Digital BW, The Print

Is zone system development time manipulation irrelevant when scanning 
film as opposed to traditional printing?   That is the question I would 
like some help with.

My understanding is that the zone system is way of ensuring a  constant 
density range on the negative independent of the brightness range of 
the scene.  This is desirable because it makes most scenes printable on 
a grade 2 paper (leaving the other grades available for artistic 
interpretation) and it helps minimize the stuffing around in the 
darkroom required to get a good print.

Since I am not doing wet prints but am scanning the negatives, it seems 
to me that the N- or N+ development dependent on the scene brightness 
range is, mostly, irrelevant.  By setting the black point, setting the 
white point and scanning the negative am I not mapping the entire 
density range of the image to a numerical range of 0-256 or 0-64k?  
This mapping would take place independent of the absolute density any 
particular zone.

As a hypothetical example lets assume a scene contains a 8 stop range 
of brightness.  Three images are similarly exposed to capture that  
brightnesses range. The three images are given different development 
times and produce density ranges of  (1.0-0.3=.7), (1.4-0.4=1.0) and 
(2.0-.5=1.5).  When the images are scanned each one will produce a full 
histogram from 0 to 255 and a scene brightness at the 6th of the eight 
stops will show up at the same place in each of the histograms.

Soooo, can't I simplify the zone mantra to "expose for the shadows and 
let the highlights fall where they may with normal development".  Also, 
  wouldn't it be better to generally use N+1 development times so that 
the numbers from the raw scan occupied more of the scanner's range?

Thanks for your help

Not a bad thought but, one of the main reasons for using the Zone System
(in addition to printing everything on one grade of paper) is to
maintain shadow detail while either separating high values or preventing
them from blocking up. Once density values pile up on the shoulder and
become the same density they cannot be separted with any scanner.
Anybody else???
 
 

Stan Shire
Associate Professor/Department Chair
Photographic Imaging
Community College of Philadelphia
Adobe Photoshop 6 A.C.E.
Author: Hands On Photoshop 7: Tutorial Workshops

215 751-8320
sshire@...

-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Gulstene [mailto:kevin@...] 
Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 6:54 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] Scanning and Zone Sys Development.


Is zone system development time manipulation irrelevant when scanning 
film as opposed to traditional printing?   That is the question I would 
like some help with.

My understanding is that the zone system is way of ensuring a  constant 
density range on the negative independent of the brightness range of 
the scene.  This is desirable because it makes most scenes printable on 
a grade 2 paper (leaving the other grades available for artistic 
interpretation) and it helps minimize the stuffing around in the 
darkroom required to get a good print.

Since I am not doing wet prints but am scanning the negatives, it seems 
to me that the N- or N+ development dependent on the scene brightness 
range is, mostly, irrelevant.  By setting the black point, setting the 
white point and scanning the negative am I not mapping the entire 
density range of the image to a numerical range of 0-256 or 0-64k?  
This mapping would take place independent of the absolute density any 
particular zone.

As a hypothetical example lets assume a scene contains a 8 stop range 
of brightness.  Three images are similarly exposed to capture that  
brightnesses range. The three images are given different development 
times and produce density ranges of  (1.0-0.3=.7), (1.4-0.4=1.0) and 
(2.0-.5=1.5).  When the images are scanned each one will produce a full 
histogram from 0 to 255 and a scene brightness at the 6th of the eight 
stops will show up at the same place in each of the histograms.

Soooo, can't I simplify the zone mantra to "expose for the shadows and 
let the highlights fall where they may with normal development".  Also, 
  wouldn't it be better to generally use N+1 development times so that 
the numbers from the raw scan occupied more of the scanner's range?

Thanks for your help



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor	

ADVERTISEMENT
 
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=241773.2725424.4169802.1925585/D=egroupweb/S=1705
019182:HM/A=1394046/R=0/*http://www.hgtv.com/hgtv/pac_ctnt/text/0,,HGTV_
3936_5802,FF.html> HGTV Dream Home Giveaway	
 
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=241773.2725424.4169802.1925585/D=egrou
pmail/S=:HM/A=1394046/rand=966528429> 	

Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this
same page.

Please follow these basic guidelines:
- Include your full name with your message.
- Include the address of your website, if you have one.
- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to
keep them short.
- As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject
header.
- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
&amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
- Complete your Yahoo profile.
- Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
resources on the homepage. 




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> . 




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

I don't really get what your going for but a flat negative will make 
a flat print- digital or silver- there is no easy way around it. you 
can expand contrast silver or digital with paper grades or curves but 
it is still going to look like a fixed job.
Crap in=crap out

Pasajack




--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Kevin Gulstene 
<kevin@d...> wrote:
> Is zone system development time manipulation irrelevant when 
scanning 
> film as opposed to traditional printing?   That is the question I 
would 
> like some help with.
> 
> My understanding is that the zone system is way of ensuring a  
constant 
> density range on the negative independent of the brightness range 
of 
> the scene.  This is desirable because it makes most scenes 
printable on 
> a grade 2 paper (leaving the other grades available for artistic 
> interpretation) and it helps minimize the stuffing around in the 
> darkroom required to get a good print.
> 
> Since I am not doing wet prints but am scanning the negatives, it 
seems 
> to me that the N- or N+ development dependent on the scene 
brightness 
> range is, mostly, irrelevant.  By setting the black point, setting 
the 
> white point and scanning the negative am I not mapping the entire 
> density range of the image to a numerical range of 0-256 or 0-64k?  
> This mapping would take place independent of the absolute density 
any 
> particular zone.
> 
> As a hypothetical example lets assume a scene contains a 8 stop 
range 
> of brightness.  Three images are similarly exposed to capture that  
> brightnesses range. The three images are given different 
development 
> times and produce density ranges of  (1.0-0.3=.7), (1.4-0.4=1.0) 
and 
> (2.0-.5=1.5).  When the images are scanned each one will produce a 
full 
> histogram from 0 to 255 and a scene brightness at the 6th of the 
eight 
> stops will show up at the same place in each of the histograms.
> 
> Soooo, can't I simplify the zone mantra to "expose for the shadows 
and 
> let the highlights fall where they may with normal development".  
Also, 
>   wouldn't it be better to generally use N+1 development times so 
that 

> the numbers from the raw scan occupied more of the scanner's range?
> 
> Thanks for your help

Hi Kevin,

> Is zone system development time manipulation irrelevant when scanning
> film as opposed to traditional printing?

An excellent question.  It is ABSOLUTELY relevant.  What you are doing by
using the Zone system is placing as wide a tonal range as you can on your
film, period.  In order to do that, you use exposure compensation and
development compensation.

> Since I am not doing wet prints but am scanning the negatives, it seems
> to me that the N- or N+ development dependent on the scene brightness
> range is, mostly, irrelevant.

Well, no...see above.

> By setting the black point, setting the
> white point and scanning the negative am I not mapping the entire
> density range of the image to a numerical range of 0-256 or 0-64k?

Not quite.  The setpoints have not a thing to do with the scan.  They are
applied to the scanned data AFTER the scan occurs.  I believe that's
actually not the right question.  The question should be how to get the
highest density range on the film THEN how to take advantage of that.

I'll explain the scanning process as it related to setpoints.  The scanner
scans the film, and place the density range of the film in an N bit space.
The density occupies only a portion of that N bit space, and how much of
that it occupies is up to the density range of the film.

You can verify this by doing a raw scan, and looking at the data from that
scan with the histogram tool.  It will only occupy a small portion of the
overall range.

What you do when setpoint is "mark" the endpoints of the actual image data
within the overall N bits the scanner scanned at.  Example, your scanner is
12 bits, that gives you a range of 2**12 or 0-4095.  You scan.  The actual
image data occupies data values from 200-766 in the raw scan.  When you
setpoint this data, it takes the 567 values of image data, and spreads them
out over either 8 bits (some get combined when going to an 8 bit space), or
over 16 bits (where they get spread out).

If the number of data values is less than the space you are mapping it into
(577 values into 16 bits) then there will be "equal" (not necessarily
perfectly equal, but as close as can be done) gaps between the data values.
A simple example of that...you have a 4 bit scanner (0-15) and the data
occupies 3-10.  You want 4 bit data out of the scanner, so you set your low
setpoint at 3, and the high one at 10 and the data gets remapped as follows:

Original image values 3-10 get mapped to 0-15 as follows:

3 -> 0
4 -> 2
5 -> 4
6 -> 6
7 -> 8
8 -> 10
9 -> 12
10-> 14

note gaps in the data.  This is no big deal as far as real image data goes
(meaning 12 bit scanned data, mapped to 8 bit data to the printer or
screen).

Map that same 3->10 into a 2 bit space:

3 -> 0
4 -> 1
5 -> 1
6 -> 1
7 -> 2
8 -> 2
9 -> 3
10-> 3

> This mapping would take place independent of the absolute density any
> particular zone.

That is true.  There is no directly calibrated correlation between scene
density, film density and scanner value....unless you went out of your way
to calibrate it...which is really unnecessary, as doing so won't get you
better scans.

> As a hypothetical example lets assume a scene contains a 8 stop range
> of brightness.  Three images are similarly exposed to capture that
> brightnesses range. The three images are given different development
> times and produce density ranges of  (1.0-0.3=.7), (1.4-0.4=1.0) and
> (2.0-.5=1.5).  When the images are scanned each one will produce a full
> histogram from 0 to 255

Only after setpointing the scanned data into an 8 bit space.

> and a scene brightness at the 6th of the eight
> stops will show up at the same place in each of the histograms.

Possibly...

> Soooo, can't I simplify the zone mantra to "expose for the shadows and
> let the highlights fall where they may with normal development".

No, because you can expose to get a higher scene density range onto the
film.  The actual density range of the film is irrelevant to how much scene
density range you can record on the film.  BUT...the wider the film density
range, the more discernable data your scanner will record, because of how
the scanner works.

> Also,
> wouldn't it be better to generally use N+1 development times

It depends on if it's a high or low contrast scene.  Plus
exposure/development is EXPANDING the scene range into the film range, for
use with LOW contrast images.  Negative exposure/development is CONTRACTING
the scene range into the film range for use with HIGH contrast images.

> so that
> the numbers from the raw scan occupied more of the scanner's range?

Yes, exactly.  You want to contract/expand the SCENE range into the film
range, therefore giving you more scene tones on the film and therefore more
discerned scanned values.

If you already knew the answer, why get me to go through the whole process
;-)

I think I said all that correctly.  I'm sure I'll get a lashing if I typo'd
or missed something...

Regards,

Austin

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Austin Franklin" <
darkroom@i...> wrote:
> Hi Kevin,
> 
> > Is zone system development time manipulation irrelevant when scanning
> > film as opposed to traditional printing?
> 
> An excellent question.  It is ABSOLUTELY relevant.  What you are doing by
> using the Zone system is placing as wide a tonal range as you can on your
> film, period.  In order to do that, you use exposure compensation and
> development compensation. 
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Rest of post Clipped!!!



Austin,

Excellent post. I totally agree with you! You lost me a little - a lot - with the math 
part though - but that is my limitation.

Bottom line is: expose and develop to record as MUCH scannable information as 
possible on film.

This is done through testing. A higher film density could produce blocked 
highlights and/or increased grain - so testing is needed. Pyro developer might be a 
cure for blocked highlights and increased grain in the highlights. 

Just thinking out loud!

John V.

Stan, thanks for your resposne.

On Tuesday, January 7, 2003, at 04:33 PM, Shire,Stanley wrote:

> Not a bad thought but, one of the main reasons for using the Zone  
> System
> (in addition to printing everything on one grade of paper) is to
> maintain shadow detail while either separating high values or  
> preventing
> them from blocking up. Once density values pile up on the shoulder and
> become the same density they cannot be separted with any scanner.

If I am reading the characteristic curves correctly, isn't the shoulder  
a function of the amount of exposure and not the amount of development.  
  Given N and N+2 development the  shoulder is at the same position on  
the exposure axis but the density is obviously different.  Blocking up  
on the print may be something else (and I have less experience here  
than most others)  but blocking up the negative seems independent of  
development.  Or have I missed something.

