Is there a Ralph Lambrecht in the house?

[Ulophot]

I recently got a copy of Way Beyond Monochrome (again) through interlibrary loan, and though I have returned it now, having read it entirely again (good book!), I remain perplexed by a notation therein.

As far as I could determine, it shows up first on page 114, without explanation. As I recall it now, it was some specified Zone followed by two large dots followed by a 5. I finally guessed that the dots each refer to 1/3 stop -- just a guess -- but have no idea what the 5 is, and I could not discover an explanation anywhere. Perhaps I overlooked it. I may get the book again, either library-wise or purchase, and would love to know whether it is explained in the book, and, in either case, what it means.

 

[koraks]

@RalphLambrecht is indeed in the house. He's notified of this thread and I'm sure he'll chime in.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I recently got a copy of Way Beyond Monochrome (again) through interlibrary loan, and though I have returned it now, having read it entirely again (good book!), I remain perplexed by a notation therein.

As far as I could determine, it shows up first on page 114, without explanation. As I recall it now, it was some specified Zone followed by two large dots followed by a 5. I finally guessed that the dots each refer to 1/3 stop -- just a guess -- but have no idea what the 5 is, and I could not discover an explanation anywhere. Perhaps I overlooked it. I may get the book again, either library-wise or purchase, and would love to know whether it is explained in the book, and, in either case, what it means.

I'm looking at page 114 but can't find the referenced anywhere. Where do you see it?

 

[Alex Benjamin]

I'm looking at page 114 but can't find the referenced anywhere. Where do you see it?

P. 114, second column, first paragraph ("All you will see..."), is what I believe he referring to. There is only one dot between the roman numerals and the "5".

 

[BrianShaw]

Which edition? It might matter regarding pagination.

 

[jeffreyg]

I have the second edition and don’t see what was referred to. The book is worth having as a reference on many subjects

 

[Alex Benjamin]

Sorry for breaking the copyright law...

(OP can validate if I'm referring to the right passage)

 

[BrianShaw]

Fair use, Alex; a very useful clause in copyright act(s).

... and the most efficient way to get an answer.

 

[pentaxuser]

Based on your test Alex, it' looks like a simple decimal point that Ralph has used to indicate a half zone in each case. Mine is the second edition and page 114 is the second page of the chapter on Tone Reproduction but I can find no reference to what the OP refers to on page 114

pentaxuser

 

[MTGseattle]

Is it simply a slightly odd choice by the printer for a footnote? "5" may refer back to a simple zone explanation diagram in the appendix?

 

[Alex Benjamin]

Mine is the second edition and page 114 is the second page of the chapter on Tone Reproduction

My p. 114 is the fourth page in the chapter titled Introduction to exposure.

 

[MattKing]

Shall I edit the thread title to read: "Is THE Ralph Lambrecht in the house?"
I'm thinking that MTGSeattle is probably right - it was meant to be "Zone VIII 5"
And there is, or should be, a corresponding footnote/endnote.

 

[pentaxuser]

Shall I edit the thread title to read: "Is THE Ralph Lambrecht in the house?"

Is that to avoid the wrong Ralph Lambrecht from responding and confusing matters further?

My p. 114 is the fourth page in the chapter titled Introduction to exposure.

The same page in question to which the OP refers is now on the fifth page of Introduction to Exposure chapter and it's page 189 of the second edition. Maybe our two books were written by two different Ralph Lambrechts hence Matt's attempt to single out the correct Ralph?

pentaxuser

 

[Doremus Scudder]

Probably this is just a decimal separator. British English commonly uses the middle-placed instead of baseline dot for the decimal separator. The Lancet medical journal requires the middle dot in their format guidelines.

See a discussion here: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/117982/central-dot-as-decimal-point-in-top-journal and in the Wikipedia page on decimal separators.

Thus, the V·5 simply means Zone V-and-a-half, etc.

Elsewhere in Way Beyond Monochrome, one and two middle dots are used to denote third-stop intervals on graphs, etc. These are usually together with density numbers that correspond to the whole-stop increments, e.g., 0.3, 0.6, 0.9, 1.2... These are printed with baseline decimal points, however.

