Pyro and T-Grain Films - Deux

[sanking]

Kirk,

I am attaching a Word file with all densities Step 1 to 21 of TMAX-100 and FP4+ with both films developed to a lower CI. Just track the Visual to Blue at any given density and I think you will see my point from the previous message.

IMO there is no other conclusion one can reach but that TMAX-100 develops as much stain as FP4+, if we base the data on Blue mode analysis. In point of fact the TMAX film shows an even greater percentage of increase than FP4 in the midtones and highlights, though the difference is very small.

I am fairly certain that the Blue mode analyis does not predict exact VC printing densities, and the best color filter would probably be somewhere between Green and Blue, perhaps Ortho as you suggested once. However, a quick look at the measurments in Green mode indicates that the readings are just slightly more tha Visual measurments. Saying more than this would require actual printing of step tablets with the negatives and plotting the print curves.



Sandy

 

[phfitz]

HI there,

Kirk and Sandy, thanks for the responses. A whole thread and no flaming, golly. I guess for 'Tmax100' there is no pressing reason to change over save curiousity or personal taste.

Happy Thanksgiving everyone
{only 31 shopping days till Christmas ;-) }

 

[Gerald Koch]

One of the vital things lost since the deaths of Adams and Minor White has been their sense of perspective. Both teachers placed personal expression ahead of technical perfection, then introduced techniques appropriate to serving the visionary needs of photographers. In his Introduction to The Camera, Adams discussed visualisation, calling it "the foundation of this and all the projected books of (his) series". Visualisation, to Adams, "is to see (an image) clearly in the mind prior to exposure, a continuous projection from composing the image through the final print."

He called it "an attitude toward photography rather than a dogma." He warned consistently that it was better to make a fuzzy picture of a clear idea " than a brilliant image of a fuzzy concept."

In the past 20 years, there has been an astonishing general achievement in making dazzling images that are empty of all emotion, and of no value at all. There is no conversation today among writers, readers or practitioners that acknowledge the foundation of all of Adams' teaching, visualisation. Instead, there is obsession over technical virtuosity driven by a literalist dogma of what constitutes a 'good picture' or proper technique.

Neither Adams, White, nor any truly good teacher ever allowed ideology to limit their students' picture making, BUT taught appropriate methods to support personal vision with the necessary technique. Today, however, we witness jihad on those who would defy the narrow minded certainties of limited technical approaches, usually based on the magical properties of certain materials, equipment, or a superstituous approach to sensitometry.[/I].

Amen, amen!

This is why the work of Jerry Uelsmann leaves me cold. Beautiful technique, but it doesn't say anything. There is nothing behind the image.

 

[Donald Miller]

Amen, amen!

This is why the work of Jerry Uelsmann leaves me cold. Beautiful technique, but it doesn't say anything. There is nothing behind the image.

I recognize that the appreciation of a photographic image is a very personal thing. However in defense of Uelsmann his images are not intended to be representative of objective reality. They are highly symbolic and require a knowledge of symbolism. From that knowledge arises the appreciation for his work.

I believe that on the basis of presenting an image inviting the participation of the observer that Uelsmann stands head and shoulders above the more purely representational photographers like Ansel Adams.

Uelsmann's work requires more from the observer but by the same token it provides more to the observer.

The same can be said for Misha Gordin's work as well as other photographers that work at that level.

Personally, while I began with an appreciation of purely representational work, I have in recent years gravitated to work that requires more intellectual involvement from me. If too much representational information is provided by the photographer there is nothing left for the observer to add.

 

[Claire Senft]

I have no plots of data to offer. Rather I have a good deal of practical experience in using "regular" and Tgrain emulsions with both staining and non-staining developers. I can see no difference between the emulsion types as as to how the pesence of the stain influences the values in a print. I find the effect of the staining etc to be quite noticeable with either emulsion type.

Although this is but ancedotal evidence I find it difficult to ignore.

As Dfcardwell so nicely points out technique for the producer of prints is not
a matter of supreme importance. Each photographer decides for themselves what technique to follow. I have come to the conclusion that in many cases the methodology chosen is very much influenced by the photographer's personality. There is no reason that extremely nice photos cannot be made with a point and shoot camera and lab processing. I magine HCB could have used one to good advantange.

On the other hand I most strongly believe that this forum is more than a place to show well made prints. There are members in this forum that are providing very worthwhile service to all of us with their contribution to advancement in technique irrespective of whether others consider photographs made by them be visually interesting.

 

[Kirk Keyes]

I have no plots of data to offer.

Hi all - sorry to not have gotten back to this in a timely fashion - I've been busy. I hope to get back soon though.