> Anybody else???
>
>
>
> Stan Shire
> Associate Professor/Department Chair
> Photographic Imaging
> Community College of Philadelphia
> Adobe Photoshop 6 A.C.E.
> Author: Hands On Photoshop 7: Tutorial Workshops
>
> 215 751-8320
> sshire@...
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kevin Gulstene [mailto:kevin@...]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 6:54 PM
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Digital BW] Scanning and Zone Sys Development.
>
>
> Is zone system development time manipulation irrelevant when scanning
> film as opposed to traditional printing?   That is the question I would
> like some help with.
>
> My understanding is that the zone system is way of ensuring a  constant
> density range on the negative independent of the brightness range of
> the scene.  This is desirable because it makes most scenes printable on
> a grade 2 paper (leaving the other grades available for artistic
> interpretation) and it helps minimize the stuffing around in the
> darkroom required to get a good print.
>
> Since I am not doing wet prints but am scanning the negatives, it seems
> to me that the N- or N+ development dependent on the scene brightness
> range is, mostly, irrelevant.  By setting the black point, setting the
> white point and scanning the negative am I not mapping the entire
> density range of the image to a numerical range of 0-256 or 0-64k?
> This mapping would take place independent of the absolute density any
> particular zone.
>
> As a hypothetical example lets assume a scene contains a 8 stop range
> of brightness.  Three images are similarly exposed to capture that
> brightnesses range. The three images are given different development
> times and produce density ranges of  (1.0-0.3=.7), (1.4-0.4=1.0) and
> (2.0-.5=1.5).  When the images are scanned each one will produce a full
> histogram from 0 to 255 and a scene brightness at the 6th of the eight
> stops will show up at the same place in each of the histograms.
>
> Soooo, can't I simplify the zone mantra to "expose for the shadows and
> let the highlights fall where they may with normal development".  Also,
>   wouldn't it be better to generally use N+1 development times so that
> the numbers from the raw scan occupied more of the scanner's range?
>
> Thanks for your help
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor	
>
> ADVERTISEMENT
>
> <http://rd.yahoo.com/M=241773.2725424.4169802.1925585/D=egroupweb/ 
> S=1705
> 019182:HM/A=1394046/R=0/*http://www.hgtv.com/hgtv/pac_ctnt/text/ 
> 0,,HGTV_
> 3936_5802,FF.html> HGTV Dream Home Giveaway	
>
> <http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=241773.2725424.4169802.1925585/ 
> D=egrou
> pmail/S=:HM/A=1394046/rand=966528429> 	
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls  
> and
> other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
> unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this
> same page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to
> keep them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject
> header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
> &amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the  
> various
> resources on the homepage.
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
> <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls  
> and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish  
> to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting  
> this same page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to  
> keep them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject  
> header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or  
> &amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the  
> various resources on the homepage.
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to  
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>

Hi Austin,

Thanks for the detailed answer.  I'm not sure if you are agreeing or 
disagreeing though :)

After reading your response I think I can still say development times 
are 'mostly irrelevant', but with   low contrast scenes there will/may 
be more gaps in the output data  and these may become apparent with 
subsequent modest or extreme  adjustments.

 From a purist perspective getting the largest density range on the film 
is best because your scanner produces more discernible data.  See 
comments below.

On Tuesday, January 7, 2003, at 04:38 PM, Austin Franklin wrote:

> Hi Kevin,
>
>> Is zone system development time manipulation irrelevant when scanning
>> film as opposed to traditional printing?
>
> An excellent question.  It is ABSOLUTELY relevant.  What you are doing 
> by
> using the Zone system is placing as wide a tonal range as you can on 
> your
> film, period.  In order to do that, you use exposure compensation and
> development compensation.
>
>> Since I am not doing wet prints but am scanning the negatives, it 
>> seems
>> to me that the N- or N+ development dependent on the scene brightness
>> range is, mostly, irrelevant.
>
> Well, no...see above.
>
>> By setting the black point, setting the
>> white point and scanning the negative am I not mapping the entire
>> density range of the image to a numerical range of 0-256 or 0-64k?
>
> Not quite.  The setpoints have not a thing to do with the scan.  They 
> are
> applied to the scanned data AFTER the scan occurs.  I believe that's
> actually not the right question.

OK, it makes sense that the set-points are applied after the scan.

> The question should be how to get the
> highest density range on the film THEN how to take advantage of that.
>
> I'll explain the scanning process as it related to setpoints.  The 
> scanner
> scans the film, and place the density range of the film in an N bit 
> space.
> The density occupies only a portion of that N bit space, and how much 
> of
> that it occupies is up to the density range of the film.
>
> You can verify this by doing a raw scan, and looking at the data from 
> that
> scan with the histogram tool.  It will only occupy a small portion of 
> the
> overall range.
>
> What you do when setpoint is "mark" the endpoints of the actual image 
> data
> within the overall N bits the scanner scanned at.  Example, your 
> scanner is
> 12 bits, that gives you a range of 2**12 or 0-4095.  You scan.  The 
> actual
> image data occupies data values from 200-766 in the raw scan.  When you
> setpoint this data, it takes the 567 values of image data, and spreads 
> them
> out over either 8 bits (some get combined when going to an 8 bit 
> space), or
> over 16 bits (where they get spread out).
>
> If the number of data values is less than the space you are mapping it 
> into
> (577 values into 16 bits) then there will be "equal" (not necessarily
> perfectly equal, but as close as can be done) gaps between the data 
> values.
> A simple example of that...you have a 4 bit scanner (0-15) and the data
> occupies 3-10.  You want 4 bit data out of the scanner, so you set 
> your low
> setpoint at 3, and the high one at 10 and the data gets remapped as 
> follows:
>
> Original image values 3-10 get mapped to 0-15 as follows:
>
> 3 -> 0
> 4 -> 2
> 5 -> 4
> 6 -> 6
> 7 -> 8
> 8 -> 10
> 9 -> 12
> 10-> 14
>
> note gaps in the data.  This is no big deal as far as real image data 
> goes
> (meaning 12 bit scanned data, mapped to 8 bit data to the printer or
> screen).
>
Cool, thanks for the primer.  Wouldn't the software use some algorithm 
to interpolate values for the gaps instead of leaving them empty?
> Map that same 3->10 into a 2 bit space:
>
> 3 -> 0
> 4 -> 1
> 5 -> 1
> 6 -> 1
> 7 -> 2
> 8 -> 2
> 9 -> 3
> 10-> 3
>
>> This mapping would take place independent of the absolute density any
>> particular zone.
>
> That is true.  There is no directly calibrated correlation between 
> scene
> density, film density and scanner value....unless you went out of your 
> way
> to calibrate it...which is really unnecessary, as doing so won't get 
> you
> better scans.
>

Agreed.  So can't I conclude that the value of the slope of the 
exposure density curve is (ignoring the number of gaps) irrelevant to 
the scan?

>> As a hypothetical example lets assume a scene contains a 8 stop range
>> of brightness.  Three images are similarly exposed to capture that
>> brightnesses range. The three images are given different development
>> times and produce density ranges of  (1.0-0.3=.7), (1.4-0.4=1.0) and
>> (2.0-.5=1.5).  When the images are scanned each one will produce a 
>> full
>> histogram from 0 to 255
>
> Only after setpointing the scanned data into an 8 bit space.
Agreed.
>
>> and a scene brightness at the 6th of the eight
>> stops will show up at the same place in each of the histograms.
>
> Possibly...
Agreed.
>
>> Soooo, can't I simplify the zone mantra to "expose for the shadows and
>> let the highlights fall where they may with normal development".
>
> No, because you can expose to get a higher scene density range onto the
> film.  The actual density range of the film is irrelevant to how much 
> scene
> density range you can record on the film.  BUT...the wider the film 
> density
> range, the more discernable data your scanner will record, because of 
> how
> the scanner works.

OK, the greater the density range of the film the more discernible 
data.  So couldn't I just settle on an N+1 time or N+2 time as long as  
the resultant film density doesn't exceed the optical density range
of my scanner I should be OK. Yes?

>
>> Also,
>> wouldn't it be better to generally use N+1 development times
>
> It depends on if it's a high or low contrast scene.  Plus
> exposure/development is EXPANDING the scene range into the film range, 
> for
> use with LOW contrast images.  Negative exposure/development is 
> CONTRACTING
> the scene range into the film range for use with HIGH contrast images.
>
Comment just above applies I think.

>> so that
>> the numbers from the raw scan occupied more of the scanner's range?
>
> Yes, exactly.  You want to contract/expand the SCENE range into the 
> film
> range, therefore giving you more scene tones on the film and therefore 
> more
> discerned scanned values.
>
> If you already knew the answer, why get me to go through the whole 
> process
> ;-)
>
> I think I said all that correctly.  I'm sure I'll get a lashing if I 
> typo'd
> or missed something...
>
> Regards,
>
> Austin
>
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls 
> and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish 
> to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting 
> this same page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to 
> keep them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject 
> header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or 
> "flames."
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the 
> various resources on the homepage.
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to 
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>

> Excellent post.

Thank you John.

> Bottom line is: expose and develop to record as MUCH scannable
> information as
> possible on film.

Exactly, and don't worry about film curves, because, unlike traditional
darkroom printing, you can adjust the tonal curve of the scanned film to
what ever you like!

Regards,

Austin

Hi Kevin,

> Thanks for the detailed answer.  I'm not sure if you are agreeing or
> disagreeing though :)

Agree in conclusion, but I think you were missing some details there as to
how things work.

> After reading your response I think I can still say development times
> are 'mostly irrelevant'

Hum.  If you use N+- exposure to compress/expand the scene density onto the
film, you have to use N+- development...

>  From a purist perspective getting the largest density range on the film
> is best because your scanner produces more discernible data.

Correct.

> >> By setting the black point, setting the
> >> white point and scanning the negative am I not mapping the entire
> >> density range of the image to a numerical range of 0-256 or 0-64k?
> >
> > Not quite.  The setpoints have not a thing to do with the scan.  They
> > are
> > applied to the scanned data AFTER the scan occurs.  I believe that's
> > actually not the right question.
>
> OK, it makes sense that the set-points are applied after the scan.

That is true of the consumer scanners you and I use.  There are some
scanners, and I've designed one, that have analog gain control between the
CCD and the A/D, and has, basically, hardware setpoints.

> Cool, thanks for the primer.  Wouldn't the software use some algorithm
> to interpolate values for the gaps instead of leaving them empty?

That is a good guess, but no...remember, every pixel has a value associated
with it.  What are you going to interpolate?  If you did somehow
interpolate, you are giving data that was the same, different values, or
creating NEW data that didn't exist before...  The gaps really don't mean
anything, as you are taking the N bit data and converting it to CONTINUOUS 8
bit data...in other words, when you go to print, you DO have every data
value from 0-255 (or most every one).

> >> This mapping would take place independent of the absolute density any
> >> particular zone.
> >
> > That is true.  There is no directly calibrated correlation between
> > scene
> > density, film density and scanner value....unless you went out of your
> > way
> > to calibrate it...which is really unnecessary, as doing so won't get
> > you
> > better scans.
>
> Agreed.  So can't I conclude that the value of the slope of the
> exposure density curve is (ignoring the number of gaps) irrelevant to
> the scan?

If I understand you correctly, the answer is yes, it is irrelevant, as long
as you have enough data there...as the slope approaches 90, you have less
data points per delta.

> OK, the greater the density range of the film the more discernible
> data.

Correct.

> So couldn't I just settle on an N+1 time or N+2 time as long as
> the resultant film density doesn't exceed the optical density range
> of my scanner I should be OK. Yes?

I am confused as to why you think you always would use +
exposure/development.  + is for expansion of low contrast scenes (small
density range) into the higher density range of the film...and - is for
contraction of a high contrast scene (large scene density range) into the
smaller density range of the film.  There are circumstances in the real
world where you would use either.

Regards,

Austin

From my perspective, the point of the zone system is to get a negative with
reasonable shadow and highlight tones.  If you have a negative with a
blown-out highlight, I don't think any scanner will help you.  For example,
take a high contrast scene that may take N-4 development (here reduced film
speed and compensating development in dilute HC110 or TMax RS).  I have many
negs like this that scan well, but I can't picture how I could get a good
tonal range with say, normal development.  In fact, the only problems I have
had in scanning LF negs with expanded and compressed development have been
those developed in pyro (Rollo or PMK), since the stain produces some
challenges in getting a good scan.  I would say go for the best neg you
would use for a silver print.

Regards,

  --Ken Carney
    www.kencarney.com


----- Original Message -----
From: "Kevin Gulstene" <kevin@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 5:53 PM
Subject: [Digital BW] Scanning and Zone Sys Development.


> Is zone system development time manipulation irrelevant when scanning
> film as opposed to traditional printing?   That is the question I would
> like some help with.
>
> My understanding is that the zone system is way of ensuring a  constant
> density range on the negative independent of the brightness range of
> the scene.  This is desirable because it makes most scenes printable on
> a grade 2 paper (leaving the other grades available for artistic
> interpretation) and it helps minimize the stuffing around in the
> darkroom required to get a good print.
>
> Since I am not doing wet prints but am scanning the negatives, it seems
> to me that the N- or N+ development dependent on the scene brightness
> range is, mostly, irrelevant.  By setting the black point, setting the
> white point and scanning the negative am I not mapping the entire
> density range of the image to a numerical range of 0-256 or 0-64k?
> This mapping would take place independent of the absolute density any
> particular zone.
>
> As a hypothetical example lets assume a scene contains a 8 stop range
> of brightness.  Three images are similarly exposed to capture that
> brightnesses range. The three images are given different development
> times and produce density ranges of  (1.0-0.3=.7), (1.4-0.4=1.0) and
> (2.0-.5=1.5).  When the images are scanned each one will produce a full
> histogram from 0 to 255 and a scene brightness at the 6th of the eight
> stops will show up at the same place in each of the histograms.
>
> Soooo, can't I simplify the zone mantra to "expose for the shadows and
> let the highlights fall where they may with normal development".  Also,
>   wouldn't it be better to generally use N+1 development times so that
> the numbers from the raw scan occupied more of the scanner's range?
>
> Thanks for your help
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
&amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
resources on the homepage.

>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

Hi Ken,

Let's take your high contrast scene.  Lets assume that 14 stops of 
scene brightness are mapped to a a film density range of .05 to 1.8 
with the zone system compensations.  When you scan that piece of film 
and apply the set points you will then map a density of .05 to  100%k 
and the density of 1.8 to 0%k.

