Aldo, thanks for taking the time to inquire and sharing the response here. I suspect there will be differences between incandescent bulbs, halogen lamps and LED light sources in how VC paper responds. The question is are they significant enough to discard one altogether in favour of another? I think the skills of a good printer will compensate for any minor variations in filter responses for a light source of roughly equivalent colour temperature.
Originally Posted by Aldo M.
I am not patient enough to do painstaking testing on what I can already see are very minor differences. I prefer to use my scarce time to make pictures which are "hang worthy"!
Since my last post I have also converted my Beseler 45 enlarger to an LED source without any permanent damage to the existing colour head. I have printed the same negative now on Durst and Meopta (both condenser/bulb) and the Beseler and Durst with LED light source. I can see no significant differences that would cause me to abandon LED in favour of traditional hot light sources. I mentioned above on the Durst conversion the contrast seemed to be a little higher using the same filter but not serious enough to be uncontrollable through moving up or down in grades.
I've seen quite a few pictures over the years where the photographer deserved to be hung. Some
expressions can be a little ambiguous.
Originally Posted by DREW WILEY
In this context, I believe it is: "Pictures are hung, people (including photographers) may be hanged".