[MF3D.FORUM:663] Possible misconceptions, Litho Grain

[Sam <3dhacker@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

At 09:35 AM 6/4/00 -0400, you wrote:
>re: "art vs. math"
>
>I have never understood the "versus" part.  It seems obvious to me 
>that stereography is "art AND science", inseparably intertwined.

Oh Boy, I might have known that would happen. My original post had no
intention of splitting the list into two separate topics nor dictating it's
content. I was merely enforcing "I am of the opinion that 3 D cannot be put
into words and I much prefer to see the real thing via follio" comment that
was made.

EVERYTHING related to medium format stereo should be discussed, any topic,
any concern, any idea. It's been that way from the beginning and hopefully
will be in the future.
 
I have enjoyed this list immensly over the last 4 years, yet had to give up
Photo3d after tiring from endless babble that sounded more like a Chip and
Dale cartoon than an exchange of ideas. Keeping ideas and posts to the
point as well as properly titled is greatly appreciated.

So to the point, NO, art and math are not the opposing aggressors on the
MF3d gladiator arena. You can't have one without the other. End of point.


OTHER topics: Does anyone out there have any ideas or formulas on reducing
the apparent grain on a litho positive? I use Pyro in my B&W MF Stereo negs
which leaves them virtually grainless under a lupe or viewer. But in the
conversion to positive I pick up grain from the litho film. I don't like
Tech Pan because I can't see it develop which I prefer for greater control.
Is there an ortho equivilant to tec pan?

Sam