Take an identical exposure of the same scene with anther piece of film. 
  This film has no development compensation.  The 14 stops of scene 
brightness are then mapped to a density range of .06 to 2.3.  When you 
scan that piece of film and apply the set points you will map the 
density of of .06 to 100%k and a density of 2.3 to 0%k.

It seems to me that as long as the maximum film density is within the 
specs of your scanner it doesn't matter whether you used N or N-4 
development.  You have to make the scene brightness fit between black 
and white one way or another.  You can do it with development or math 
in the scanner.  The result, it seems to me is the same.

Clearly you have to set a film speed appropriately to capture the 
shadow details but I am not convinced that modifying the film 
development is required to capture the highlights when you are scanning 
a negative.

That is what I am trying to come to grips with.

Thanks for your help

On Tuesday, January 7, 2003, at 06:23 PM, Ken Carney wrote:

>> From my perspective, the point of the zone system is to get a 
>> negative with
> reasonable shadow and highlight tones.  If you have a negative with a
> blown-out highlight, I don't think any scanner will help you.  For 
> example,
> take a high contrast scene that may take N-4 development (here reduced 
> film
> speed and compensating development in dilute HC110 or TMax RS).  I 
> have many
> negs like this that scan well, but I can't picture how I could get a 
> good
> tonal range with say, normal development.  In fact, the only problems 
> I have
> had in scanning LF negs with expanded and compressed development have 
> been
> those developed in pyro (Rollo or PMK), since the stain produces some
> challenges in getting a good scan.  I would say go for the best neg you
> would use for a silver print.
>
> Regards,
>
>   --Ken Carney
>     www.kencarney.com
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kevin Gulstene" <kevin@...>
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 5:53 PM
> Subject: [Digital BW] Scanning and Zone Sys Development.
>
>
>> Is zone system development time manipulation irrelevant when scanning
>> film as opposed to traditional printing?   That is the question I 
>> would
>> like some help with.
>>
>> My understanding is that the zone system is way of ensuring a  
>> constant
>> density range on the negative independent of the brightness range of
>> the scene.  This is desirable because it makes most scenes printable 
>> on
>> a grade 2 paper (leaving the other grades available for artistic
>> interpretation) and it helps minimize the stuffing around in the
>> darkroom required to get a good print.
>>
>> Since I am not doing wet prints but am scanning the negatives, it 
>> seems
>> to me that the N- or N+ development dependent on the scene brightness
>> range is, mostly, irrelevant.  By setting the black point, setting the
>> white point and scanning the negative am I not mapping the entire
>> density range of the image to a numerical range of 0-256 or 0-64k?
>> This mapping would take place independent of the absolute density any
>> particular zone.
>>
>> As a hypothetical example lets assume a scene contains a 8 stop range
>> of brightness.  Three images are similarly exposed to capture that
>> brightnesses range. The three images are given different development
>> times and produce density ranges of  (1.0-0.3=.7), (1.4-0.4=1.0) and
>> (2.0-.5=1.5).  When the images are scanned each one will produce a 
>> full
>> histogram from 0 to 255 and a scene brightness at the 6th of the eight
>> stops will show up at the same place in each of the histograms.
>>
>> Soooo, can't I simplify the zone mantra to "expose for the shadows and
>> let the highlights fall where they may with normal development".  
>> Also,
>>   wouldn't it be better to generally use N+1 development times so that
>> the numbers from the raw scan occupied more of the scanner's range?
>>
>> Thanks for your help
>>
>>
>> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls 
>> and
> other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>>
>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>>
>> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish 
>> to
> unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this 
> same
> page.
>>
>> Please follow these basic guidelines:
>> - Include your full name with your message.
>> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
>> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to 
>> keep
> them short.
>> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject 
>> header.
>> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
> &amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
>> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
>> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the 
>> various
> resources on the homepage.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to 
>> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>>
>>
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls 
> and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish 
> to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting 
> this same page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to 
> keep them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject 
> header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or 
> &amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the 
> various resources on the homepage.
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to 
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>

This assumes that the highlights don't saturate the film - hence losing 
detail. I think you have a bit more latitude with a scanner when it 
comes to development, but not a lot more. If the highlights are 
saturated - they are gone forever.

Truman

Kevin Gulstene wrote:

>Hi Ken,
>
>Let's take your high contrast scene.  Lets assume that 14 stops of 
>scene brightness are mapped to a a film density range of .05 to 1.8 
>with the zone system compensations.  When you scan that piece of film 
>and apply the set points you will then map a density of .05 to  100%k 
>and the density of 1.8 to 0%k.
>
>Take an identical exposure of the same scene with anther piece of film. 
>  This film has no development compensation.  The 14 stops of scene 
>brightness are then mapped to a density range of .06 to 2.3.  When you 
>scan that piece of film and apply the set points you will map the 
>density of of .06 to 100%k and a density of 2.3 to 0%k.
>
>It seems to me that as long as the maximum film density is within the 
>specs of your scanner it doesn't matter whether you used N or N-4 
>development.  You have to make the scene brightness fit between black 
>and white one way or another.  You can do it with development or math 
>in the scanner.  The result, it seems to me is the same.
>
>Clearly you have to set a film speed appropriately to capture the 
>shadow details but I am not convinced that modifying the film 
>development is required to capture the highlights when you are scanning 
>a negative.
>
>That is what I am trying to come to grips with.
>
>Thanks for your help
>
>On Tuesday, January 7, 2003, at 06:23 PM, Ken Carney wrote:
>
>  
>
>>>From my perspective, the point of the zone system is to get a 
>>>negative with
>>>      
>>>
>>reasonable shadow and highlight tones.  If you have a negative with a
>>blown-out highlight, I don't think any scanner will help you.  For 
>>example,
>>take a high contrast scene that may take N-4 development (here reduced 
>>film
>>speed and compensating development in dilute HC110 or TMax RS).  I 
>>have many
>>negs like this that scan well, but I can't picture how I could get a 
>>good
>>tonal range with say, normal development.  In fact, the only problems 
>>I have
>>had in scanning LF negs with expanded and compressed development have 
>>been
>>those developed in pyro (Rollo or PMK), since the stain produces some
>>challenges in getting a good scan.  I would say go for the best neg you
>>would use for a silver print.
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>  --Ken Carney
>>    www.kencarney.com
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Kevin Gulstene" <kevin@...>
>>To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
>>Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 5:53 PM
>>Subject: [Digital BW] Scanning and Zone Sys Development.
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Is zone system development time manipulation irrelevant when scanning
>>>film as opposed to traditional printing?   That is the question I 
>>>would
>>>like some help with.
>>>
>>>My understanding is that the zone system is way of ensuring a  
>>>constant
>>>density range on the negative independent of the brightness range of
>>>the scene.  This is desirable because it makes most scenes printable 
>>>on
>>>a grade 2 paper (leaving the other grades available for artistic
>>>interpretation) and it helps minimize the stuffing around in the
>>>darkroom required to get a good print.
>>>
>>>Since I am not doing wet prints but am scanning the negatives, it 
>>>seems
>>>to me that the N- or N+ development dependent on the scene brightness
>>>range is, mostly, irrelevant.  By setting the black point, setting the
>>>white point and scanning the negative am I not mapping the entire
>>>density range of the image to a numerical range of 0-256 or 0-64k?
>>>This mapping would take place independent of the absolute density any
>>>particular zone.
>>>
>>>As a hypothetical example lets assume a scene contains a 8 stop range
>>>of brightness.  Three images are similarly exposed to capture that
>>>brightnesses range. The three images are given different development
>>>times and produce density ranges of  (1.0-0.3=.7), (1.4-0.4=1.0) and
>>>(2.0-.5=1.5).  When the images are scanned each one will produce a 
>>>full
>>>histogram from 0 to 255 and a scene brightness at the 6th of the eight
>>>stops will show up at the same place in each of the histograms.
>>>
>>>Soooo, can't I simplify the zone mantra to "expose for the shadows and
>>>let the highlights fall where they may with normal development".  
>>>Also,
>>>  wouldn't it be better to generally use N+1 development times so that
>>>the numbers from the raw scan occupied more of the scanner's range?
>>>
>>>Thanks for your help
>>>
>>>
>>>Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls 
>>>and
>>>      
>>>
>>other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>>    
>>
>>>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>>>
>>>If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish 
>>>to
>>>      
>>>
>>unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this 
>>same
>>page.
>>    
>>
>>>Please follow these basic guidelines:
>>>- Include your full name with your message.
>>>- Include the address of your website, if you have one.
>>>- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to 
>>>keep
>>>      
>>>
>>them short.
>>    
>>
>>>- As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject 
>>>header.
>>>- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
>>>      
>>>
>>&amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
>>    
>>
>>>- Complete your Yahoo profile.
>>>- Before posting a question, search the message archives and the 
>>>various
>>>      
>>>
>>resources on the homepage.
>>    
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to 
>>>http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls 
>>and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>>
>>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>>
>>If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish 
>>to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting 
>>this same page.
>>
>>Please follow these basic guidelines:
>>- Include your full name with your message.
>>- Include the address of your website, if you have one.
>>- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to 
>>keep them short.
>>- As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject 
>>header.
>>- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or 
>>&amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
>>- Complete your Yahoo profile.
>>- Before posting a question, search the message archives and the 
>>various resources on the homepage.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to 
>>http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>>
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
>If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same page.
>
>Please follow these basic guidelines:
>- Include your full name with your message.
>- Include the address of your website, if you have one.
>- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short.
>- As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
>- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or &amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
>- Complete your Yahoo profile.
>- Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various resources on the homepage. 
>
>
> 
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
>
>
>
>  
>



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

On Tuesday, January 7, 2003, at 06:08 PM, Austin Franklin wrote:

> Hi Kevin,
>
>> Thanks for the detailed answer.  I'm not sure if you are agreeing or
>> disagreeing though :)
>
> Agree in conclusion, but I think you were missing some details there 
> as to
> how things work.

Yes.  My conclusion seemed counterintuitive.  Your answer helped fill 
in some of the 'gaps'.

>
>> After reading your response I think I can still say development times
>> are 'mostly irrelevant'
>
> Hum.  If you use N+- exposure to compress/expand the scene density 
> onto the
> film, you have to use N+- development...
>
>>  From a purist perspective getting the largest density range on the 
>> film
>> is best because your scanner produces more discernible data.
>
> Correct.
>
>>>> By setting the black point, setting the
>>>> white point and scanning the negative am I not mapping the entire
>>>> density range of the image to a numerical range of 0-256 or 0-64k?
>>>
>>> Not quite.  The setpoints have not a thing to do with the scan.  They
>>> are
>>> applied to the scanned data AFTER the scan occurs.  I believe that's
>>> actually not the right question.
>>
>> OK, it makes sense that the set-points are applied after the scan.
>
> That is true of the consumer scanners you and I use.  There are some
> scanners, and I've designed one, that have analog gain control between 
> the
> CCD and the A/D, and has, basically, hardware setpoints.


That would be add a whole new meaning to the auto-exposure function!!

>
>> Cool, thanks for the primer.  Wouldn't the software use some algorithm
>> to interpolate values for the gaps instead of leaving them empty?
>
> That is a good guess, but no...remember, every pixel has a value 
> associated
> with it.  What are you going to interpolate?  If you did somehow
> interpolate, you are giving data that was the same, different values, 
> or
> creating NEW data that didn't exist before...  The gaps really don't 
> mean
> anything, as you are taking the N bit data and converting it to 
> CONTINUOUS 8
> bit data...in other words, when you go to print, you DO have every data
> value from 0-255 (or most every one).
>
>>>> This mapping would take place independent of the absolute density 
>>>> any
>>>> particular zone.
>>>
>>> That is true.  There is no directly calibrated correlation between
>>> scene
>>> density, film density and scanner value....unless you went out of 
>>> your
>>> way
>>> to calibrate it...which is really unnecessary, as doing so won't get
>>> you
>>> better scans.
>>
>> Agreed.  So can't I conclude that the value of the slope of the
>> exposure density curve is (ignoring the number of gaps) irrelevant to
>> the scan?
>
> If I understand you correctly, the answer is yes, it is irrelevant, as 
> long
> as you have enough data there...as the slope approaches 90, you have 
> less
> data points per delta.
>
>> OK, the greater the density range of the film the more discernible
>> data.
>
> Correct.
>
>> So couldn't I just settle on an N+1 time or N+2 time as long as
>> the resultant film density doesn't exceed the optical density range
>> of my scanner I should be OK. Yes?
>
> I am confused as to why you think you always would use +
> exposure/development.  + is for expansion of low contrast scenes (small
> density range) into the higher density range of the film...and - is for
> contraction of a high contrast scene (large scene density range) into 
> the
> smaller density range of the film.  There are circumstances in the real
> world where you would use either.

Yes I understand classic zone methodology.

Just let me make sure I have understood what you are saying and that we 
do in fact agree.  In the same hypothetical the N-1 development 
(density range of .7), the N development (density range of 1) and the 
N+1 development( density range of 1.5) all produce virtually the same 
scan after set points are applied.

  With an extremely shallow exposure/density curve you may have too few 
discernible points from the scanner to fill the 256 data points 
(assuming 8bit).  As a principle more data points (ie maximum density 
range) is better.  Except in situations with an extreme brightness 
range adding development time to your 'normal' time (or the 
manufacturers recommended time if you haven't done any testing at all) 
will increase the density range. And be a good thing.

