I don't disagree. I just think Davis is a little "over the top". There's bad in-camera testing and then there's bad in-camera testing. Knowing the variables and pitfalls can help one design a much better test - although I agree it will never be as good as a contact test. I credit you with helping me to see that. But even when it comes to contacting (not contacting in the camera), I still have some issues to sort through in my own tests. I still find it difficult to do properly because I don't have a sensitometer. Using an enlarger is the closest most people can get. But even though the illumination is exceptionally even (at least in my case), timing an exposure precisely without a shutter, and knowing the actual illuminance at the film plane/baseboard is problematic. So basically I'm saying it's hard to figure out the exposure.