Digital BW, The Print

Thank you Roy,

You make excellent points.

Being neither an electrical engineer nor an expert in sensitometry I am
heistant to debate the issues with Austin. I am sure that he is a very good
engineer, but it is obvious that he is convined that he is right. I think
that we all agree that there are other interpretations than Austin's
regarding Dynamic Range. However, the really great thing about these lists
is the we "can" debate in an open and informative way.

Great thread, but perhaps we should all agree to disagree and go on to the
next issue.

Mike


----- Original Message -----
From: "royvharrington" <roy@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 8:14 PM
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Thoughts about Imaging


> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Austin Franklin"
<darkroom@i...> wrote:
> >
> > What are these "taped and printed discussions of dynamic range as it
relates
> > to prints", aside from discussions posted on a web page, or in news
groups
> > on the Internet?
> >
> > BTW, I do understand that people have confused the term dynamic range
when
> > they mean density range, for what ever historical reason...probably
because
> > those doing it didn't really know what dynamic range was.  It is very
> > similar to the misuse of the term resolution when talking about computer
> > monitors (or digital cameras ;-).
> >
> > Austin
>
> Austin,
>
> You've pushed you idea on dynamic range for imaging, time and time again.
Many
> people have argued with you.  I personally have gone to the library to
look at
> your reference book by "Higgins".  First of all I'd like to point out that
the
> formula and the diagrams you have spoken about are under a paragraph
> heading:   1.4.1  DYNAMIC RANGE EXAMPLE: ANALOG VS. DIGITAL AUDIO.
> The last word AUDIO is key.  You've claim to have 25 years of experience
in
> AUDIO, fine.   You've claimed to have taken this formula, plugged in
density,
> and defined dynamic range for imaging.  I tried several times to point out
that
> it was at least possible to plug in density to the formula in different
ways.
> You declined to admit that, saying there wasn't any interpretation,
mapping,
> or logic, involved in going from the audio formula to imaging.
>
> Well, bottom line is you're mistaken, incorrect, misinformed or whatever
you want
> to call it.  I don't expect or even recommend that you believe me.  You've
got
> to investigate, research, and learn more about the Imaging World and
figure it
> out for yourself.  I'd be glad to help point you in the right direction
but you've
> got to do it yourself.
>
> Here's a couple of hints:
> The formula in Higgins book is about audio, explicitly showing the
waveform
> nature of sound.   The signal diagram shows what to measure with a wave.
> Imaging is very different, when we talk about light intensity, or film
density
> there are no waves.  They are direct measured values that can be perceived
> as constant values.  Your interpretation has made density into a waveform
> property which it is not.
>
> Get away from the audio books, jettison the audio baggage.  Read some
imaging
> books.  Here's a nice one:
> Read World Scanning and Halftones by Blatner, Fleishman and Roth.
>  -- page 13  direct quote
>   "Dynamic Range" expresses how broad a range of tonal values a scanner
can
>   capture; this is similar to the photographic measure of "density".
>  -- page 14  direct quote
>    ... compare bit depth and dynamic range to a staircase: the dynamic
range
>    describes the height of the staircase and the bit depth describes the
>    number of steps from the bottom to the top.
> Read Ansel Adams: The Negative
> Read the kodak website -- search for dynamic range.
>
> Whether you like it or not dynamic range is well used in imaging and your
> interpretation doesn't agree with the anyone else.   If you really like
your function
> call it Austin's Cool Range Formula, and I'm sure we'd all be happy to let
you
> own it.
>
> I am sorry to be harsh about it, but I really think the aruments have
> become a disservice to the group.
>
> Regards,
> Roy
>
>
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or "flames."
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
resources on the homepage.
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>