Digital BW, The Print

There are specific test that can be done with equipment this is true. But
many photographers will NOT go out and but it, nor will they field test 15
lens 3 of each type, just to get the best. Their ability to visually
discriminate which is best may also hamper their choice. So, for many using
the digital paradigm of USM, Sharpening in PS and all the other avenues of
image enhancement to a direct comparison to film, through lens to paper is
going to be a wild and wooly path. This is why in another forum I recently
stated that with all the information running around about this method and
that method as being "the best", you really need to look long and hard at
personal bias and precise workflow being cited. There is lots of out dated
information, slightly wrong, wildly wrong, right but for a different
workflow input and output. Etc.   

 

The level of pixel placement of paper is wide and varied. I still think that
many fine prints are being made the old fashioned way; silver and paper. 

 

All images captured with a lens are optical illusions. All it takes is one
trip to the optometrist to confirm that.  : )  There is an interesting test
on the xrite site that was being discussed on the Alt Photo Process group.
This is kind of fun:  http://www.xrite.com/custom_page.aspx?PageID=77

Visually we see things differently. How we get there is also open to boat
loads of path that can all arrive at the same dock but the absolute path
taken by anyone of us is quite different.  

 

So my point here is that some may have developed, adopted, or otherwise come
to a workflow. Their lens selection may enhance or be hindered by that
workflow.  

 

 

Eric Neilsen Photo

4101 Commerce Street, Suite 9

Dallas, TX 75226

214 827-8301

 

http://ericneilsenphotography.com

SKype ejprinter

 

  _____  

From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Cdtobie
Sent: Sunday, September 28, 2008 8:15 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] DSLR sharp? -- was How tiny dots determine real
resolution in a B&W ink print

 

Post-capture sharpening is an optical illusion, so testing it is not 
as straightforward as counting visible lines per inch. I don't believe 
there would be any valid method other than visual evaluation, at a 
fixed distance, using side by side prints with the same size, image, 
media, inks, printer, profile and lighting . But then; the results 
would really only tell you about that combo, and might well be 
different for other combos.

C. D. Tobie
WW Product Technology Mngr.
Digital Imaging & Home Theater
DataColor.com
CDTobie@DataColor. <mailto:CDTobie%40DataColor.com> com

On Sep 27, 2008, at 7:48 PM, "E Neilsen" <e.neilsen2@worldnet
<mailto:e.neilsen2%40worldnet.att.net> .att.net> 
wrote:

> Paul, Sharpness in the digital landscape has always been an issue 
> for me.
> Aside from the mechanics of focusing the light on the senor, we also 
> have to
> deal with processing of the image; USM in Photoshop, Clarity Slider 
> in LR,
> Nik Sharp, etc. There are many ways to improve or screw up an 
> image. IS any
> one aware of a good comprehensive test or series of test that have 
> been done
> to take the myth and marketing out of it and get down to the brass 
> tacks?
>
>
>
> Eric
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]