-
D-Max shootout
Oh,
And Jorge,
If the inkjet print has the same DMax, the same resolution, the same tonality, same permanence, etc,etc, tell me again how silver is better. Based on what you're saying, and what others have found, the inkjet is the same, not any better than silver. So please, clarify how silver can be the same but still better.....or is this the emotional factor that your adding to the print rather than a quantifiable one. If it is, maybe I can think happy thoughts when I hit the print button and we can take care of that difference as well.
Cheers,
-
D-Max shootout
Once again, if I only valued the process and produced crap nobody would buy my prints.
I'm not trying to change anyones workflow or methods....but, I will speak up when misinformation is spread as a means of justifying old methods
You say this but were the first one on the other thread posting how silver printers should be made aware of the higest Dmax possible in the world with ink jet prints...once again with a single paper and a single set of inks. As you say I too dont care what people use, but will speak up when misifnormation about ink jet prints is presented.
I do agree though, people like Jorge have already admited that if inkjet offerred more resolution, better tonality, greater permanence, at a lower cost, he has still said he would choose the silver based image. To me, that doesn't speak of logic....just emotion.
That is just it, they do not...and yes I am sure your response will be "they will in the future"....well when that happens get back to me. In the end your "logic" seems to say that having something that looks the same as to the real thing is just fine.....isnt that wishful thinking?
the inkjet is the same, not any better than silver.
LOL...you wish, if this was so people like you would not be trying to come up with silly comparissons and numbers to try and convince us they are the same.....
-
D-Max shootout
I think that most of us could tell the difference between an inkjet and a silver print in a blind comparison. Even if they have the same Dmax, there are enough other differences--surface and gradation above all--that would allow us to tell them apart, emotional issues aside. I don't see them ever becoming interchangeable, any more than platinum, albumen, silver, and B&W C-prints are interchangeable.
I recently participated in the production of a set of prints for just this purpose. We had one 8x10" negative, and I produced an Azo print, another printer did platinum, VanDyke, silver, an inkjet on an office printer, and a few other processes, another did a high-end inkjet print, and there were a few other variations thrown in there including a few wacky things like Xerox copies and inkjets on OHP film. This was for an appraiser who wanted a set of prints for a workshop for art appraisers interested in learning to appraise photographs (and implicitly to suggest that they stay out of it, if they really didn't know what they were doing and couldn't tell a platinum print from a xerox copy). The appraiser matted them all and numbered them, and there was no question as to which prints were the inkjets. The high-end inkjet was a nice inkjet with a look all its own, but it's not as if it could be mistaken for any other kind of print by someone familiar with different print process.
-
D-Max shootout
"For the comment about a scanner not having enough Dmax, I don't understand. If you set a black point and white point, then you should be able to print maximum black and total white."
Perhaps I was unclear: One big issue with scanners - DMax - is one common in all digital capture - especially when we deal with affordable models that use CCDs to gather the light: how deeply can they read into the dense areas of the target, and still distinguish the different tones ? Similarly, how well can they read the clear areas of the target, and not introduce noise ? An ideal scanner should be able to do both. Interestingly, the really expensive high-end scanners rely on analog devices to do this job.
When scanning negatives, the dense areas represent highlights in the final print: does the scanner blow all these values to pure white, or can it faithfully retain the subtlety found on the negative ? Similarly, the clear areas on the negative contain shadow details. Does the scanner merely represent all those as "black" ? Does it introduce noise that wasn't there, but exists due to signla processing, etc. ?
The same issues will be true, in reverse, when scanning slides: Can the scanner reach into the black areas and get good shadow detail ? Does it blow out on the high values ? After all, it's just a digital camera.
So when we talk about the DMax of a scanner, we mean: How wide a range of brightness in the target, can it handle faithfully ?
-
D-Max shootout
DMax is essentially the wrong term (rather like the confusing use of ppi and dpi). More correctly I think it should be termed DRange - for Density range (se the use of D9ensity)max within this below). And isn't really quite talking about the same thing as DMax in printing. You are sort of talking eggs and oranges... sort of roundish things, but in somewhat different circumstances
A colleague who worked on frequency modulation, extremely high end scanner type device design and engineering and other such stuff I don't pretend to understand described it well for me like this once:
Sure, I'd be happy to 'splain it.
"First dRange... The "d" means density (and has nothing to do with dynamic
range), and when measuring density that film records (as in contains valid
image data), there is a minimum value (dMin), and a maximum value (dMax).
The range between these two density points it the density "range", or
dRange.
Positive film has a clear base...so the dMin for it is going to be quite
low...as compared to negative film, which has a cloudy base...so the dMin
for negative film will be quite a bit higher than positive film. Both films
will pretty much have the same max density, black is still black, whether
it's positive or negative film.
Well, let's say the dMax (blackest part) of both films can be measured at
3.6...and the positive films dMin is .2, and the negative films dMin is
.8... That gives a dRange for the positive film of 3.6 - .2 or 3.4, and for
the positive film 3.6 - .8 or 2.8.
It's purely the film base "offset" that creates the difference in density
range.
For another discussion (after this one if you like ;-)...let's say that the
same range of image tonality could be recorded on either film...just that
negative film would have the range compressed, film density wise that is,
compared to positive film. Also, the "dynamic range" of the film is not the
same as the density range...and the term dynamic range is often misused when
talking about density range."
-
D-Max shootout
I don't like RC paper, whether inkjet or silver. Once I can print an image with an inkjet on a paper surface like Forte or Ilford's glossy fiber based paper inkjets will be more tool I am willing to use to produce most of my black and white prints. I am very happy with the 2200 and the Quadtone rip for some mages, but not others. And it isn't solely because of the dmax issues. But I think I will still preffer to know I made the print with my hands over pushing the print button and getting one more identacle print out of the printer.
I also value hand crafted items over machine made items. I would rather have a well made hand printed image over a well made machine print. The same goes for furniture, paintings over printed copies. I am adding more hand tools to my wood shop, even if they take more time to use than the power tools. I will still use power tools, but a hand planed board is more appealing to me now. Maybe some of it emotion, but I am not a robot, so emotions matter to me. I suspect they do to many print buyers as well.
-
D-Max shootout
Tim, I don't know what your are talking about but it sure doesn't fit in with my observations of transparency and negative films - either color or black and white. I would go back for another expanation.
-
D-Max shootout
Larry - it's basically how scanning film work. Don't confuse it with working in adarkroom.
What exactly are your observations?
-
D-Max shootout
sorry, this bit also has a typo:
"Well, let's say the dMax (blackest part) of both films can be measured at 3.6...and the positive films dMin is .2, and the negative films dMin is .8... That gives a dRange for the positive film of 3.6 - .2 or 3.4, and for the NEGATIVE film 3.6 - .8 or 2.8."
Larry - again, I think you are probably confusing Dynamic range with Density range?
-
D-Max shootout
Regarding dRange and dMax, this is why many prosumer scanners (however the manufacturers chose to fudge the listed "DMax" numbers") can usually quite easily capture the full range of a color or black and white negative, but have trouble capturing the full range of a color transparency.
(Note that noise is a different issue)