True or False... (kind of a trick question, just for fun)

[ic-racer]

Two prints with identical total base exposure time (same enlarger, negative, paper, lens etc.). The print with an extensive 'burn-in' around the edges can have a LIGHTER center.

 

[Removed Account]

True or false? Yes.

If you did the base exposures and followed that with the burning in, then the center of the burned-in print would be identical to the non-burned in, but appear lighter because of the darker edges. So the answer would be false.

If the edges of the burned-in print were burned in while making the base exposure on that print then the center would be lighter because you'd have been dodging it while burning in the edges on the base exposure, so the answer would be true.

 

[ic-racer]

Total exposure time to the center of each print is identical.

 

[Steve Smith]

It's definitely true or false.

 

[Robert Kerwin]

Two prints with identical total base exposure (same enlarger, negative, paper, lens etc.). The print with an extensive 'burn-in' around the edges can have a LIGHTER center.

Lighter than what? The center of the other print? Take a knife and cut out the two centers, then compare them side by side on a sheet of white mat board. Better yet, have someone else do it for you and not tell you which patch came from which print.

 

[eric]

E, Both A and C are correct.
or
F. Neither B or D is correct.
G. All the above is correct.
...this is how I got through college and look at me now!

 

[scootermm]

E, Both A and C are correct.
or
F. Neither B or D is correct.
G. All the above is correct.
...this is how I got through college and look at me now!

how about...
H. The question is dumb.

 

[gainer]

All questions are dumb. The people who ask them are at least smart enough to ask. Sometimes it boils down to asking the right people to answer dumb questions.

You could take two pieces of white drawing paper that look to be the same brightness and paint a black border on one of them. See how the width of the border changes the apparent brightness of the central portion. A change in the brightness of any part of the field of view can cause a change in the adapation level of the eye. This adaptation has two mechanisms: the obvious one is the iris, which has a rapid response but a limited range. The other is chemical, more like printing out paper. You see that if there is a small light leak in your darkroom. At first you can see nothing when the light goes out. After a while, you begin to wonder if you should have loaded that developing tank without a changing bag.

The eye has a logarithmic response to change of illumination, so that the just noticeable change is nearly constant over a wide range. For that reason, brightness comparisons should be done side by side, not one after the other.

It's a complex subject over which I spent many hours during my years of study of human factors at NACA-NASA.

 

[2F/2F]

With identical processing, and exactly the same exposure, False. However, both of these things are difficult to get exact. Are you actually comparing the center of one to the center of the other? Or does it just look brighter on the burned one because you are comparing it to the edges?

 

[srs5694]

They could be different because of reciprocity effects, if the lens aperture or ND filtration lengthened the exposure time significantly. There could also be effects based on filtration for contrast on VC paper, but IMHO that would be violating the spirit of the question.

 

[ic-racer]

Ok, here is a hint: Coldlight

(also see my post on coldlight output vs time (there was a url link here which no longer exists))

 

[ic-racer]

With identical processing, and exactly the same exposure, False.

This is what I meant by "kind of a trick.." The 'Exposure Time' is the same on the center of both but not necessarily the "Exposure."

 

[2F/2F]

Obviously, same exposure to the middle of the print. It's not kind of a trick. It is very straightforward.

 

[ic-racer]

Ok, another hint. Think of the order of things. ie Burn-first vs Base exposure-first.

 

[Steve Smith]

If you burn in first then do the base exposure, the light has already been on for a while so the base exposure may be brighter (is that how they work?). In that case the centre of the print would be darker, not brighter though.


EDIT: But now I have seen your other post with the graph, I see light intensity drops with time so if you burn first then do the base exposure, you will indeed get a lighter un-burned in centre area.

Steve.

 

[Stephen Benskin]

A dark surround tone will make the middle appear lighter. A light surround will make the middle appear darker. It's called simultaneous contrast. Perception is a very important aspect of photography, so not a bad question.

 

[Frank Szabo]

False - it's called optical illusions, rather similar to some of the tricks illustrated with lines we see sometimes.

 

[ic-racer]

If you burn in first then do the base exposure, the light has already been on for a while so the base exposure may be brighter (is that how they work?). In that case the centre of the print would be darker, not brighter though.


EDIT: But now I have seen your other post with the graph, I see light intensity drops with time so if you burn first then do the base exposure, you will indeed get a lighter un-burned in centre area.

Steve.

EXACTLY!

I have now posted a pair of example prints that show it on the other thread. (there was a url link here which no longer exists)

 

[2F/2F]

"Burn-first vs Base exposure-first."

No. Why would I do that? That's not the same exposure for the middle section?

 

[ic-racer]

"Burn-first vs Base exposure-first."

No. Why would I do that? That's not the same exposure for the middle section?

The burn is on the edges only. Center exposure time is the same on each.

 

[2F/2F]

The burn is on the edges only. Center exposure time is the same on each.

I understand. What I am saying is that I would not do the burn first, in order to make the center more consistent print to print. I was asking why someone would do the burn first.

As for the lamp heat affecting exposure, if I remember your IR measurements graph, it only takes noticeable effect on density in exposures of some time...far longer than any exposures I have made except with lith printing or very large prints from fairly dense negs.

Thank you for your testing, BTW. It is quite interesting info. What did you use to determine the reduction in lamp brightness at a certain exposure time?

 

[ic-racer]

I understand. What I am saying is that I would not do the burn first, in order to make the center more consistent print to print. I was asking why someone would do the burn first.

Yes, I usually don't either, but (I didn't go in to detail in the example photograph) but it was a split grade exposure, so I had an extensive burn before the second main exposure. (I did not do the burn on the test print, thus the change in lamp output from test-print to final print).

As for the lamp heat affecting exposure, if I remember your IR measurements graph, it only takes noticeable effect on density in exposures of some time...far longer than any exposures I have made except with lith printing or very large prints from fairly dense negs.

Exactly, I agree, and I think a compensating timer or special control unit is not a nesscessity.

Thank you for your testing, BTW. It is quite interesting info. What did you use to determine the reduction in lamp brightness at a certain exposure time?

Simply put a light meter on the baseboard aimed up at the enlarger lens. Safelights off, of course.

In 30 years I had never encountered anything like this, so I wanted to share the experience. I have never seen a graph like I posted in any discussion of coldlights, but it IS a characteristic response of these lamps.