Digital BW, The Print

The reason I wanted to use Gray Gamma 1.8 as the calibration mode for 
my monitor was the need for more detail in the lower Zones (I-III) 
than Gray Gamma 2.2 allows. If I were to switch to GG2.2 then those 
details would be lost and I would be worse off than now. For the time 
being I guess I'll just use a curve upon opening the image to boost 
the middle gray from 128 to 145 and go from there, unless someone who 
has gone through this themselves an has found the solution would care 
to jump into the thread. Oh, if I only had a spectrophotometer to 
create printer profiles!  Would anyone in the group volunteer to help 
me with this by profiling my printer/paper/ink combination?

Your friend in Photography,

Johnny







--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Seth" 
<seth@m...> wrote:
> Johnny-
> 
> I think things are gradually changing.  A LOT of print shops, 
whether MAC or
> PC-based, are using a gamma of 2.2 now.  It has/is become a defacto
> standard.  Probably just to keep all things level.
> 
> Guessing now, most shops were MAC based, most input was getting to 
be from
> PC, so it all evened out for continuity.
> 
> Seth 
> 
> ==-----Original Message-----
> ==From: Johnny Eades [mailto:jeades1@s...] 
> ==
> ==
> ==My monitor is calibrated for Gray Gamma 1.8, so I should be 
> ==making my exposures so that middle gray should read on the 
> ==monitor as RGB 145. 
> ==Is that correct? Practically all the 21 step grayscale strips 
> ==are set up for Gray Gamma 2.2 and have 128 as middle gray. In 
> ==addition to the monitor set up as GG 1.8 it is set so the 
> ==color temperature is 5000K and I view all my prints under a