Why do some photographers use sensitometry?

[steve simmons]

Lets see how I treated Jorge.

I gave him a chance to write an article on film testing for View Camera. I made it clear before he did so that I would have the article reviewed. He agreed. The first reviewer had problems with the article. What Jorge should have done, whether he agreed with the reviewer or not was listen, take the constructive criticism, and try and rework the article so it would be acceptable. Instead he became vile and abusive. I showed the article to four other people who all had the same complaints. The article was poorly written, incomplete, the logic did not flow, and the prints he submitted contradicted the written conclusions. When the first reviewer tried to keep a dialogue going with Jorge he quit the conversation and refused to continue. Not the behavior of a professional at all.

Now, Jorge may, and I say may, have written something that would have been acceptable to a BTZS publication. But that was not his assignment. If he was going to write something only a BTZS devotee would understand than he should have lengthened the article to give a context for what he was doing (even though it was not what he was assigned to write about.). Since BTZS is not a universally accepted theory or practice to write something for a broader publication that could only be understood by a small minority of people was simply wrong. Perhaps the problems could have been worked out but Jorge’s behavior made any compromise impossible.

Jorge claims to be using sensitometry to carefully control his negatives but then also says

“If you use the palm pilot the program will tell you to develop for 5.37 minutes. Clearly this is an uneeded accuracy, whenever I have film that has for example development times of 4.45, 5.27, 6.30 I just put all of them in the drum and develop for the average. Film is very forgiving and with a little of magic in the darkroom there is no need to take things too far”

“Given that I have included a margin of error on my printing so that I can print negatives which have a density range from 1.0 to 1.8 I can easily print a negative that has that 20% "error" you mention.”

“I know you are unable to understand why anybody can tolerate a 30% "error" as you call it or as I prefer to call it tolerance margin,”

“A 20% increase in development might be significant for your printing process, but it might not be for mine.”

:What Sand and I have said, is that film has an inherent big margin of error…”

And from Sandy King

“I would have to agree that Jorge's example, which suggsted a range of development between 4:45 and 6:30, is not a very happy one. I just looked at the practical result of developing a number of films in Pyrocat 2:2:100 in rotary at 70F for 4:45 and 6:30, and the median range is an average contrast from .45 at 4:45 to .65 at 6:30. This would be unacceptable to me. “

“Does any of this make any difference? For most practical work, probably not”

My point all along has been that it is not necessary to study sensitometry to be a good photographer. Apparently Sandy, Jorge and I agree.

steve simmons

[sanking]

Steve Simmons: "My point all along has been that it is not necessary to study sensitometry to be a good photographer. Apparently Sandy, Jorge and I agree.

Steve,

Lesson in Reading Comprhension 101. If you claim that someone agrees with you, please show that you have read what the other person wrote re: the specifc issue.

So here is what I said:

'However, the moment you start comparing films and developers the precision is essential. There is just no way to accurately compare the effective film speed, either of different films or film/developer combinations, with in-camera tests. It just can not be done. Period. Double Period. The tolerances of shutters, lens apertures and metering systems just won't allow precision of much better than 1/2 stop, or perhaps 1/4 at the very best. I know because I have tested this many times. BTZS testing on the other hand, especially if done with a sensitometer or an exposure system using light integration, has very high precision, better than 1/20 of a stop in my tests."

Did you read that? Do you really understand what was said?

If so, please address this specifc issue.

Thank you,

Sandy

[Kirk Keyes]

Steve Simmons wrote, "Now, Jorge may, and I say may, have written something that would have been acceptable to a BTZS publication."

You mean that View Camera is not inclusive to the BZTS side of the large format world? That's too bad - to shun people just because they use a certain technique of film testing...

[steve simmons]

I am not in the business of comparing films and film developers. I am in the business and interested in make evocative engaging images. I simply quoted what you said in this thread. Studying films curves and film developers is a separate endeavor. Perhaps that is where we differ. I have done the testing, min time for max black w/o a densitometer, to make evocative photographs. Now I want to continue making photographs. You ahve said yourself that you do not need the precision os 1/20 of a stop to make a photograph.

As far as you comments about my balls that was way out of line. But let me challenge you. If you have concerns about them my I invite you to climb on my 16 hand Morgan (who is now internationally famous for his strength, endurance and stamina) and lead a two day 70 mile horse drive. That is right, you lead horses. This means you would be in front of 500 horses going home. You have to keep them in check to prevent a runaway herd. One misstep and you are in a lot of trouble. As you lead these horses every mile or so you will be the first to come up on a ravine that is too steep for them to go down and up the other side or that has a barbed wire fence at the bottom. It is up to you and 2-3 other riders to turn and face the herd and get them to change direction. The second day was 11 hours in the saddle. No break. Lunch was in the saddle.

Ok, how about going to Idaho every June and working on a roundup where the range is so large you may go 4 hours without seeing another human. All you have is your horse and the 50 or so cattle you've gathered and are driving to the corrals. If you have an accident it may be hours before anyone knows you are mssing and many more before they might find you.