We'll see what Ralph says when he rejoins the conversation. In the 2nd Edition, the middle dots are smaller.

Best,

Doremus

 

[Sirius Glass]

Shall I edit the thread title to read: "Is THE Ralph Lambrecht in the house?"
I'm thinking that MTGSeattle is probably right - it was meant to be "Zone VIII 5"
And there is, or should be, a corresponding footnote/endnote.

What if it was meant to be used with a light meter such as the Pentax Digital Spot Meter which uses '•' as third stops. Example: 5.6 • • 8

 

[Doremus Scudder]

What if it was meant to be used with a light meter such as the Pentax Digital Spot Meter which uses '•' as third stops. Example: 5.6 • • 8

That gets used in the book in that manner as well, but the passage in question has a Zone number in the form of a Roman numeral, then a middle dot and then the number 5, like this: V·5. Definitely not third-stop indications here.

 

[Alex Benjamin]

We'll see what Ralph says when he rejoins the conversation.

I almost wish he doesn't. Everybody chiming in with his hypothesis is quite the entertainment .

Or maybe I've just been out in the heat too much...

 

[Ulophot]

Thanks to all, including Mr. L., for the lively response. I had jotted down pg 114 along with the notation on a scrap of paper that evidently found another purpose subsequent.y. Although, from the responses, I could have said any of a number of pages. In any case, I join you all in awaiting the author's authoritative elucidation. And I will politely refrain from mentioning my intense curiosity as to how Maestro Scudder became so intimately familiar with the editorial/typographic style book of The Lancet. I had rather thought the publication might publish articles on human bodies, not landscapes...

 

[Doremus Scudder]

Philip,

I just learned about The Lancet's requirements from the link I posted above. So, no special connection to the publication I just did a quick Google search on decimal separators and everything needed came up. (I am pretty familiar with the Chicago Style Manual from my doctoral study days, though.)

Best,

Doremus

 

[Pieter12]

In case you missed my response from the potter forum:

In my copy, there is just one dot, not two. I assume the dot (or more correctly, bullet) is used because it follows a Roman numeral which does not conventionally use decimal points, so as not to be confused with a period. So in the example Zone I•5 would indicate Zone I-1/2. Just a guess on my part.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

P. 114, second column, first paragraph ("All you will see..."), is what I believe he referring to. There is only one dot between the roman numerals and the "5".

I must be blind. I'm looking at the 2nd edition,2nd printing and I can't see it. I'll take a look at my digital files and backups.

 

[Molli]

I must be blind. I'm looking at the 2nd edition,2nd printing and I can't see it. I'll take a look at my digital files and backups.

Mr. Lambrecht, it's on Page 189 in the second edition you have there.

I believe the Page 114 to which Ulophot refers to be in the first edition.
Looking at it myself, I'm inclined to agree with others that the •5 refers to the halfway point between two zones.

Like others, I'm also happy we have the author with us here to answer questions definitively. We're a pretty spoiled bunch here!
Thank you in retrospect and in advance, Mr. Lambrecht!

 

[BrianShaw]

A very interesting question. Decimals in Roman Numerals is something I never thought much about. Some sources seem to indicate that in the olden days "s" stood for a Roman 1/2. I would have expected V-1/2 for Zone 5.5. Eagerly awaiting the answer. It seems potentially confusing nomenclature, or possible a bad font/charactermap conversion in the file as it transitioned through the editorial/printing process. If footnotation, it probably didn't need to be repeated so many times in the same paragraph. Whatever the answer, it's surprising that an editor missed something like that... but those things happen.

 

[cowanw]

I finally found it in my Volumn Two; My reading of it is simply that the authors were trying to express that they measure their densitometry from the middle of the range of tones that are encompassed by each Zone. Given the none-straight line relationships of sensitometry maybe Zone 1 1/2 was not thought to be the same as half way between the beginning of Zone 1 and the beginning of Zone 2

 

[BrianShaw]

... maybe Zone 1 1/2 was not thought to be the same as half way between the beginning of Zone 1 and the beginning of Zone 2