[Leica] Re: LUG Digest, Vol 30, Issue 26

[mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner)]

On 6/11/05 6:02 PM, "Mark R. Wilkins" <mark_wilkins@yahoo.com> typed:

> 
> On Jun 11, 2005, at 5:15 PM, lug-request@leica-users.org wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Over exposure = death when it comes to quality black and white
>> image making.
>> And all "pulling" is is over exposing with a smug attitude.
> 
> Obviously your photography speaks for itself, so far be it from me to
> argue that you should try anything differently from what you're
> doing, but pulling can be more useful, done right, than you're making
> out.
> 
> Increasing exposure just increases shadow detail.  Reducing
> development time (within reasonable limits, which I'll get to in a
> second) reduces the density of the highlights on the negative, which
> prevents the hottest highlights from hitting the film's maximum
> density -- this increases detail in the highlights as well.
> 
> Really, the reason that increasing exposure and reducing development
> ("pulling") can eventually cause image problems is that there's a
> time scale to the diffusion of the chemistry through the developer
> and the film's emulsion that depends on temperature only -- and
> reducing development time means there's less time for chemistry to
> diffuse effectively and thus there can be problems with uneven
> development or difficulties with repeatability of the process from
> roll to roll.
> 
> To some extent, lowering the temperature of development and keeping
> the development time and degree of agitation the same can help
> overcome this, but that only helps to a point.
> 
> "Overexposure" may be a huge problem, but overexposure means exposing
> too much for the specifics of how the film is developed, not exposing
> more than the rated ISO speed of the film (which is what "pulling"
> and "pushing" use as a baseline.)
> 
> Ansel Adams' wrote about how to exploit "pushing" and "pulling"
> pretty extensively in "The Negative," if you'd like a more detailed
> explanation of how it works in practice.  However, I don't believe he
> uses those terms -- he just talks about the techniques.
> 
> -- Mark
> 
> 
There's a lot of darkroom and photography and zone system conversation which
sounds like people sitting around a bong or a hookah taking hits.
Lets face it we feel a little sheepish because this photography thing is for
a large part just a "click" of the shutter and that's it.
I think we feel a little inferior and try to mystify it to make up for that
little "click" and Kodak does the rest.
And I'ts easy to mystify stuff we really don't thoroughly understand.

Mark R. Wilkins I don't recognize your name perhaps this is your first post
welcome to the LUG! I'd love it if you could go back and explain what you
mean by:
> Really, the reason that increasing exposure and reducing development
> ("pulling") can eventually cause image problems is that there's a
> time scale to the diffusion of the chemistry through the developer
> and the film's emulsion that depends on temperature only -- and
> reducing development time means there's less time for chemistry to
> diffuse effectively and thus there can be problems with uneven
> development or difficulties with repeatability of the process from
> roll to roll.
Because it's like I forgot how to read English.

And then
> To some extent, lowering the temperature of development and keeping
> the development time and degree of agitation the same can help
> overcome this, but that only helps to a point.

And then the next paragraph:
> "Overexposure" may be a huge problem, but overexposure means exposing
> too much for the specifics of how the film is developed, not exposing
> more than the rated ISO speed of the film (which is what "pulling"
> and "pushing" use as a baseline.)

Kind of sounds like Pat Paulson! :)

If you were discussing Nuclear physics I'd say "fine" but I happen to be
into photography specifically the printing aspics of it and I understand it
fairly thoroughly AND Ansel whose books I've read every version of decade by
decade and this just doesn't register to me at all as being on the map.
I think what we are doing here on the LUG on such topics is making a real
effort to make sense.
Me, I do give people the benefit of the doubt when I don't know them being
an optimist and assume they're not BS'ing.





Mark Rabiner
Photography
Portland Oregon
http://rabinergroup.com/