Re: PHOTO-3D digest 1376

[P3D Neil Harrington <nharrington@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Robert writes:

>One need only look at the ends of a developed roll to understand why F'chrome
>(and virtually all E-6 types) gives consistently "good enough for most folks"
>results.  The blackest black is the unexposed ends.  Hold them up to a bright
>light and what do you see?  Not black!  Deep charcoal gray; nowhere as rich a
>black as K'chrome under the same test.  The same is true of the whites.  Look
>at the severely overexposed leader --if you ever get one  ;-)  --and see that
>E-6 isn't colorless.  So if you start with a film incapable of rendering a
>true black neither a pure white, what do you get?  Less contrast.  More room
>for error.  Less possibility of really terrible shots. 

That doesn't necessarily follow, Robert.  Contrast is the slope of the
density curve, right?  The steeper the slope, the greater the contrast.
Saying that whites are not as white, or blacks as black, on an E-6 film
simply says that the toe and the shoulder of the curve are closer together
on such film; it doesn't tell you anything about the slope.  You are really
comparing density RANGE of the two kinds of film.   

> Also, less
>possibility of tremendous shots.  E-6 films are great; cannot achieve the
>same contrast as K'chrome; but it's probably good enough for most folks.  Use
>it in your Loreo. ;-)

You seem to be assuming that the greater the contrast the better the
picture.  But that doesn't necessarily follow either.  If it were so, we'd
probably all be using Kodalith.    ;-/



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