>
> Regards,
>
> Austin
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls 
> and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish 
> to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting 
> this same page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to 
> keep them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject 
> header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or 
> "flames."
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the 
> various resources on the homepage.
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to 
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>

Kevin,

> It seems to me that as long as the maximum film density is within the
> specs of your scanner it doesn't matter whether you used N or N-4
> development.

I believe, you get better tonal separation from + development, as that
increases the image density on the film, therefore giving more overall
discernable (by the scanner) tones.  The trick is to fit your image scene
density into that.

In other words, given how our scanners work, when you scan something with an
overall density range of 1.6, you get, say, 100 different valid image data
values.  When you scan something with an overall density range of 2.3,
you'll get, say, 200 different valid image data values.  That's just how
these fixed gain scanners work.  So, if you can spread the tones out over a
higher density range, no matter what the scene density actually is...I think
you have the most information to scan.

Now, to your question.  I believe if you don't compensate develop, you
either short the expansion of the tonal range, therefore, similar to above,
you would get lower density and therefore less tonal separation...or clip
the compression of the tonal range.

> You have to make the scene brightness fit between black
> and white one way or another.  You can do it with development or math
> in the scanner.  The result, it seems to me is the same.

Not if you lose image information via not doing compensation development, or
because you don't have enough data separation.

> Clearly you have to set a film speed appropriately to capture the
> shadow details but I am not convinced that modifying the film
> development is required to capture the highlights when you are scanning
> a negative.
>
> That is what I am trying to come to grips with.

I understand what you are saying.  Let me think about it.  I believe that
since the development "brings in" the highlights, without doing so, you
would lose them.

But, the conclusion I'd draw from all of this, is that you would get "more"
scanning data from higher density range...so use a film that provides the
highest density range, and develop for a higher density range...but longer
development times bring out grain, so there are, of course, trade-offs.  The
other issue is you really only need at most 200 different tones in a B&W
scene...more than that, the eye can't discern...and printing techniques,
like Piezo, claim to "fill in" to "smooth the transitions" between visible
tones, so they claim to print far more tones than you actually give data.

Interesting discussion, thanks!

Austin

Hi Kevin,

> > That is true of the consumer scanners you and I use.  There are some
> > scanners, and I've designed one, that have analog gain control between
> > the
> > CCD and the A/D, and has, basically, hardware setpoints.
>
>
> That would be add a whole new meaning to the auto-exposure function!!

I am surprised none of the current "high end" consumer scanners do it...it
just isn't that hard, or costly.

> >> Cool, thanks for the primer.  Wouldn't the software use some algorithm
> >> to interpolate values for the gaps instead of leaving them empty?
> >
> > That is a good guess, but no...remember, every pixel has a value
> > associated
> > with it.  What are you going to interpolate?  If you did somehow
> > interpolate, you are giving data that was the same, different values,
> > or
> > creating NEW data that didn't exist before...  The gaps really don't
> > mean
> > anything, as you are taking the N bit data and converting it to
> > CONTINUOUS 8
> > bit data...in other words, when you go to print, you DO have every data
> > value from 0-255 (or most every one).

BTW, did you understand that?  It isn't an easy thing to understand...so if
you didn't, I can try to give a usable example.

> Just let me make sure I have understood what you are saying and that we
> do in fact agree.  In the same hypothetical the N-1 development
> (density range of .7), the N development (density range of 1) and the
> N+1 development( density range of 1.5) all produce virtually the same
> scan after set points are applied.

Hum.  I don't know what you mean by "same".  The data for the .7 density
range will be "narrower", meaning, say values from 100-240, vs 1, which
would give you 100-440 vs 1.5, which would give you values from 100-600 (I
am making up the numbers, they just illustrate that you get more different
data values, as in a wider range of data values, the more density you are
scanning.

> With an extremely shallow exposure/density curve you may have too few
> discernible points from the scanner to fill the 256 data points
> (assuming 8bit).

Correct!

> As a principle more data points (ie maximum density
> range) is better.

Yes.

> Except in situations with an extreme brightness
> range adding development time to your 'normal' time (or the
> manufacturers recommended time if you haven't done any testing at all)
> will increase the density range. And be a good thing.

Yes, but what's the "except" for?  This statement, and the previous one ("As
a principle...") are the same, are they not?

Regards,

Austin

Hi Austin,

On Tuesday, January 7, 2003, at 07:41 PM, Austin Franklin wrote:

> Hi Kevin,
>
>>> That is true of the consumer scanners you and I use.  There are some
>>> scanners, and I've designed one, that have analog gain control 
>>> between
>>> the
>>> CCD and the A/D, and has, basically, hardware setpoints.
>>
>>
>> That would be add a whole new meaning to the auto-exposure function!!
>
> I am surprised none of the current "high end" consumer scanners do 
> it...it
> just isn't that hard, or costly.
>
>>>> Cool, thanks for the primer.  Wouldn't the software use some 
>>>> algorithm
>>>> to interpolate values for the gaps instead of leaving them empty?
>>>
>>> That is a good guess, but no...remember, every pixel has a value
>>> associated
>>> with it.  What are you going to interpolate?  If you did somehow
>>> interpolate, you are giving data that was the same, different values,
>>> or
>>> creating NEW data that didn't exist before...  The gaps really don't
>>> mean
>>> anything, as you are taking the N bit data and converting it to
>>> CONTINUOUS 8
>>> bit data...in other words, when you go to print, you DO have every 
>>> data
>>> value from 0-255 (or most every one).
>
> BTW, did you understand that?  It isn't an easy thing to 
> understand...so if
> you didn't, I can try to give a usable example.

Yes, when I said fill in the gaps I had a image of a histogram with 
nasty gaps that could be interpolated.  But as you say, if you 
interpolated a value to fill a histogram gap, what pixel would you 
assign it to. <sheepish grin>

>
>> Just let me make sure I have understood what you are saying and that 
>> we
>> do in fact agree.  In the same hypothetical the N-1 development
>> (density range of .7), the N development (density range of 1) and the
>> N+1 development( density range of 1.5) all produce virtually the same
>> scan after set points are applied.
>
> Hum.  I don't know what you mean by "same".  The data for the .7 
> density
> range will be "narrower", meaning, say values from 100-240, vs 1, which
> would give you 100-440 vs 1.5, which would give you values from 
> 100-600 (I
> am making up the numbers, they just illustrate that you get more 
> different
> data values, as in a wider range of data values, the more density you 
> are
> scanning.

OK.  We are following the same line of reasoning.  Where that reasoning 
leads you to  depends on the numbers.  Tomorrow I will take a 'normal' 
scene, develop N-1, N and N+1 and see what the numbers look like.  I 
think we need an actual in place of my hypothetical.

>
>> With an extremely shallow exposure/density curve you may have too few
>> discernible points from the scanner to fill the 256 data points
>> (assuming 8bit).
>
> Correct!
>
>> As a principle more data points (ie maximum density
>> range) is better.
>
> Yes.
>
>> Except in situations with an extreme brightness
>> range adding development time to your 'normal' time (or the
>> manufacturers recommended time if you haven't done any testing at all)
>> will increase the density range. And be a good thing.
>
> Yes, but what's the "except" for?  This statement, and the previous 
> one ("As
> a principle...") are the same, are they not?
>
> Regards,
>
> Austin
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls 
> and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish 
> to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting 
> this same page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to 
> keep them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject 
> header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or 
> "flames."
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the 
> various resources on the homepage.
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to 
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>

Truman,

Also it is going to depend a lot on the film/developer you are using.

Using pg 247 of "the negative" the N curve is steeper than the N-1 
curve, as you would expect, but the density difference at zone 12 is 
about 0.4 (2.1 vs 1.7).  I am fairly sure that you wouldn't notice any 
difference between the scan of a film with a denisty range of 2 and the 
scan of a film with the density range of 1.7.  After applying the set 
points I don't think there would be much difference.

Compensating 4 stops may produce enough density difference to be seen 
in the scan.  That is much more extreme case than I have any experience 
with.

On Tuesday, January 7, 2003, at 07:14 PM, Truman Prevatt wrote:

> This assumes that the highlights don't saturate the film - hence losing
> detail. I think you have a bit more latitude with a scanner when it
> comes to development, but not a lot more. If the highlights are
> saturated - they are gone forever.
>
> Truman
>
> Kevin Gulstene wrote:
>
>> Hi Ken,
>>
>> Let's take your high contrast scene.  Lets assume that 14 stops of
>> scene brightness are mapped to a a film density range of .05 to 1.8
>> with the zone system compensations.  When you scan that piece of film
>> and apply the set points you will then map a density of .05 to  100%k
>> and the density of 1.8 to 0%k.
>>
>> Take an identical exposure of the same scene with anther piece of 
>> film.
>>  This film has no development compensation.  The 14 stops of scene
>> brightness are then mapped to a density range of .06 to 2.3.  When you
>> scan that piece of film and apply the set points you will map the
>> density of of .06 to 100%k and a density of 2.3 to 0%k.
>>
>> It seems to me that as long as the maximum film density is within the
>> specs of your scanner it doesn't matter whether you used N or N-4
>> development.  You have to make the scene brightness fit between black
>> and white one way or another.  You can do it with development or math
>> in the scanner.  The result, it seems to me is the same.
>>
>> Clearly you have to set a film speed appropriately to capture the
>> shadow details but I am not convinced that modifying the film
>> development is required to capture the highlights when you are 
>> scanning
>> a negative.
>>
>> That is what I am trying to come to grips with.
>>
>> Thanks for your help
>>
>> On Tuesday, January 7, 2003, at 06:23 PM, Ken Carney wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>> From my perspective, the point of the zone system is to get a
>>>> negative with
>>>>
>>>>
>>> reasonable shadow and highlight tones.  If you have a negative with a
>>> blown-out highlight, I don't think any scanner will help you.  For
>>> example,
>>> take a high contrast scene that may take N-4 development (here 
>>> reduced
>>> film
>>> speed and compensating development in dilute HC110 or TMax RS).  I
>>> have many
>>> negs like this that scan well, but I can't picture how I could get a
>>> good
>>> tonal range with say, normal development.  In fact, the only problems
>>> I have
>>> had in scanning LF negs with expanded and compressed development have
>>> been
>>> those developed in pyro (Rollo or PMK), since the stain produces some
>>> challenges in getting a good scan.  I would say go for the best neg 
>>> you
>>> would use for a silver print.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>>  --Ken Carney
>>>    www.kencarney.com
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Kevin Gulstene" <kevin@...>
>>> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 5:53 PM
>>> Subject: [Digital BW] Scanning and Zone Sys Development.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Is zone system development time manipulation irrelevant when 
>>>> scanning
>>>> film as opposed to traditional printing?   That is the question I
>>>> would
>>>> like some help with.
>>>>
>>>> My understanding is that the zone system is way of ensuring a
>>>> constant
>>>> density range on the negative independent of the brightness range of
>>>> the scene.  This is desirable because it makes most scenes printable
>>>> on
>>>> a grade 2 paper (leaving the other grades available for artistic
>>>> interpretation) and it helps minimize the stuffing around in the
>>>> darkroom required to get a good print.
>>>>
>>>> Since I am not doing wet prints but am scanning the negatives, it
>>>> seems
>>>> to me that the N- or N+ development dependent on the scene 
>>>> brightness
>>>> range is, mostly, irrelevant.  By setting the black point, setting 
>>>> the
>>>> white point and scanning the negative am I not mapping the entire
>>>> density range of the image to a numerical range of 0-256 or 0-64k?
>>>> This mapping would take place independent of the absolute density 
>>>> any
>>>> particular zone.
>>>>
>>>> As a hypothetical example lets assume a scene contains a 8 stop 
>>>> range
>>>> of brightness.  Three images are similarly exposed to capture that
>>>> brightnesses range. The three images are given different development
>>>> times and produce density ranges of  (1.0-0.3=.7), (1.4-0.4=1.0) and
>>>> (2.0-.5=1.5).  When the images are scanned each one will produce a
>>>> full
>>>> histogram from 0 to 255 and a scene brightness at the 6th of the 
>>>> eight
>>>> stops will show up at the same place in each of the histograms.
>>>>
>>>> Soooo, can't I simplify the zone mantra to "expose for the shadows 
>>>> and
>>>> let the highlights fall where they may with normal development".
>>>> Also,
>>>>  wouldn't it be better to generally use N+1 development times so 
>>>> that
>>>> the numbers from the raw scan occupied more of the scanner's range?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for your help
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls
>>>> and
>>>>
>>>>
>>> other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>>>
>>>
>>>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>>>>
>>>> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish
>>>> to
>>>>
>>>>
>>> unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this
>>> same
>>> page.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Please follow these basic guidelines:
>>>> - Include your full name with your message.
>>>> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
>>>> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages 
>>>> to
>>>> keep
>>>>
>>>>
>>> them short.
>>>
>>>
>>>> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject
>>>> header.
>>>> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
>>>>
>>>>
>>> &amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
>>>
>>>
>>>> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
>>>> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the
>>>> various
>>>>
>>>>
>>> resources on the homepage.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
>>>> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls
>>> and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>>>
>>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>>>
>>> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish
>>> to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting
>>> this same page.
>>>
>>> Please follow these basic guidelines:
>>> - Include your full name with your message.
>>> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
>>> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to
>>> keep them short.
>>> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject
>>> header.
>>> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
>>> &amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
>>> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
>>> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the
>>> various resources on the homepage.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
>>> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls 
>> and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>>
>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>>
>> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish 
>> to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting 
>> this same page.
>>
>> Please follow these basic guidelines:
>> - Include your full name with your message.
>> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
>> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to 
>> keep them short.
>> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject 
>> header.
>> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or 
>> &amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
>> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
>> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the 
>> various resources on the homepage.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to 
>> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls 
> and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish 
> to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting 
> this same page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to 
> keep them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject 
> header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or 
> &amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the 
> various resources on the homepage.
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to 
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>

I think there is more latitude with scanning and printing digitally than 
with printing to paper. But I don't know how much. I have two images 
that seem to be blocked in the highlights no matter how I scan or 
manipulate in S/W. They were slightly over developed for the exposure. I 
either didn't read my meter correctly or didn't take enough readings 
when I took the shot. It could have been a different batch of film, I 
could have read the thermometer wrong.  I just don't know what happened. 
It's a nice image and I thought I might be able to save it by scanning 
and processing but no luck. These images are not badly blocked but I 
couldn't do any better in S/W than I could in the wet darkroom with them.

