Quote Originally Posted by Bill Burk View Post
Bruce Barnbaum would not like to have the poorer quality - it is measurable in terms of detail and grain and sharpness. Measurable but it's not much. Most amateurs are quite satisfied with the compromise you might make. Bruce and other very quality conscious photographers will strive for the very best negative, I personally am happy with a lot. But I also get great pleasure from understanding and applying these exposure and processing techniques.
Bill - This is not quite true as far as Barnbaum is concerned. He is pretty much unconcerned with graininess and resolution. For example he will readily give significant overexposure when applying expansion development, and like Adams and others, in the end his negatives are pretty much all over the place, requiring plenty of darkroom gymnastics.

I'd also add he's a perfect example of someone who has learnt to make excellent prints of his negatives despite his exposure/development processes not doing what he thinks they are doing (to go back to Benskin again). In the book, he's proud to say he's never owned a densitometer, and then proceeds to present a fictitious (and incorrect/misleading) H&D curve to support his "bellows analogy", zone IV shadow placement discussion, and extreme compensation techniques (which would obliterrate highlight detail if they actually did what he says they do).