Digital BW, The Print

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
<stevekale@b...> wrote:
> Hi Tyler and others following along...

Well, at least I understand what you are getting at now, even though I
quite adamantly disagree. But lack of consensus is better than lack of
understanding.

Your classroom example has some problems... You assume if all three
tones are properly exposed their relationships will be correct.
Really? You've found a perfect straight line film/processing combo?
The scanner you used was dead linear, or perfectly profiled profiled?
Or perhaps you captured the scene. What were the characteristics of
that device? How was the file processed? Anyway, different conversation...


> > The resulting tonal progression is something porportionally or somehow
> > mathematically related to the reference, but not exactly the same rate
> > of change. 
>  
> The existing relationship to reference is variable and changes for every
> ink/paper combination.

Yes! Thanks goodness! They all have different characteristics. 
...

> >...The whole point is to maintain the tonal
> > relationships, unless of course you want come up with your own unique
> > definition of "linearization".
> 
> I am not defining linearization just using it...
...and...
> I am saying that linearization to LAB should actually do that, not some
> other function whose relationship to LAB changes for each and every
> ink/paper combination.

OK, strictly yes. But the standard use of the term linearization for
an output device these days is not that, and that's what I'm talking
about. Even though the "linearization" results in a compression, the
tonal relationships within that range bear a relationship to LAB from
dmin to dmax, you must admit. Had one done a similar "linearization"
to gamma 2.2 (or whatever) that same relationship would hold between
the linearized output and 2.2, even though compressed. Strictly, the
rate of change, is no longer exactly that of the target, granted.
We are after two completely different things. You want middle gray to
be middle gray whether you are printing on a brown paper bag or
Photorag, utilizing some (in this extreme example) rather massive
change in the other tonal relationships, and those changes will likely
be different between middle gray and dmin, and middle gray and dmax.
I need all those relationships to be proportionally maintained,
absolutely, and that is what I think is generally accepted as
linearization, even though that moniker may be incorrect by strict
definition.

So there we are, good luck in your efforts...
Tyler