Truman

Kevin Gulstene wrote:

>Truman,
>
>Also it is going to depend a lot on the film/developer you are using.
>
>Using pg 247 of "the negative" the N curve is steeper than the N-1 
>curve, as you would expect, but the density difference at zone 12 is 
>about 0.4 (2.1 vs 1.7).  I am fairly sure that you wouldn't notice any 
>difference between the scan of a film with a denisty range of 2 and the 
>scan of a film with the density range of 1.7.  After applying the set 
>points I don't think there would be much difference.
>
>Compensating 4 stops may produce enough density difference to be seen 
>in the scan.  That is much more extreme case than I have any experience 
>with.
>
>On Tuesday, January 7, 2003, at 07:14 PM, Truman Prevatt wrote:
>
>  
>
>>This assumes that the highlights don't saturate the film - hence losing
>>detail. I think you have a bit more latitude with a scanner when it
>>comes to development, but not a lot more. If the highlights are
>>saturated - they are gone forever.
>>
>>Truman
>>
>>Kevin Gulstene wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Hi Ken,
>>>
>>>Let's take your high contrast scene.  Lets assume that 14 stops of
>>>scene brightness are mapped to a a film density range of .05 to 1.8
>>>with the zone system compensations.  When you scan that piece of film
>>>and apply the set points you will then map a density of .05 to  100%k
>>>and the density of 1.8 to 0%k.
>>>
>>>Take an identical exposure of the same scene with anther piece of 
>>>film.
>>> This film has no development compensation.  The 14 stops of scene
>>>brightness are then mapped to a density range of .06 to 2.3.  When you
>>>scan that piece of film and apply the set points you will map the
>>>density of of .06 to 100%k and a density of 2.3 to 0%k.
>>>
>>>It seems to me that as long as the maximum film density is within the
>>>specs of your scanner it doesn't matter whether you used N or N-4
>>>development.  You have to make the scene brightness fit between black
>>>and white one way or another.  You can do it with development or math
>>>in the scanner.  The result, it seems to me is the same.
>>>
>>>Clearly you have to set a film speed appropriately to capture the
>>>shadow details but I am not convinced that modifying the film
>>>development is required to capture the highlights when you are 
>>>scanning
>>>a negative.
>>>
>>>That is what I am trying to come to grips with.
>>>
>>>Thanks for your help
>>>
>>>On Tuesday, January 7, 2003, at 06:23 PM, Ken Carney wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>>From my perspective, the point of the zone system is to get a
>>>>>negative with
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>reasonable shadow and highlight tones.  If you have a negative with a
>>>>blown-out highlight, I don't think any scanner will help you.  For
>>>>example,
>>>>take a high contrast scene that may take N-4 development (here 
>>>>reduced
>>>>film
>>>>speed and compensating development in dilute HC110 or TMax RS).  I
>>>>have many
>>>>negs like this that scan well, but I can't picture how I could get a
>>>>good
>>>>tonal range with say, normal development.  In fact, the only problems
>>>>I have
>>>>had in scanning LF negs with expanded and compressed development have
>>>>been
>>>>those developed in pyro (Rollo or PMK), since the stain produces some
>>>>challenges in getting a good scan.  I would say go for the best neg 
>>>>you
>>>>would use for a silver print.
>>>>
>>>>Regards,
>>>>
>>>> --Ken Carney
>>>>   www.kencarney.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>>From: "Kevin Gulstene" <kevin@...>
>>>>To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
>>>>Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 5:53 PM
>>>>Subject: [Digital BW] Scanning and Zone Sys Development.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>Is zone system development time manipulation irrelevant when 
>>>>>scanning
>>>>>film as opposed to traditional printing?   That is the question I
>>>>>would
>>>>>like some help with.
>>>>>
>>>>>My understanding is that the zone system is way of ensuring a
>>>>>constant
>>>>>density range on the negative independent of the brightness range of
>>>>>the scene.  This is desirable because it makes most scenes printable
>>>>>on
>>>>>a grade 2 paper (leaving the other grades available for artistic
>>>>>interpretation) and it helps minimize the stuffing around in the
>>>>>darkroom required to get a good print.
>>>>>
>>>>>Since I am not doing wet prints but am scanning the negatives, it
>>>>>seems
>>>>>to me that the N- or N+ development dependent on the scene 
>>>>>brightness
>>>>>range is, mostly, irrelevant.  By setting the black point, setting 
>>>>>the
>>>>>white point and scanning the negative am I not mapping the entire
>>>>>density range of the image to a numerical range of 0-256 or 0-64k?
>>>>>This mapping would take place independent of the absolute density 
>>>>>any
>>>>>particular zone.
>>>>>
>>>>>As a hypothetical example lets assume a scene contains a 8 stop 
>>>>>range
>>>>>of brightness.  Three images are similarly exposed to capture that
>>>>>brightnesses range. The three images are given different development
>>>>>times and produce density ranges of  (1.0-0.3=.7), (1.4-0.4=1.0) and
>>>>>(2.0-.5=1.5).  When the images are scanned each one will produce a
>>>>>full
>>>>>histogram from 0 to 255 and a scene brightness at the 6th of the 
>>>>>eight
>>>>>stops will show up at the same place in each of the histograms.
>>>>>
>>>>>Soooo, can't I simplify the zone mantra to "expose for the shadows 
>>>>>and
>>>>>let the highlights fall where they may with normal development".
>>>>>Also,
>>>>> wouldn't it be better to generally use N+1 development times so 
>>>>>that
>>>>>the numbers from the raw scan occupied more of the scanner's range?
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanks for your help
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls
>>>>>and
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>>>>>
>>>>>If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish
>>>>>to
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this
>>>>same
>>>>page.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>Please follow these basic guidelines:
>>>>>- Include your full name with your message.
>>>>>- Include the address of your website, if you have one.
>>>>>- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages 
>>>>>to
>>>>>keep
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>them short.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>- As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject
>>>>>header.
>>>>>- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>&amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>- Complete your Yahoo profile.
>>>>>- Before posting a question, search the message archives and the
>>>>>various
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>resources on the homepage.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
>>>>>http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls
>>>>and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>>>>
>>>>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>>>>
>>>>If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish
>>>>to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting
>>>>this same page.
>>>>
>>>>Please follow these basic guidelines:
>>>>- Include your full name with your message.
>>>>- Include the address of your website, if you have one.
>>>>- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to
>>>>keep them short.
>>>>- As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject
>>>>header.
>>>>- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
>>>>&amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
>>>>- Complete your Yahoo profile.
>>>>- Before posting a question, search the message archives and the
>>>>various resources on the homepage.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
>>>>http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls 
>>>and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>>>
>>>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>>>
>>>If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish 
>>>to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting 
>>>this same page.
>>>
>>>Please follow these basic guidelines:
>>>- Include your full name with your message.
>>>- Include the address of your website, if you have one.
>>>- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to 
>>>keep them short.
>>>- As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject 
>>>header.
>>>- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or 
>>>&amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
>>>- Complete your Yahoo profile.
>>>- Before posting a question, search the message archives and the 
>>>various resources on the homepage.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to 
>>>http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>
>>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>
>>
>>Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls 
>>and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>>
>>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>>
>>If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish 
>>to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting 
>>this same page.
>>
>>Please follow these basic guidelines:
>>- Include your full name with your message.
>>- Include the address of your website, if you have one.
>>- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to 
>>keep them short.
>>- As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject 
>>header.
>>- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or 
>>&amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
>>- Complete your Yahoo profile.
>>- Before posting a question, search the message archives and the 
>>various resources on the homepage.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to 
>>http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>>
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
>If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same page.
>
>Please follow these basic guidelines:
>- Include your full name with your message.
>- Include the address of your website, if you have one.
>- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short.
>- As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
>- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or &amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
>- Complete your Yahoo profile.
>- Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various resources on the homepage. 
>
>
> 
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
>
>
>
>  
>



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

Kevin,

> I am fairly sure that you wouldn't notice any
> difference between the scan of a film with a density range of 2 and the
> scan of a film with the density range of 1.7.  After applying the set
> points I don't think there would be much difference.

Actually, there is quite a difference.  10**1.7 = 50 and 10**2 = 100.  A
density range of 2.0 is 2x that of 1.7.  There is a doubling of density for
a .3 increase in density value.

Regards,

Austin

----- Original Message -----

From: "Austin Franklin" <darkroom@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 4:41 AM
Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Scanning and Zone Sys Development.


> Hi Kevin,
>
> > > That is true of the consumer scanners you and I use.  There are some
> > > scanners, and I've designed one, that have analog gain control between
> > > the
> > > CCD and the A/D, and has, basically, hardware setpoints.
> >
> >
> > That would be add a whole new meaning to the auto-exposure function!!
>
> I am surprised none of the current "high end" consumer scanners do it...it
> just isn't that hard, or costly.

The Nikon 8000 has analog gain control. I presume that it works the same way
as you describe it otherwise why call it "analog gain" control. It will show
more noise in the shadows when set to a maximum

Ernst

How does all of this relate to C41 films such as XP2 where you can't fiddle
with development and you have a rather different curve from 'real' b/w film?


bye for now   

Keith Cooper

Northlight Images
http://northlight-images.co.uk
Photography - Digital Imaging - Apple Mac Consultancy

Tel +44 (0)116 291 9092 Mobile +44 (0)780 162 9397

XP2 Super have a very wide latitude. No need to fiddle with development.
Just be sure to expose it enough - it doesn't tolerate underexposure.
Overexposure: I had overexposed it by mistake as far as two stops once,
and it didn't loose highlight detail (it was a backlit scene -
considerable degree of highlight) but it delivered outstanding shadow
detail. The main advantage of XP2 Super is that it can be used IR
dust/defect removal technology such as ASF's Digital ICE and/or Canon's
FARE. The disadvantage of it is dye cloud image (read as: not archival
as real B/W film) and the need of a good quality photo-lab around (means
the additional risk of a ruined film by some dumb operator fault too).

Regards,
Loris.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Keith Cooper [mailto:yahoogroups@...] 
> Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 3:35 PM
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Scanning and Zone Sys Development.
> 
> 
> How does all of this relate to C41 films such as XP2 where 
> you can't fiddle with development and you have a rather 
> different curve from 'real' b/w film?

There are a great many solutions to controlling contrast in digital 
photography that perform the same things as Zone System 
exposure and development used to. One of these is to expose 
for the shadows (making sure you get all the information) and 
then make 2 scans, one for the highlights and one for the 
shadows. The range of densities, especially on Tri-X and color 
negative film allows us to capture detail that was previoiusly 
unprintable with only one scan. Tweaking the single scan with 
Levels and Curves destroys part of the image, even in 16-bit. 
With 2 scans, one for the highlights and one for the shadows, 
you can then recombine these images in Photoshop using this 
procedure and get a nearly flawless Dynamic Range:

1.	In Photoshop select and drag (using the Move Tool) the 
underexposed image on top of the overexposed image. This 
puts the underexposure on a layer on top of the overexposure 
(which becomes the Background).  Go to Difference Blending 
Mode and align, if necessary.
2.	Make a layer mask on the 2nd layer.
3.	Select the Background and copy to the clipboard. Hold down 
the Option/Alt key and click on the mask (it should turn white).
4.	Paste the Background into the layer mask (it will be pasted as 
a B&W mask).
5.	Open View > New View to see the effects of the mask.
6.	Click on the mask and Gaussian Blur the mask to a 30-50 
pixel radius.
7.	Adjust contrast and brightness of the mask with curves.
8.	Flatten.

Another, and more productive way,  is to combine 2 images 
taken in camera on a tripod ( especially with a digital camera) 
and use the new photoshop plugin, Optipix, which does this 
automatically (www.reindeergraphics.com).

I've also just tested the new Epson RIP for the 2200 and it 
produces an absolutely neutral(and outstanding) grayscale 
image (when a Grayscale image is used printed using the Color 
setting (CMYK)). It nearly matches the old Piezography inks in 
tone. 

George

Hi George,

> There are a great many solutions to controlling contrast in digital
> photography that perform the same things as Zone System
> exposure and development used to. One of these is to expose
> for the shadows (making sure you get all the information) and
> then make 2 scans, one for the highlights and one for the
> shadows.

