Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/10/24

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] It's not the "Leica" glow
From: "Dan Post" <dpost@triad.rr.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 10:12:12 -0400
References: <200010241248.IAA12958@sushi.toad.net>

Steve-
I have found that what is done in the darkroom is extremely important. To
illustrate I have to recount a talk our local camera group made to a group
in neighboring Winston-Salem.
First, let me say that our group is an informal bunch that has only one
'formal' rule- we meet for breakfast every Wednesday morning at a local
'greasy spoon' pancake house, that has great coffee, and our regular
waitress is a treasure. We have hand colorists, 4x5 enthusiasts, nature
photographers, Leica nuts, and people who even use <<GACK>> Canons and
Nikons!
Our common love is B&W, so when we were asked by the group from Winston to
give a presentation, we jumped at the chance! They are a wonderful bunch of
people- about thirty of them, and all are enthusiasts, but primarily into
color!
We impressed them,needless to say, and enjoyed quite a lot of interest in
our work.
Now, to the meat of the matter. Since I am a person who uses a densitometer
and an enlarging meter, I am really big into 'probes'!! (Despite the
protestations of MArk 'The Rabid' Rabiner, I say it works for me!) and I
explained that a piece of film can register an amazing range of scene
brightness. I used the 21 step tablet that has 21 discrete steps of density,
each one incresing by .15 density, and if you consider it as a 'negative'
develope to a contrast index of 0.5, the it represents a range of 21 stops
of brightness!!! The Log value of the brightness range is therefore 21X.3 or
7! That means that the range would be from a brightness of say 10 to the
first to ten to the seventh or more simply- the brightest recordable object
can be 10,000,000 brighter than the darkest!!
No paper can record all these possible tones! It take quite a bit of talent
to go into the darkroom, and either compress or expand the toines to fit the
paper! Now, taking a densitometer to the paper, the reflection density of
Ilford MC fiber pbased paper, the glossy, ranges from a white with a
reflection density of about .15 to a black of about 2.8- no way a film
recording a rang that is three time that can be easily printed on that
paper!!
Now, most scenes don't have 21 stops of brightness range, unless you are
filming an A-bomb blast, and using SPF 1000 sunblock- so it isn't all that
bad! The fact is, however, that film can be oversexposed drastically and
still provide a usable printable negative.
So exposing Plus -X at 64 instead of 125 is not a stretch- it moves the
shadow density more into the linear portion of the response curve- even
exposing it at ISO 32 would not be too drastic, especially if the
development is 'pulled' a bit! Film, B&W film in particular, is capable of
recording a very extreme range of scene brightness, but where the real magic
is to be done, is to take that negative into the darkroom, or even into a
scanner, and getting it translated into a print that gives the maximum
amount of information possible considering the tonal limitations of paper!
If you really want to see some rich tomes, look at some old 'lantern'
slides- B&W transparencies... NOw there are some TONES!

Dan
> Mike,
>
> I have to agree with you 100%, ITPS (It's The Print Stupid). I am in the
> unique position of being a fairly good photographer but do not have a clue
> when it comes to doing lab work. And because for the past 20 years I have
> been the Owner/Publisher/Editor of two monthly magazines I have had the
same
> Master Printer under contract to do all my work. (I would be in big
trouble
> without Dermott Hickey).
>
> I do think there is something to this Leica "Glow" thing, in part based on
> Dermott seeing immediately on the light box something was different (the
> "Glow") when a few years ago I started to shoot with Leicas in addition to
> my Nikons. I have talked with Dermott about this and about all he would
tell
> me is that it is in his technique (it would be over my head anyway, so I
> don't need to know). From conversations with me he had picked up on what I
> liked, so he started making my prints with glow.
>
> Dermott has also said that with Leica lenses there really is a difference
> apart from every other brand he has ever printed.
>
> Dermott has started a major project of printing archival photos for the US
> Naval Academy. I can't wait to see some of those.
>
> Steve
> Annapolis
>

In reply to: Message from "Steve LeHuray" <icommag@toad.net> (Re: [Leica] It's not the "Leica" glow)