, even so I had the courtesy not to respond in kind to try and keep the topic civil....but no!! in your ignorance you continued spouting idiocies ...here is one more.

This is much sloppier than those of us testng w/o a densitometer would ever do. We would know better!!!

At this time I got tired of you taking pot shots at me without getting some of it back to you.

In the end, it is not my reputation that suffers. Displaying your ignorance of photographic materials and testing in public hurts you more than it hurts me. I am grateful that there are other much better magazines like Lenswork, Silverzhots, Shots, B&W photography UK, that I can submit my pictures as well as articles where I know they will be at least reviewed impartially from people who do have an understanding of photographic materials.

[Richard Schlesinger]

Special fo Sandy King: my OED lists "nut" as ". . . an enthusiast, a devotee. . ."

[sanking]

Steve Simmons: "I was reacting to what I felt was an overall tendency by some to use the perceived need for hard science as a gate keeping procedure that might intimidate some and keep them from picking up a large format camera."

There is no question but that some people, for whatever reason, whether from intimidation or because they prefer a lower key approach to photography, are not going to be interested in a system like BTZS, or even Zone for that matter. And there are people who have learned BTZS very well, but for their own reasons have returned to work primarily with Zone. Brian Ellis, I believe, is one of those persons.

And all of that is perfectly fine. Most of us are photo hobbyists in one way or the other, at least as it comes to image making, and we should do what makes us happy.

I started this thread to explain some of the reasons many of us find BTZS useful since there do appear to be some prejudice out there about this type of testing, and I believe that ito some extent this prejudice is based on misunderstanding in believing it is more complicated than it really is. Most of the persons I know who have taken the time to master BTZS have not found it to be reocket science at alll. For actual field work a person can get outstanding results with both Zone or the SBR system, but the actual process of testing film is simply more efficient and more precise with BTZS. Whether that matters is a question ever person will have to answer for themselves, but it is impossible to evaluate and compare two system when you only understand one of them.