I don't believe what you outline here actually works.

No matter how many scans you make, you will get the EXACT same tonal range
information from the scanner.  When the scanner scans, it does nothing to
the image data, it just scans it.  The actual image data only occupies a
small portion of the scanner "space".  Subsequent scans will NOT change the
image data that was scanned.  I am talking strictly about commercial CCD
scanners.

> The range of densities, especially on Tri-X and color
> negative film allows us to capture detail that was previoiusly
> unprintable with only one scan. Tweaking the single scan with
> Levels and Curves destroys part of the image, even in 16-bit.

I've done thousands and thousands of scans, and have not seen this "problem"
you claim here.  Whether the image data is 16 bits or not isn't the issue,
it's whether the image data is spread out OVER the 16 bits.  Setpoints MUST
be done first to spread out the image data, then tonal curves.  Also, you
may or may not "combine" data values (which is what you mean by "destroy")
it depends on the "amount" of the tonal correction.  Also, combining,
depending on how severe, may simply not matter, as you only need 256
resultant tones in the final output.

> With 2 scans, one for the highlights and one for the shadows,
> you can then recombine these images in Photoshop using this
> procedure and get a nearly flawless Dynamic Range:

Unless you change "something" when you make the raw scans, the raw scans
from the same negative are identical.  What, on earth, is it you believe you
can change to "scan for the highlights and then scan for the shadows"???

Also, even if you did change exposure, which is the only thing you can
change, you STILL get the exact same range of image data.  Whether it falls
from .1 to 1.7 or from .2 to 1.8.  All exposure time (and aperture) does is
moves the density range of the image being scanned within the scanner
"space".

> Another, and more productive way,  is to combine 2 images
> taken in camera on a tripod

IF the images are exposed differently, this will work, but this is an
entirely different situation than you describe above.

Regards,

Austin

Ernst,

> The Nikon 8000 has analog gain control. I presume that it works
> the same way
> as you describe it otherwise why call it "analog gain" control.
> It will show
> more noise in the shadows when set to a maximum

Actually, I believe it's misnamed.  This has been discussed with Ed Hamrick
and should be in the archives.  It does not change the actual gain between
the CCD and the A/D, but the exposure time.  To quote from Ed Hamrick (who
wrote ViewScan) from the rec.photo.digital newsgroup:

"The "Analog gain" in the Nikon is a bit misleading.  It's actually
just the exposure time for each of red, green, blue, and infrared."

Austin

> > > The Nikon 8000 has analog gain control. I presume that it works
> > > the same way
> > > as you describe it otherwise why call it "analog gain" control.
> > > It will show
> > > more noise in the shadows when set to a maximum
> >
> > Actually, I believe it's misnamed.  This has been discussed with Ed
> Hamrick
> > and should be in the archives.  It does not change the actual
> gain between
> > the CCD and the A/D, but the exposure time.  To quote from Ed
> Hamrick (who
> > wrote ViewScan) from the rec.photo.digital newsgroup:
> >
> > "The "Analog gain" in the Nikon is a bit misleading.  It's actually
> > just the exposure time for each of red, green, blue, and infrared."
> >
> > Austin
>
> In what way can one compare both methods ? Is there a difference in the
> results ?

Hi Ernst,

Yes, there is a MARKED difference in the results.  The "analog gain" that
Nikon has merely shifts the tones up or down the "scale".  Example:

        -
      - - -   - -   - -
    - - - - - - - - - - -
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9101112131415

now shift that up:

          -
        - - -   - -   - -
      - - - - - - - - - - -
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9101112131415

Same curve, just different "values", but all relative values are maintained.
What it's useful for is getting your entire tonal range within the range of
the scanner...but other scanners do that as well with their exposure
setting.

If the scanner is designed such that it has actual analog gain between the
CCD and A/D, you would EXPAND your analog data, and actually get MORE tones:

    - - -
  - - - - -   - - -     - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9101112131415

The limit, of course, is our vision (and noise in the CCD/analog
circuitry/AD).  As long as you can get 256 tones out of your data, and you
have tonal "separation" between tones you want to show tonal separation
between...more tones in the image data wouldn't necessarily do you any good.
Again, I understand the Piezo driver claims to give more tones beyond what
you give it for data, to smooth the tonal transitions.

Regards,

Austin

----- Original Message -----

From: "Austin Franklin" <darkroom@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 3:33 PM
Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Scanning and Zone Sys Development.


> Ernst,
>
> > The Nikon 8000 has analog gain control. I presume that it works
> > the same way
> > as you describe it otherwise why call it "analog gain" control.
> > It will show
> > more noise in the shadows when set to a maximum
>
> Actually, I believe it's misnamed.  This has been discussed with Ed
Hamrick
> and should be in the archives.  It does not change the actual gain between
> the CCD and the A/D, but the exposure time.  To quote from Ed Hamrick (who
> wrote ViewScan) from the rec.photo.digital newsgroup:
>
> "The "Analog gain" in the Nikon is a bit misleading.  It's actually
> just the exposure time for each of red, green, blue, and infrared."
>
> Austin

In what way can one compare both methods ? Is there a difference in the
results ?

Ernst

Yes there is a difference.

As I understand it, with the Nikon method of adjusting the exposure the 
number of valid sample points (in its 14 bit space) doesn't change but 
their location in the histogram does.  For example if you make the 
first scan and it has 800 samples with data ranging from 200 to 1000.  
Adjusting the exposure may give you the same 800 samples but ranging 
from 300 to 1100.

By actually changing the gain you would, for example, get 1500 samples 
ranging from 200 to 1700.

On Wednesday, January 8, 2003, at 10:28 AM, Ernst Dinkla wrote:

>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Austin Franklin" <darkroom@...>
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 3:33 PM
> Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Scanning and Zone Sys Development.
>
>
>> Ernst,
>>
>>> The Nikon 8000 has analog gain control. I presume that it works
>>> the same way
>>> as you describe it otherwise why call it "analog gain" control.
>>> It will show
>>> more noise in the shadows when set to a maximum
>>
>> Actually, I believe it's misnamed.  This has been discussed with Ed
> Hamrick
>> and should be in the archives.  It does not change the actual gain 
>> between
>> the CCD and the A/D, but the exposure time.  To quote from Ed Hamrick 
>> (who
>> wrote ViewScan) from the rec.photo.digital newsgroup:
>>
>> "The "Analog gain" in the Nikon is a bit misleading.  It's actually
>> just the exposure time for each of red, green, blue, and infrared."
>>
>> Austin
>
> In what way can one compare both methods ? Is there a difference in the
> results ?
>
> Ernst
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls 
> and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish 
> to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting 
> this same page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to 
> keep them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject 
> header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or 
> &amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the 
> various resources on the homepage.
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to 
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>

George,

Thanks for your input!  I haven't tried your suggestion, but I will  
shortly.

If I understand correctly, the fact that you can do some post  
development image manipulation in the scanner and/or photoshop and  
produce a good print of a scene that might have deserved N-2  
development seems to support the conclusion that, within some limits,  
modifying development times is irrelevant when the image will  
ultimately be scanned and not wet printed.

If I incorporate Austin's response to your post, it would also seem  
that the method used to manipulate the raw information from the scanner  
(whether the scanner software is used or photoshop is used or both) is  
paramount in managing  the scene contrast.

It seems to me this is exactly analogous to the motivation for creating  
the zone system in the first place: making it easier to produce a print  
without enormous effort.  In the wet workflow it is much easier to  
manage the density range on the negative than to try and produce a good  
print from a poor (eg: too many or too few zones) negative.   
Conversely, it may be easier to use software to mange the contrast of a  
scanned negative than it is to manage the density range on the negative  
using development compensation.

Hmmm, I hope that doesn't sound silly in a couple of posts.  No doubt  
it will after I hit the send key.



On Wednesday, January 8, 2003, at 06:12 AM, George DeWolfe  
<dewolfe04679@...> wrote:

> There are a great many solutions to controlling contrast in digital
> photography that perform the same things as Zone System
> exposure and development used to. One of these is to expose
> for the shadows (making sure you get all the information) and
> then make 2 scans, one for the highlights and one for the
> shadows. The range of densities, especially on Tri-X and color
> negative film allows us to capture detail that was previoiusly
> unprintable with only one scan. Tweaking the single scan with
> Levels and Curves destroys part of the image, even in 16-bit.
> With 2 scans, one for the highlights and one for the shadows,
> you can then recombine these images in Photoshop using this
> procedure and get a nearly flawless Dynamic Range:
>
> 1.	In Photoshop select and drag (using the Move Tool) the
> underexposed image on top of the overexposed image. This
> puts the underexposure on a layer on top of the overexposure
> (which becomes the Background).  Go to Difference Blending
> Mode and align, if necessary.
> 2.	Make a layer mask on the 2nd layer.
> 3.	Select the Background and copy to the clipboard. Hold down
> the Option/Alt key and click on the mask (it should turn white).
> 4.	Paste the Background into the layer mask (it will be pasted as
> a B&W mask).
> 5.	Open View > New View to see the effects of the mask.
> 6.	Click on the mask and Gaussian Blur the mask to a 30-50
> pixel radius.
> 7.	Adjust contrast and brightness of the mask with curves.
> 8.	Flatten.
>
> Another, and more productive way,  is to combine 2 images
> taken in camera on a tripod ( especially with a digital camera)
> and use the new photoshop plugin, Optipix, which does this
> automatically (www.reindeergraphics.com).
>
> I've also just tested the new Epson RIP for the 2200 and it
> produces an absolutely neutral(and outstanding) grayscale
> image (when a Grayscale image is used printed using the Color
> setting (CMYK)). It nearly matches the old Piezography inks in
> tone.
>
> George
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor  
> ---------------------~-->
> DVD Rentals with No Late Fees - Try Netflix for FREE!
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/.ZSp6B/dlOFAA/46VHAA/ucIolB/TM
> --------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> ~->
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls  
> and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish  
> to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting  
> this same page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to  
> keep them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject  
> header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or  
> "flames."
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the  
> various resources on the homepage.
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to  
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>

Hi Ernst,

> I get the picture.

;-)

> But I doubt it will mean a difference in CCD
> filmscanners
> with B&W films.

It can, but that is film, development, exposure, scene (and in fact, output)
dependant.  Also, the main reason it might not make a difference is the
limits of our grayscale vision.

> The difference should be more pronounced in a PMT drumscanner with the
> higher dynamic range.

Shouldn't matter, as far as the limits of our grayscale vision go.  A CCD
scanner can still have a "range" of around 4...and remember, a .3 increase
in density range (or dynamic range) doubles the amount of data.  It may not
matter as much for some of the higher density B&W films, but for Tri-X (my
favorite), which has a below 2 density range, it can make a big difference.

> In practice I doubt you can use true analog
> gain on a CCD filmscanner, there's no margin left at both sides
> of the tonal
> scale.

I have done exactly that (analog gain in a CCD scanner), and it works quite
well in fact.  What you are up against is actually noise.  You can only
discern down to noise, going below that doesn't give you any more good data.

Regards,

Austin

Austin, you wrote:

> Yes, there is a MARKED difference in the results.  The "analog gain" that
> Nikon has merely shifts the tones up or down the "scale".  Example:
>
>         -
>       - - -   - -   - -
>     - - - - - - - - - - -
> 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9101112131415
>
> now shift that up:
>
>           -
>         - - -   - -   - -
>       - - - - - - - - - - -
> 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9101112131415
>
> Same curve, just different "values", but all relative values are
maintained.
> What it's useful for is getting your entire tonal range within the range
of
> the scanner...but other scanners do that as well with their exposure
> setting.
>
> If the scanner is designed such that it has actual analog gain between the
> CCD and A/D, you would EXPAND your analog data, and actually get MORE
tones:
>
>     - - -
>   - - - - -   - - -     - - -
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9101112131415
>
> The limit, of course, is our vision (and noise in the CCD/analog
> circuitry/AD).  As long as you can get 256 tones out of your data, and you
> have tonal "separation" between tones you want to show tonal separation
> between...more tones in the image data wouldn't necessarily do you any
good.
> Again, I understand the Piezo driver claims to give more tones beyond what
> you give it for data, to smooth the tonal transitions.

I get the picture. But I doubt it will mean a difference in CCD filmscanners
with B&W films. Of course they shouldn't have called it analoge gain in the
Nikon software but if it really was analog gain it wouldn't be usable if
only for the softest, finest grained negatives. I'm using Polaroid 665
negatives and that film could be a candidate for it. Its compression is also
limited so one can only use it for contrasty scenes with some extra tricks,
pre-exposure etc.

The difference should be more pronounced in a PMT drumscanner with the
higher dynamic range. In a CCD scanner the analog data is the limiting
factor or it may just be equal to the B&W film densities, the limitation
isn't in the film. Expanding the analog data of a CCD scanner when it scans
reflective originals seems more appropriate. Colour negatives may have
enough compression to use analoge gain but there will be little left to
expand, maybe B&W films that are specially developed to keep a low contrast
and that have a grain fine enough to deliver that tonal separation. Slides
will all be beyond the range. In practice I doubt you can use true analog
gain on a CCD filmscanner, there's no margin left at both sides of the tonal
scale.

Ernst

Hi Ernst,

> Some consider 3 as the highest possible with CCD
> scanners.