Or how about something more photographic. How about working year after year for the Heart Gallery. This is a program where you go into the foster home of an older child who has been abused in ways you can not imagine, who doesn't trust the system becasue he/she has been disappointed many times before and then trying to get an engaging photograph of them so they might be adopted. Two of the three that I have photographed, who have languished in foster homes for years, were adopted based on my photographs. If this program does not exist where you are how about stepping forward to help it get started. I did with CameraArts when the program existed only in New Mexico. Now it exists in 45 sates and 6 foreign countries.

Any/all of these activites take more of those things than it does to sit behing a keyboard 1500 miles away and say someting like that when you do not have to look the person in the eye.

steve simmons

[steve simmons]

Where did I say I was shunning anything. What i said was that View Camera was a broader magazine than a BTZS publication would be. Jorge did not explain anything in that article except what fellow devotees may have understood. This was not appropriate for a broader magazine. When given comment about that he became vile and abusive.

I stand by what I did say, not your interpretation.

steve simmons

[sanking]

Steve Simmons: "I gave him a chance to write an article on film testing for View Camera. I made it clear before he did so that I would have the article reviewed. He agreed. The first reviewer had problems with the article. What Jorge should have done, whether he agreed with the reviewer or not was listen, take the constructive criticism, and try and rework the article so it would be acceptable. Instead he became vile and abusive. I showed the article to four other people who all had the same complaints. The article was poorly written, incomplete, the logic did not flow, and the prints he submitted contradicted the written conclusions. When the first reviewer tried to keep a dialogue going with Jorge he quit the conversation and refused to continue. Not the behavior of a professional at all."

That is your story, and it does not play on my CD. The way I see this is as follows. You challenged Jorge to write an article comparing various pyro staining developers, knowing in advance that you would reject the article and embarrass him if his conclusions did not agree with yours, and/or if it were less than perfect.

And that is exactly what happened.

You have seen here comments from people such as Kirk Keyes and others that the article in question would have been a good contribution to View Camera, but you continue to do the weasel thing and find support in your hand-picked reviewers. . Your rejection of it , especially in light of the fact that you had requested the article from Jorge, is in my opinion one of the less enlightened decisions I have ever seen from any publisher/editor.

Now, if View Camera magazine were a referred journal with standards for reviewing articles for publications, you might be able to justify your weasel actions. But View Camera does not. You publish what you want to publish. That is very clear.

And yet, years after the fact, and for no reason, you insist on bringing this story up again in this thread, simply to embarrass Jorge.

Let me tell you this, Steve. You only embarrass yourself with this BS, and as far I am concerned, you just used up your last ounce of credibility.

Sandy

[sanking]

Neil,

I started this thread to discuss BTZS, not fight with Steve Simmons.

Would it be to much to ask to eliminate any messages from and about SS from this thread?

Sandy

[steve simmons]

Yes, I requested/invited the article but I made it clear from the beginning that the article would be reviewed. Jorge accepted the rules. The first reviewer does not even use a staining developer. He had no such bias. The second reviews also did not, and does not, use a staining developer. He did not care about the outcome one way or the other. Neither did the first. When I passed on the article I did not give any indication one way or the other how I felt. Three others also felt it was badly done. My handpicked reviewers included people doing business with Jorge and know him either personally or by phone/e-mail, etc. They were not his enemies or people who disliked him.. If Jorge had shown the slightest ability to work on the article and make some corrections it might have been published in View Camera. He did not. He became vile and aubusive.If Jorge's article was so good why has it not been published in another magazine?

You have repeatedly indicated that the precision of BTZS is not necessary to make a photograph. This is the public position you have taken.

...If so, please address this specifc issue.

here is my response

"I am not in the business of comparing films and film developers. I am in the business and interested in make evocative engaging images. I simply quoted what you said in this thread. Studying films curves and film developers is a separate endeavor. Perhaps that is where we differ. I have done the testing, min time for max black w/o a densitometer, to make evocative photographs. Now I want to continue making photographs. You ahve said yourself that you do not need the precision os 1/20 of a stop to make a photograph. "

Now, if someone wants to write an article on BTZS and how it works so it can be understood by someone other than a devotee I would be interested in opublishing it.



steve simmons

[steve simmons]

Neil,
I started this thread to discuss BTZS, not fight with Steve Simmons.

Would it be to much to ask to eliminate any messages from and about SS from this thread?

Sandy

--Sandy King 2005-12-10 20:12 PST

Perhaps it should be Sandy and his reference to my anatomy that should be removed. No one else has stooped to that level.

This is simply an effort to contol the flow of information view so he can have the pulpit to himself.

steve simmons

[sanking]

Steve Simmons: "Now, if someone wants to write an article on BTZS and how it works so it can be understood by someone other than a devotee I would be interested in publishing it."

Two comments:

1) Given the background, who would trust you to treat the article fairly?

and

2) How does a person write so that the readership, other than devotees ( in your estimation), would understand it? Would they, for example, have to write at your level of understanding, or could one perhaps hope for a more sophisticated reader?

Sandy