Digital BW, The Print

----- Original Message -----
From: "Austin Franklin" <darkroom@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2002 6:49 PM
Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Dynamic Range Definitions and Print Tones


> > > Having said that, it seems to me that a perfectly meaningful and
> > unambiguous
> > > (in any ordinary sense of those words) conversation can be had
> > between two
> > > printers using "dynamic range" and "density range" interchangeably to
> > > describe the range of tones produced by an ink/paper/workflow
> > combination.
> >
> > Absolutely and this has been a common practice for quite some time.
>
> Martin,
>
> "common practice" and "quite some time" for whom?  How long have you had
> anything to do with digital imaging, seriously?

Austin,

Perhaps this is the root of our disagreement. I am not making any distiction
between digial photography/imaging and traditional photography. My remark
above would be that this has been common among photographers for quite some
time.

> I've been at this 25 years,
> and only in the past few years, because of all the
> misunderstanding/misinformation on the web, combined with non-technical
(as
> in home owners etc.) people getting into digital imaging, and the
> proliferation of cheap scanners, have I seen this density range/dynamic
> range misinterpretation "crop up" ;-)

The issue of dynamic range is very important in digital cameras and
scanners. You are correct that in these areas the term is not well used,
especially by manufacturers who want to claim bit depth is equal to the
dynamic range of their latest gadget. I do recognize that and your expertise
in this area. I just don't think that you can take those relationships that
apply to digital imaging and apply them to a finished print silver or inkjet
or whatever without stepping back and seeing if this is appropriate or if it
is telling you something meaningful about the print.

Martin