Digital BW, The Print

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Burkhardt Kiegeland 
<burkhardt@e...> wrote:
> 
> 
> Martin,
> 
> thank you for comment. Here are the benchmark data of an 80 years 
old Zeiss
> Tessar 4.5/300mm. I hope the date dont mess up during transport to 
this
> list...
> 
> angle off-axis: 0    5   10   15   20   25  _28_  30   degrees
> 
>      f/4.5    80   60   40   15    8   30   12    0   lines/mm
>      f/22     65   60   50   35   20   50   30    6   lines/mm
>      f/64     25   25   25   25   25   25   20   15   lines/mm
> 
> Actually Mr. Gainer´s figure is not correct. The theoretical limit 
of a
> perfect lens is 22lp/mm at zero degrees. BTW - lp/mm in classical
> photography is always pairs of lines!
> I run into this issue by preparing an article on the new 
Gigabitfilm which
> was published recently in PhotoVision. This film provides a 
resolution of
> 900lp/mm at a contrast of 1:1000. In this context I was taught 
about the
> more recent data cncerning the resolution of the human eye. And of 
course I
> was stunned to learn that the old figure of 9-10lp/mm was gained by
> Helmholtz and others by imposing a test setting which is far from 
the actual
> behaviour of our eyes. Helmholtz, one of the most famous scientist 
100 years
> ago has said that he would hand back the human eye to it´s creator 
because
> it is so bad. He was wrong.
> More recent research has shown that using both eyes elements 
10times finer
> are resolved. This is even more enhanced by the tremor.

Burkhardt,

Thank you for the additional information and clarification. You 
jogged my memory and I recalled seeing your Gigabit film article. I 
had not read it in detail but did go back to it after your post 
above. A very interesting film indeed and a very thorough evaluation 
on your part. I find it interesting that PhotoVision, which takes an 
anti-digital stance, would be the only review I have seen of a film 
seemingly aimed (perhaps in name only) toward a film-to-scanner 
workflow. 

I recommend the article to those who may have missed it. Photo Vision 
is sold by Barnes & Noble, at least in my area:

www.photovisionmagazine.com

For information on Gigabit films:
www.gigabitfilm.de/

Having settled on Ilford FP4+ and TMax 400 with pyro development 
years ago I am reluctant to spend time experimenting with new films. 
The increased shadow detail does sound very appealing though. In your 
article you mention that Lotus would be a distributor for Gigabit 
films but I did not find it on your website. Is this something in 
progress or have your plans changed? Have you moved to this new film 
yourself since writing the article?

> 
> In my praxis I am interested in a sharpness which gives me the 
finest
> possible detail and a smooth tonality. In consequence I ended with 
large
> negatives of 8x10" and bigger which are contact printed, not 
enlarged.
> Having made direct comparing between 8x10" contact prints and high
> resolution scans of the same subjects which were inkjet printed 
then in size
> 8x10" using Piezography as well as other inks by implementing all 
kinds of
> curves provided by the friendly members of several mailing lists I 
came to
> the conclusions posted in my message.

I would agree with you on theory alone. An original 11x14 negative 
contact printed on to silver paper is going to suffer less loss of 
information than the same negative going through the optics of a 
scanner, the data acquisition hardware and software, output through 
the printer driver, etc. to make an 11X14 inkjet print. Or the same 
negative passed through an optical enlarger to make an 11X14 print. 
The old run of degradation each time information is reproduced is 
still true.

My favorite and standard print size has always been 11x14 but I have 
never had the resources or the resolve to work with a camera that 
size. I salute you and hope to have the chance to see some of your 
images first hand some day.

Do you feel that writer to Photo Techniques who reported a 80 lp/mm 
resolution for contact printing on Ilford Multigrade IV RC vs. 20 
lp/mm was correct in the amount of resolution lost in an optical 
enlarging system? 

I ask because the recent medium format scanners have given results of 
60 lp/mm, which is lower than the silver paper resolution in contact 
printing but perhaps greater than what could be achieved with an 
optical enlarger system.

> 
> Of course I can enhance sharpness by unsharp masking in Photoshop - 
but this
> results in a somewhat coarser tonality.
> 
> Anothet test I made was aput printing resolution. I scanned an 8x10"
> negative at 300, 360, 480 and 600dpi. The prints 300 and 360dpi 
showed less
> sharpness than the 480dpi, the best result was with 600 dpi. 
Printer here
> was the Epson 3000 equipped with the Triton system.
> 
> The Trition system works using 3 carts containing 3 different 
blacks. Part
> of the system is a set of tables designed for different papers. The 
tables
> are free.
> The fine tuning of the print is done in grayscale mode. After that 
the image
> has to be changed into indicated colors where the table is applied.
> The results are very nice and definitely of the same quality as the 
best
> Piezography prints. No dots, no banding, just perfect for an inkjet 
print.
> The Triton inks are available for all Epson printers in neutral 
tone and
> warm tone. They last 50 years under normal exhibition conditions - 
depending
> of course on the paper. Unfortunately Triton does not offer bulk 
inks.

The use of three inks is very reasonable and it has been noted in the 
past that three shades of gray would be sufficient. My great 
frustration is that I cannot see a sample of the Triton prints. I am 
glad to hear that there is yet another option available. I know Lotus 
in Austria distributes the film. Are there any US distributors?

Thank you,
Martin Wesley