Re: Drydown and other esoteric mysteries

[Peter De Smidt <pdesmidt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Here's Bruce Barnbaum's thoughts on dry down from his book *The Art of
Photography*:

Inspection, Evaluation, and the Myth of "Dry Down"

	*The intensity of this inspection light [the print inspection light] is
far more important than most people realize!*  My own experience-and my
experience with hundreds of students in years of workshops-is that lack
of solid thought about the inspection light can undo all of the good
printing techniques performed to this point. I cannot overstress the
importance of the inspection light!
	Most people feel that nay normal room light will do the job.  Wrong!
Others feel that a good, bright light will  show the print best for
proper evaluations.  Disastrously wrong!  The best inspection light is a
rather dim light, or an average wattage bulb placed rather far away from
the print.  The reason for this is basic common sense.  Consider the
following: you have been in a room lit by safelights from the time you
removed the enlarging paper from the box, placed it in the easel,
exposed the negative with any extra burning or flashing steps, then
developed the print (hopefully for at least 4 or 5 minutes), stopped it,
and placed it in the fixer.  You have been laboring in dim light for ten
minutes and your iris is now wide open to gather in the light.  Then,
you put on a bright light.  It's like walking out of a matinee into the
sunlit afternoon!  If the print is too dark, it will look good! And if
it is printed just right, it will look too light! A dim light will give
you a far batter feel of what the print really looks like!
.
.
.
	After your eyes adjust to the dim light, you can then put on a brighter
light for a more thorough inspection.  this may seem to contradict the
need for a dim light initially, but it does not.  The reason for the dim
light is to let you see the print initially as you would see it under
normal lighting when your eyes are fully adjusted to normal lighting. 
If the initial light is too bright, you will see shadow detail that will
not be visibile in the finished print (unless you view the print in
mid-day sunlight!)  The psychological importance of that initial
inspection is critical, for once you see shadow detail in the print
under a light that is too bright, it is hard to strike that impression
fr4om you mind, and you will always end up fighting that first
impression.  When you see the finished print you will attribute the loss
of detail in the shadow to "dry down"  It is not dry-down, the alleged
darkening of an image as it dries, it is an inspection light too bright!
.
.
. 	Again, "dry-down" is often cited for the appearance of highlight
detail in the finished print that was not visible during inspection, but
again, it is not dry down, it is failure to view the print without the
layer of liquid fix obscuring highlight detail.
	I urge you to try this for yourself by removing a print from the fix
after carefully inspecting it in the tray.  you'll notice that more
detail immediately shows in the subtle highlights as the print is
removed from beneath the liquid.  Then put it on a vertical surface,
such as white acrylic plastic.  When you squeegee off the remaining
liquid, still more detail appears.  no more will appear after the print
dries.  Nwo hose it down with water or re-immerse it in the tray of fix
and watch those subtle highlights immediately disappear!  I call this
effect "wet-up!"
	Although no more detail will appear in the finished print then you will
see using good inspection techniques, the subtle highlight detail that
appears will be more pronounced in the dried, finished print.  I believe
that the reason for this is due to the slight shrinkage of the print as
it dries.  A wet 16x20 print may be more than 1/4th inche longer than a
dried print.  As the developed silver grains bunch together more closely
as the print dries and shrinks, the subtle detail will appear more
prominently.  This intensity increase in the highlights during drying is
the only "dry-down" effect I have ever observed, but I have not observed
new detail appearing.
	"Dry-down" is an overused excuse for improper inspection.  In fact, if
there is a change to be seen, it is the other way.  When a print is wet,
its blacks appear richest, and they lose some of the intensity when the
print dries.  This is simply due to the way light scatters off the paper
form a wet or dry print.  (Matte papers exhibit a dramatic lss of
brilliance in the blacks when they dry because of the surface	 qualities
of the paper.)  I call this effect "dry-up!"

I'm not taking sides here, but I thought an opinion on the other side
might stimulate consideration.

Regards,
Peter De Smidt
*
****
*******
******************************************************
*  To remove yourself from this list, send:          *
*         UNSUBSCRIBE INFRARED                       *
*       to                                           *
*         MAJORDOMO@xxxxx                            *
*----------------------------------------------------*
*   For the IR-FAQ, IR-Gallery and heaps of links:   *
*  http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mainpage.htm  *
******************************************************

------------------------------

End of Infrared-Digest V0 #536
******************************