Digital BW, The Print

David W, Duane, Mike...

David, thanks for taking your deserved credit. I didn't want to name
names.

That Harman print is superb...but that exchange featured superb prints
of all sorts...the best 2400 clearly is no better than R220, 1280,
2200 with OEM or MIS and Epson or QTR.  

Harman, except for the David's exquisite image and craft, wasn't
better than several less expensive matte papers...such as HPR or Red
River Polar, according to one's taste. 

IMO Weston was a  better photographer and printer than Adams, while
they both lived...and before Adams did densitometry. 

Weston is remembered for nudes and sexy vegetables, Adams for rocks. I
rest my case. 


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "dlruckus"
<dlruckus@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Mike.
> Sometimes perceptual is all that matters:) It's possible for a nice
> 1.68 matte to outshine a lackluster 2.0, 2.1 glossy quite easily.
> 
> Regards
> Duane
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Michael King"
> <drmrking@> wrote:
> >
> 
> > I think perceptually in that photo the blacks are pretty good, but
> they are
> > not great when measured with the spectro.
> > Coming in around L* 19.5.  About run of the mill for Matte. Velvet
> Fine Art
> > printed with ABW I think tops the league table with L* 14 and
> Ultrasmooth
> > with ABW is also pretty good @ 15.5
> > Both beautiful, but expensive papers.
> > 
> > Just don't want people thinking there is something magic going on with
> > Harmon and MIS.
> > 
> > Mike
> >
>