Well, I KNOW that simply is not correct, as I've designed CCD scanners that
have far more than a density range of 3, and they have been thoroughly
tested to prove so.

> That's where PMT drum scanners are superior, the range is wider / noise
> further away. So analoge gain can then be used without the
> penalty of noise.

To some degree true, but the superiority of PMT scanners is they don't
suffer the bloom and smear characteristics of CCDs.

Analog gain can readily be used with CCD scanners, it depends on the design
of the scanner.

> I have followed the thread on what the eye still can see of tonal
> steps in a
> piezoprint.

I was not referring to only a "piezoprint", but any grayscale image.

> I can't judge that part by experience with piezo
> printing though
> I doubt the eye is limited to 256 steps.

Actually, it's quite a well proven/known fact that the human eye is limited
to being able to discern between 100-200 graytones.  NOT colors, but
graytones.  Do a web search and you'll find many many many references to
this, with decent substantiation.  You can search the archives of this group
as well, as it's been discussed here.

> There's something that
> is added by
> a real smoothness of tones that probably can't be explained by the eye's
> capacity to distinguish tones and resolution.

Understood, and agreed.

Regards,

Austin

Austin, you wrote:

> > But I doubt it will mean a difference in CCD
> > filmscanners
> > with B&W films.
>
> It can, but that is film, development, exposure, scene (and in fact,
output)
> dependant.  Also, the main reason it might not make a difference is the
> limits of our grayscale vision.
>
> > The difference should be more pronounced in a PMT drumscanner with the
> > higher dynamic range.
>
> Shouldn't matter, as far as the limits of our grayscale vision go.  A CCD
> scanner can still have a "range" of around 4...and remember, a .3 increase
> in density range (or dynamic range) doubles the amount of data.  It may
not
> matter as much for some of the higher density B&W films, but for Tri-X (my
> favorite), which has a below 2 density range, it can make a big
difference.

> > In practice I doubt you can use true analog
> > gain on a CCD filmscanner, there's no margin left at both sides
> > of the tonal
> > scale.
>
> I have done exactly that (analog gain in a CCD scanner), and it works
quite
> well in fact.  What you are up against is actually noise.  You can only
> discern down to noise, going below that doesn't give you any more good
data.

That "range" of around 4 is an arbitrary ranking based on what is considered
to be acceptable noise. Some consider 3 as the highest possible with CCD
scanners. In fact the same noise barrier you mention in your last sentence.
That's where PMT drum scanners are superior, the range is wider / noise
further away. So analoge gain can then be used without the penalty of noise.

With Tri-X the density range will fall within most CCD scanner's dynamic
range (maybe excluding a strong development with Rodinal as I used to do
ages ago), but the tonal separation will not be better with analog gain than
with any stretching of the digital data after the A/D
step. The grain just isn't fine enough. More an estimation on my part than a
researched fact but some 35 mm Tri-X scans with the Nikon 8000 I made last
week makes me think so.

I have followed the thread on what the eye still can see of tonal steps in a
piezoprint. I can't judge that part by experience with piezo printing though
I doubt the eye is limited to 256 steps. There's something that is added by
a real smoothness of tones that probably can't be explained by the eye's
capacity to distinguish tones and resolution. Like in intanglio aquatints
the eye seems to zoom in at detail to build an impression of the total
image. I hate to utter the term "Gestalt" but what I try to describe can't
be far off that concept. Like one will add the knowledge of the texture of
the print that one has touched or seen from nearby to the view at a distance
of the same print.

Ernst

Hi all,

I have an Epson Color Stylus 1160 equipped with a Nomorecarts CIS primed
with MIS FS/FS-N Black + Piezotone Selenium Gray inks. Although having
PiezographyBW installed on my computer (PC), I exclusively use Jeff
Randalls Partitioned Worklow with Epson Archival Matte and Hahnemuehle
Photo Rag 188 papers. I'm happy with the results I get with Randall WF
except for the following points:

1) Heavy ink usage [which causes disturbingly wavy prints on EAM - less
but present on HPR 188]
2) Low CYAN usage [It seems that the Randall curves/Epson driver
combination substites CYAN with BLACK and this makes a negative
influence on hue/chromacity I think]

The reasons for not using PiezographyBW are as follows (please note that
I get perfect nozzle checks before every print):

1) Microbanding mostly pronounced in the 80 - 50% range [seems like
being a CYAN related issue???]
2) Flat midtones [something fixable with monitor/print matching
operations I guess]
3) Inconvenient monitor/print matching behaviour [as an individual
accustomed to and using ICC scanner/monitor/printer profiles effectively
- I run a calibrated system, I find the custom dot gain approach
PiezographyBW totally odd]

In the other hand Piezography has the following advantages:

1) less (read as not wavy prints) and
2) balanced (read as better hue/chromacity) ink usage

So I decided to take the struggle in order to make PiezographyBW work -
completely disregarding the microbanding problem, assuming that I may
get rid of it by changing the CYAN ink and/or applying windex treatment.
Although I didn't run the 20" paper feed test, I'm pretty sure that
paper feeding is OK...

First of all, I printed a 21 step wedge just selecting the appropiate
printer/icq profile combination in the plug in.

After waiting around 1 hour I further dried the print (both front and
back) with a hair drier.

I scanned the print (100% size @ 300dpi, 16 bits grayscale mode, no
setpoint, contrast/gamma adjustments) with my calibrated scanner, then
in Photoshop I gaussian-blurred the image by 4-5 pixels diameter (to get
rid of the possible dots, dithering, paper texture and scanner noise). I
set the blackpoint to 100% patch and white point to the paper white.

Then I placed a curves adjustment layer over the background and watching
carefully the color sampler I designed my custom dot-gain curve. When
finished, I checked if the color sampler shows the right K values over
each patch - it was right on.

Here comes the question: instead of setting this as my grayscale preview
profile for that particular paper, I want to view and edit the file in
gamma 2.2 grayscale space and apply a curve just before exporting it to
PiezographyBW. I tried to output by using this method and the tone
separation was better compared to the no-curves-applied output. The
problem is that the curve is thinning the image - increasing the gamma I
presume - I get a much lighter image than what I see on my screen (in
the other hand, Randall's workflow output matches my monitor quite
good). What should I do? Should I play with gamma setting in the
PiezographyBW software? Am I in a completely wrong way?

I would like to hear your thougths and suggestions...

Thanks in advance,
Loris.

Loris wrote:
  I tried to output by using this method and the tone
  separation was better compared to the no-curves-applied output. The
  problem is that the curve is thinning the image - increasing the gamma I
  presume - I get a much lighter image than what I see on my screen (in
  the other hand, Randall's workflow output matches my monitor quite
  good). What should I do?
I am using this kind of approach with great success. The only difference is
that I am measuring the output density with a densitometer and then
calculate a PS curve from these data in order to "correct" the Piezo output
(smoothing the curve is 90% of the trick). The nice thing is that I got rid
of the posterization and flat midtones.

It is also my experience that the Piezo print are "lighter" than those made
with Randall's curves. The slope of the output densitiy curve (21 step
image) in the highlights is less than the slope in the darks. This is ok for
me because the eye is more sensitive to highlights than to dark tones. The
rest is a question of a good printer profile to get a perfect match of the
monitor.

As you described you can also measure the dot gain curve of your
printer/ink/paper combination and use this as a (first approach) soft proof
in PS (with gamma 2.2 as working space or whatever you want). I did this and
only had to make small changes for an excellent monitor match (visual dot
gain).

Yes, you may have icc-calibrated your system, but you are still missing a
printer profile unless you are doing this kind of measurement or adjusting a
dot gain curve manually and use this as a soft proof. Cone's information is
a bit misleading because he is speaking of paper profiles but these are not
icc profiles and the first time user assumes that all she/he has to do is to
press the print button and get a perfect print. I think that there is no way
to change the (old) software and make it a bit more modern. Let's wait for
the new software.

Regarding the microbanding: I also had strong microbanding until I did two
things:
1. playing around with the paper height setting of my 1160 and adjusting via
software the heads and comparing the results. It seemed that the lowest
possible paper setting was best in my case.
2. When I am printing test prints on half of A4 paper I still have
microbanding but not in the final output on A3+ paper. I think that this has
something to do with the lower resolution of the final print (usually about
500 dpi) in contrast to the extreme high resolution of the small test print
(sometimes > 1200 dpi).

Don't play with the "gamma" setting of the Piezo software. I In PS you know
what you are doing and you can easily compare different settings.

Peter Baumbach



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

Hello Loris,

>The problem is that the curve is thinning the image - increasing 
>the gamma I presume - I get a much lighter image than what I see 
>on my screen (in the other hand, Randall's workflow output matches 
>my monitor quite good). What should I do? 

I don't use your system so my idea might be completely wrong for this,
but FWIW, I used to think there was something sacrosanct about the
assigned image profile (front end) but later discovered it can be
changed to whatever is needed to get good WYSIWYG as long as the
assigned printer profile (back end) is the same (choose "Same As
Source" from the profile list).  So you might try finding a front end
curve that makes the screen image match the print.  As long as you
have "Same As Source" at the back end the print will not change as you
try different front end curves.  If you can get good WYSIWYG with this
approach it might do the job for you.

I have written an article on my web site which explains how this works
and gives more details, including making custom curves.  It's in Part
4 of the series at the link below.

Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm

----- Original Message -----

From: "Austin Franklin" <darkroom@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 7:23 PM
Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Scanning and Zone Sys Development.


>
> > > > The Nikon 8000 has analog gain control. I presume that it works
> > > > the same way
> > > > as you describe it otherwise why call it "analog gain" control.
> > > > It will show
> > > > more noise in the shadows when set to a maximum
> > >
> > > Actually, I believe it's misnamed.  This has been discussed with Ed
> > Hamrick
> > > and should be in the archives.  It does not change the actual
> > gain between
> > > the CCD and the A/D, but the exposure time.  To quote from Ed
> > Hamrick (who
> > > wrote ViewScan) from the rec.photo.digital newsgroup:
> > >
> > > "The "Analog gain" in the Nikon is a bit misleading.  It's actually
> > > just the exposure time for each of red, green, blue, and infrared."
> > >
> > > Austin
> >
> > In what way can one compare both methods ? Is there a difference in the
> > results ?
>
> Hi Ernst,
>
> Yes, there is a MARKED difference in the results.  The "analog gain" that
> Nikon has merely shifts the tones up or down the "scale".  Example:
>
>         -
>       - - -   - -   - -
>     - - - - - - - - - - -
> 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9101112131415
>
> now shift that up:
>
>           -
>         - - -   - -   - -
>       - - - - - - - - - - -
> 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9101112131415
>
> Same curve, just different "values", but all relative values are
maintained.
> What it's useful for is getting your entire tonal range within the range
of
> the scanner...but other scanners do that as well with their exposure
> setting.
>
> If the scanner is designed such that it has actual analog gain between the
> CCD and A/D, you would EXPAND your analog data, and actually get MORE
tones:
>
>     - - -
>   - - - - -   - - -     - - -
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9101112131415
>
> The limit, of course, is our vision (and noise in the CCD/analog
> circuitry/AD).  As long as you can get 256 tones out of your data, and you
> have tonal "separation" between tones you want to show tonal separation
> between...more tones in the image data wouldn't necessarily do you any
good.
> Again, I understand the Piezo driver claims to give more tones beyond what
> you give it for data, to smooth the tonal transitions.
>
> Regards,
>
> Austin

Austin, Kevin,

After some excercises with NikonScan and an IT8 slide I'm not so certain
that it is just a false name for an exposure strength variation.
When I crop the scan to a small part of the greystep in that image, change
the analog gain setting so I can get the histogram in the middle,
then the histogram is stretched to the density range. Of course it still can
be a digital stretching that is performed and not an A/D stretching but it
isn't a simple exposure change either. Still a false term if it is not done
at the A/D stage.

What is interesting though is that it will not stretch any crop and with
"positive" negative scanning the redraw button will more often (but not
always) initiate a new reading scan instead of picking the data from the
preview. That could mean that NikonScan is behaving more intelligent than
expected. My guess is that it could use true analog gain but checks what it
actually has to offer in dynamic range to make that worthwhile. That makes
this function less transparent but still very useful. It also has the logic
of the comments I made before on the usefulness of analoge gain in CCD film
scanners, most of the time there's not enough dynamic range.

What I write is based on 'dry' scans, I didn't measure the RGB values in
scanned images etc, just looking at the histogram changes.
Disappointment is still possible.

Ernst

Clayton wrote:
  I don't use your system so my idea might be completely wrong for this,
  but FWIW, I used to think there was something sacrosanct about the
  assigned image profile (front end) but later discovered it can be
  changed to whatever is needed to get good WYSIWYG as long as the
  assigned printer profile (back end) is the same (choose "Same As
  Source" from the profile list).  So you might try finding a front end
  curve that makes the screen image match the print.  As long as you
  have "Same As Source" at the back end the print will not change as you
  try different front end curves.  If you can get good WYSIWYG with this
  approach it might do the job for you.
Printing with Piezo is done via the export function of Photoshop. There is
no "same as source" - icc - function available for printing. Loris can
achieve good WYSIWYG if he uses a self made soft proof profile (cf <Matching
Your Monitor view to Your Prints.pdf> from Tyler Boley in the files section
of this group).

