Switch to English Language Passer en langue franšaise Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,896   Posts: 1,584,312   Online: 891
      
Page 4 of 19 FirstFirst 1234567891014 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 182
  1. #31
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Beaverton, OR, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,796
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Burk View Post
    I like the style of the sketch, a lot.

    You know "extra" and "over" can be pushed vertically to make good prints.
    Actually no. Moving the curves up would make a very different prints.

    The "over" curve could never print the same highlights as the other three could, that detail is simply lost somewhere above the shoulder, just as surely as if it were an underexposure at the other end of the curve.

    The "extra" curve, on the other hand, would print different subject matter in each print zone if it were moved up, it would not produce the print we originally visualized/planned.

    The "box" and "extra" curves though can both produce good prints with all the zones falling as planned producing nearly identical prints.
    Mark Barendt, Beaverton, OR

    "We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Ana´s Nin

  2. #32
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Beaverton, OR, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,796
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Stephen Benskin View Post
    Like this?

    Attachment 67350

    I'm with Michael. I'm not sure what you are getting at. How is this different from a tone reproduction diagram?
    I'm going to sleep on this and see if I can think of a better way to express it.

    Was your attachment supposed to be a windmill?
    Mark Barendt, Beaverton, OR

    "We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Ana´s Nin

  3. #33
    Stephen Benskin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,221
    Quote Originally Posted by markbarendt View Post
    I'm going to sleep on this and see if I can think of a better way to express it.

    Was your attachment supposed to be a windmill?
    It's the data from it. You can follow the values from subject to print. How is this different from what you just explained?

  4. #34
    Bill Burk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    3,581
    Images
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by markbarendt View Post
    Actually no. Moving the curves up would make a very different prints.

    The "over" curve could never print the same highlights as the other three could, that detail is simply lost somewhere above the shoulder, just as surely as if it were an underexposure at the other end of the curve.

    The "extra" curve, on the other hand, would print different subject matter in each print zone if it were moved up, it would not produce the print we originally visualized/planned.

    The "box" and "extra" curves though can both produce good prints with all the zones falling as planned producing nearly identical prints.
    I'll grant that if you place Zone VIII over the shoulder by overexposing, it will not be recoverable detail.

    I am just used to film that gives me Zone XII without shouldering. So my view of where the shoulder is at is skewed, making me comfortable with overexposure. Your diagram should stay simple. Like I said, I like it.

  5. #35
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,544
    Images
    65
    Haist has done it more simply!

    PE

  6. #36

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    119
    Kodak film, IMHO, is probably the best photographic medium producing the best negatives. Print paper at the present time ranges in quality so that it might not be possible to find a material adequate to make a corresponding image from a good negative. I've read somewhere that Ansel Adams had to wait a period of years before a print paper was manufactured and sold which had enough gamma for him to make a satisfactory print of "Moonrise, Hernandez, New Mexico".

  7. #37
    Stephen Benskin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,221
    Quote Originally Posted by markbarendt View Post
    How are the Zone reference lines supposed to work? Are they a through line running from a subject luminance to the paper luminance or are they Zone paper references? If they are Zone paper references, I thought there wasn't a correlation between print Zones and specific reflection densities. If they are a through line, the line would be distorted by the camera image, film and paper curve. Also, I might be reading them wrong, but it looks to me like the exposure labels are backwards. The under doesn't have any portion of the curve touching Zone III and over doesn't have any part of the curve touching Zone VIII.

  8. #38

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Bilthoven, The Netherlands
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,858
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    Haist has done it more simply!

    PE
    I agree. Kodak and others like Haist, have a simple approach. I like the pproach inthe kodak publication best.


    Jed

  9. #39
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Beaverton, OR, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,796
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Stephen Benskin View Post
    How are the Zone reference lines supposed to work? Are they a through line running from a subject luminance to the paper luminance or are they Zone paper references? If they are Zone paper references, I thought there wasn't a correlation between print Zones and specific reflection densities. If they are a through line, the line would be distorted by the camera image, film and paper curve. Also, I might be reading them wrong, but it looks to me like the exposure labels are backwards. The under doesn't have any portion of the curve touching Zone III and over doesn't have any part of the curve touching Zone VIII.
    Through lines.

    Essentially the same lines as your windmills show between Q1&Q4, I'm moving those two quadrants apart and superimposing possible negative curves between them. There is also one other big difference, the lines are meant to show the photo I want at either end regardless of negative exposure.

    Unlike the Dorst diagram I'm not scaling to the density of the medium so there is no funnel effect and unlike windmills no corners to turn, not trying to give that much info. The range shown/defined at each stage: "scene", "film", and "paper"; is simply "1", "a print's worth" or "100%" of the print range.

    Regarding the "under" curve I've drawn "it does not get enough camera exposure" to create detail on the negative for my chosen zone III subject matter, it is showing how a failure/operator error/scrimping on exposure might lose detail. The film curve in my diagram remains pegged to where my chosen subject matter falls or in this case fails to fall..
    Mark Barendt, Beaverton, OR

    "We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Ana´s Nin

  10. #40
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Beaverton, OR, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,796
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Jed Freudenthal View Post
    I agree. Kodak and others like Haist, have a simple approach. I like the pproach inthe kodak publication best.


    Jed
    Do you have a link or PDF you could share to the Kodak paper?
    Mark Barendt, Beaverton, OR

    "We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Ana´s Nin

Page 4 of 19 FirstFirst 1234567891014 ... LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  Ś   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin