L & D curve to work out exposure ???

[Jorge]

Jorge

How does one asks you nice??



Jorge O

Done Bubba, I will send them your way also.

 

[Aggie]

..

 

[lee]

aggie,
you can scan it for me


lee\c

 

[Shesh]

I hope I am in your good books too, Jorge.
Thanks

 

[Aggie]

..

 

[Jorge]

Well, seems a lot of people want it, how about you or Eric e mail Barnbaum and ask him if he would mind if we post the list here. If he does I will PM it to shees and Lee.

 

[Eric Rose]

I will email Bruce and see what he says. I'm working with him on something else at the moment so it's no problem.

Eric

 

[inthedark]

Eww! goody! Thanks Jorge and Aggie thank you too for offering. This should help tons.

JL

 

[Eric Rose]

This is Bruce's reply:
*************
Eric,
re: Reciprocity numbers...
All that is fine. I've never hesitated to give out info to anyone who
asks. So, go for it!

Bruce
***********
I will make up a webpage on my server and post the link here. The page will include a pdf file that you can download and print out, then laminate so it will look just like the one Bruce gave us.

I have always found Bruce to be EXTREMELY generous with his knowledge. He is not someone to try and keep some tricks secret.

Eric

 

[Jorge]

Well great! I took care of Shees and Lee, so for the rest, if you are interested go to Eric`s page.

 

[Eric Rose]

Here it is:

http://68.145.119.122

Just print them out and put the pages back to back and laminate them. This is a scan of the info we were given.

Please do the courtesy of checking out Bruce's website.

Thanks,

Eric

 

[lee]

Eric,

the link gets to the Barnbaum and the pdf's stuff but only the link to the Barnbaum stuff works. Que pasa, amigo?

lee\c

 

[Eric Rose]

Try again, I fixed it. Darn windoze crap. Make sure you refresh the main page first before trying to get the PDF's.

Duh.

 

[Donald Miller]

Eric,

I have a question. As I review what you have posted and attributed to Bruce Barnbaum, I see processing notations in the first column. If these are developing compensations (as they appear to be) that are tied to time and reciprocity compensations then they make absolutely no sense to me. Since to use these would be to increase contrast in ever increasing increments in relation to ever increasing exposure times. This would be counter to what every film manufacture would advise. Furthermore it is counter to what reason would indicate. The problem with long (reciprocity affected) exposures is always increased negative contrast. To compensate by increasing development time would be driving negative contrast into the unprintable. Please explain.

 

[clay]

I'm guessing the notation is what the effect of the long exposure would actually BE. For instance N+1 means that the long exposure actually causes an effective N+1 contrast increase, which would need to be compensated by a N-1 contraction. This is just a guess, though.

I use the BTZS reciprocity information in their palm pilot program, and it handles all that development compensation and contrast adjustment stuff with aplomb, so I can just concentrate on the photograph. I know a lot of people think its a sissy way of calculating exposure, but I'd rather be a 'sissy' with a great negative than 'burly man' trying to turn a rotten negative into a great print.

Clay

"It takes a big man to be able to cry, but it takes an even bigger man to laugh at that man"

--- Jack Handey

 

[Eric Rose]

You've got it right Clay.

 

[modafoto]

..

Why the two dots. I noticed you have posted it a lot on this site?

Morten