[Stephen Benskin]

Stephen, I'm trying to come up with a decent illustrative test example to show flare vs no flare. For the flare test I was going to photograph a reflection tablet. Here's a question a I have (actually this would apply to transmission wedges too).

Most tablets have a progressive set of densities. Therefore the difference in density between any two adjacent steps is relatively small. We know that flare affects the highest reflection densities on the reflection tablet most. Consider the step with the highest reflection density. Suppose we placed the step with the lowest reflection density right next to it, rather than further away. Does that change the amount of flare impacting the step with the high reflection density?

Asked another way, if one fills the frame with a front lit reflection tablet or backlit transmission wedge of a given total density range, does the arrangement of the steps on the tablet/wedge have an effect on the way flare affects the resulting curve? Or is it only the total range that matters?

As an aside, why are most reflection tablets glossy? It would be easier to work with them if they were not.

Distribution does play a factor. We've all seen the bleed from a really light area next to a really dark area. I guess this could be consider a localized flare effect in addition to the veiling flare.

The reason why reflection tablets are glossy is that glossy produces a greater reflection density range. Think about the difference between the D-Max of matte paper at around 1.60 with glossy paper at around 2.00 to 2.20. I know what you're saying about the difficulty in handling. It's kind of ironic that reflectance is based on a Lambertain surface.