Peter Baumbach


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

> Printing with Piezo is done via the export function of Photoshop. 
>There is no "same as source" - icc - function available for
>printing.  Loris can achieve good WYSIWYG if he uses a self made 
>soft proof profile (cf <Matching Your Monitor view to Your 
>Prints.pdf> from Tyler Boley in the files section of this group).

Ok, Peter, thanks for the info.  I'm not familiar with the PZ system,
but at least there is still a way to do it.

Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm

Ernst,

My experience was with an LS2000 so the functions may be different than 
the newer 8000.      I admit I had a lot of trouble understanding 
exactly what  Nikonscan software was doing, when it was applying some 
auto-exposure mojo and why it did it at those times.

The LS2000 manual, from memory, described the gain function as way of 
'increasing exposure'.  I did some testing and arrived at the 
conclusion that it was just moving the histogram but not changing it's 
shape/width.  That may not apply to the 8000 though.

Kevin

On Thursday, January 9, 2003, at 06:55 AM, Ernst Dinkla wrote:

>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Austin Franklin" <darkroom@...>
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 7:23 PM
> Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Scanning and Zone Sys Development.
>
>
>>
>>>>> The Nikon 8000 has analog gain control. I presume that it works
>>>>> the same way
>>>>> as you describe it otherwise why call it "analog gain" control.
>>>>> It will show
>>>>> more noise in the shadows when set to a maximum
>>>>
>>>> Actually, I believe it's misnamed.  This has been discussed with Ed
>>> Hamrick
>>>> and should be in the archives.  It does not change the actual
>>> gain between
>>>> the CCD and the A/D, but the exposure time.  To quote from Ed
>>> Hamrick (who
>>>> wrote ViewScan) from the rec.photo.digital newsgroup:
>>>>
>>>> "The "Analog gain" in the Nikon is a bit misleading.  It's actually
>>>> just the exposure time for each of red, green, blue, and infrared."
>>>>
>>>> Austin
>>>
>>> In what way can one compare both methods ? Is there a difference in 
>>> the
>>> results ?
>>
>> Hi Ernst,
>>
>> Yes, there is a MARKED difference in the results.  The "analog gain" 
>> that
>> Nikon has merely shifts the tones up or down the "scale".  Example:
>>
>>         -
>>       - - -   - -   - -
>>     - - - - - - - - - - -
>> 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9101112131415
>>
>> now shift that up:
>>
>>           -
>>         - - -   - -   - -
>>       - - - - - - - - - - -
>> 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9101112131415
>>
>> Same curve, just different "values", but all relative values are
> maintained.
>> What it's useful for is getting your entire tonal range within the 
>> range
> of
>> the scanner...but other scanners do that as well with their exposure
>> setting.
>>
>> If the scanner is designed such that it has actual analog gain 
>> between the
>> CCD and A/D, you would EXPAND your analog data, and actually get MORE
> tones:
>>
>>     - - -
>>   - - - - -   - - -     - - -
>> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>> 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9101112131415
>>
>> The limit, of course, is our vision (and noise in the CCD/analog
>> circuitry/AD).  As long as you can get 256 tones out of your data, 
>> and you
>> have tonal "separation" between tones you want to show tonal 
>> separation
>> between...more tones in the image data wouldn't necessarily do you any
> good.
>> Again, I understand the Piezo driver claims to give more tones beyond 
>> what
>> you give it for data, to smooth the tonal transitions.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Austin
>
> Austin, Kevin,
>
> After some excercises with NikonScan and an IT8 slide I'm not so 
> certain
> that it is just a false name for an exposure strength variation.
> When I crop the scan to a small part of the greystep in that image, 
> change
> the analog gain setting so I can get the histogram in the middle,
> then the histogram is stretched to the density range. Of course it 
> still can
> be a digital stretching that is performed and not an A/D stretching 
> but it
> isn't a simple exposure change either. Still a false term if it is not 
> done
> at the A/D stage.
>
> What is interesting though is that it will not stretch any crop and 
> with
> "positive" negative scanning the redraw button will more often (but not
> always) initiate a new reading scan instead of picking the data from 
> the
> preview. That could mean that NikonScan is behaving more intelligent 
> than
> expected. My guess is that it could use true analog gain but checks 
> what it
> actually has to offer in dynamic range to make that worthwhile. That 
> makes
> this function less transparent but still very useful. It also has the 
> logic
> of the comments I made before on the usefulness of analoge gain in CCD 
> film
> scanners, most of the time there's not enough dynamic range.
>
> What I write is based on 'dry' scans, I didn't measure the RGB values 
> in
> scanned images etc, just looking at the histogram changes.
> Disappointment is still possible.
>
> Ernst
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls 
> and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish 
> to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting 
> this same page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to 
> keep them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject 
> header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or 
> &amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the 
> various resources on the homepage.
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to 
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>

Kevin: I can very quickly run out of knowledge about scanning (or exactly
how electricity works, for that matter).  I may well be missing the point,
but here is where I'm stuck.  Let's suppose I have a common high-contrast
scene, say a long 10-15 minute exposure and the meter says, e.g., that Zone
8 is placed four stops above where I need it.  I don't know any way to
capture that image without adjusting the film speed downward and using
compensating development ("N-4" in my example, or thereabouts).  In other
words, I wouldn't know how to get a negative with enough info to scan
without first getting all the info on the neg.  Normal exposure or
development would get me a bullet-proof neg with no high detail.  Help.

Regards,

  --Ken Carney
    www.kencarney.com

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kevin Gulstene" <kevin@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 8:56 PM
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Scanning and Zone Sys Development.


> Hi Ken,
>
> Let's take your high contrast scene.  Lets assume that 14 stops of
> scene brightness are mapped to a a film density range of .05 to 1.8
> with the zone system compensations.  When you scan that piece of film
> and apply the set points you will then map a density of .05 to  100%k
> and the density of 1.8 to 0%k.
>
> Take an identical exposure of the same scene with anther piece of film.
>   This film has no development compensation.  The 14 stops of scene
> brightness are then mapped to a density range of .06 to 2.3.  When you
> scan that piece of film and apply the set points you will map the
> density of of .06 to 100%k and a density of 2.3 to 0%k.
>
> It seems to me that as long as the maximum film density is within the
> specs of your scanner it doesn't matter whether you used N or N-4
> development.  You have to make the scene brightness fit between black
> and white one way or another.  You can do it with development or math
> in the scanner.  The result, it seems to me is the same.
>
> Clearly you have to set a film speed appropriately to capture the
> shadow details but I am not convinced that modifying the film
> development is required to capture the highlights when you are scanning
> a negative.
>
> That is what I am trying to come to grips with.
>
> Thanks for your help
>
> On Tuesday, January 7, 2003, at 06:23 PM, Ken Carney wrote:
>
> >> From my perspective, the point of the zone system is to get a
> >> negative with
> > reasonable shadow and highlight tones.  If you have a negative with a
> > blown-out highlight, I don't think any scanner will help you.  For
> > example,
> > take a high contrast scene that may take N-4 development (here reduced
> > film
> > speed and compensating development in dilute HC110 or TMax RS).  I
> > have many
> > negs like this that scan well, but I can't picture how I could get a
> > good
> > tonal range with say, normal development.  In fact, the only problems
> > I have
> > had in scanning LF negs with expanded and compressed development have
> > been
> > those developed in pyro (Rollo or PMK), since the stain produces some
> > challenges in getting a good scan.  I would say go for the best neg you
> > would use for a silver print.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> >   --Ken Carney
> >     www.kencarney.com
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Kevin Gulstene" <kevin@...>
> > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 5:53 PM
> > Subject: [Digital BW] Scanning and Zone Sys Development.
> >
> >
> >> Is zone system development time manipulation irrelevant when scanning
> >> film as opposed to traditional printing?   That is the question I
> >> would
> >> like some help with.
> >>
> >> My understanding is that the zone system is way of ensuring a
> >> constant
> >> density range on the negative independent of the brightness range of
> >> the scene.  This is desirable because it makes most scenes printable
> >> on
> >> a grade 2 paper (leaving the other grades available for artistic
> >> interpretation) and it helps minimize the stuffing around in the
> >> darkroom required to get a good print.
> >>
> >> Since I am not doing wet prints but am scanning the negatives, it
> >> seems
> >> to me that the N- or N+ development dependent on the scene brightness
> >> range is, mostly, irrelevant.  By setting the black point, setting the
> >> white point and scanning the negative am I not mapping the entire
> >> density range of the image to a numerical range of 0-256 or 0-64k?
> >> This mapping would take place independent of the absolute density any
> >> particular zone.
> >>
> >> As a hypothetical example lets assume a scene contains a 8 stop range
> >> of brightness.  Three images are similarly exposed to capture that
> >> brightnesses range. The three images are given different development
> >> times and produce density ranges of  (1.0-0.3=.7), (1.4-0.4=1.0) and
> >> (2.0-.5=1.5).  When the images are scanned each one will produce a
> >> full
> >> histogram from 0 to 255 and a scene brightness at the 6th of the eight
> >> stops will show up at the same place in each of the histograms.
> >>
> >> Soooo, can't I simplify the zone mantra to "expose for the shadows and
> >> let the highlights fall where they may with normal development".
> >> Also,
> >>   wouldn't it be better to generally use N+1 development times so that
> >> the numbers from the raw scan occupied more of the scanner's range?
> >>
> >> Thanks for your help
> >>
> >>
> >> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls
> >> and
> > other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
> >>
> >> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> >>
> >> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish
> >> to
> > unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this
> > same
> > page.
> >>
> >> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> >> - Include your full name with your message.
> >> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> >> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to
> >> keep
> > them short.
> >> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject
> >> header.
> >> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
> > &amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
> >> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> >> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the
> >> various
> > resources on the homepage.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> >> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls
> > and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
> >
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> >
> > If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish
> > to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting
> > this same page.
> >
> > Please follow these basic guidelines:
> > - Include your full name with your message.
> > - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> > - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to
> > keep them short.
> > - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject
> > header.
> > - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
> > &amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
> > - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> > - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the
> > various resources on the homepage.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
&amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
resources on the homepage.

>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>

Ken,

It seemed counterintuitive to me as well.  But here is a more 
traditional way to look at it.  when you make the exposure the image is 
on the film.  There is no other opportunity to capture more 
information.  The only thing that you can affect now is how dense the 
highlights are made.  The highlight detail _is_ there.  If you use N-4 
development you bring the highlight density down to a range where it 
can be printed traditionally.

As I said there are going to be extreme cases where this is not true.  
Maybe N-4 (which I have never done) is that extreme.  The 
film/developer combination you use will also make a big difference.  
You can create situations where highlight detail is lost because the 
film just won't get any more dense.  If you are doing N-4 development 
you may have those circumstances.

I have one TMAX negative of my old house in Chicago.  It was taken in 
bright sunlight, snow on the ground and shadows in the front 
porch/garden.  Vuescan tells me (and I don't know how accurate it is) 
that the density range is from (~.6 to ~3.2).  Using vuescan and my 
normal scanning workflow I get detail in the snow drifts and on the 
porch.  Mind you it looks pretty flat cramming all those zones in.

So, I think, it comes down to where do you want to do the work.  In 
managing the density range on the negative or finessing the scan and 
adjustments

On Thursday, January 9, 2003, at 10:00 AM, Ken Carney wrote:

> Kevin: I can very quickly run out of knowledge about scanning (or 
> exactly
> how electricity works, for that matter).  I may well be missing the 
> point,
> but here is where I'm stuck.  Let's suppose I have a common 
> high-contrast
> scene, say a long 10-15 minute exposure and the meter says, e.g., that 
> Zone
> 8 is placed four stops above where I need it.  I don't know any way to
> capture that image without adjusting the film speed downward and using
> compensating development ("N-4" in my example, or thereabouts).  In 
> other
> words, I wouldn't know how to get a negative with enough info to scan
> without first getting all the info on the neg.  Normal exposure or
> development would get me a bullet-proof neg with no high detail.  Help.
>
> Regards,
>
>   --Ken Carney
>     www.kencarney.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kevin Gulstene" <kevin@...>
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 8:56 PM
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Scanning and Zone Sys Development.
>
>
>> Hi Ken,
>>
>> Let's take your high contrast scene.  Lets assume that 14 stops of
>> scene brightness are mapped to a a film density range of .05 to 1.8
>> with the zone system compensations.  When you scan that piece of film
>> and apply the set points you will then map a density of .05 to  100%k
>> and the density of 1.8 to 0%k.
>>
>> Take an identical exposure of the same scene with anther piece of 
>> film.
>>   This film has no development compensation.  The 14 stops of scene
>> brightness are then mapped to a density range of .06 to 2.3.  When you
>> scan that piece of film and apply the set points you will map the
>> density of of .06 to 100%k and a density of 2.3 to 0%k.
>>
>> It seems to me that as long as the maximum film density is within the
>> specs of your scanner it doesn't matter whether you used N or N-4
>> development.  You have to make the scene brightness fit between black
>> and white one way or another.  You can do it with development or math
>> in the scanner.  The result, it seems to me is the same.
>>
>> Clearly you have to set a film speed appropriately to capture the
>> shadow details but I am not convinced that modifying the film
>> development is required to capture the highlights when you are 
>> scanning
>> a negative.
>>
>> That is what I am trying to come to grips with.
>>
>> Thanks for your help
>>
>> On Tuesday, January 7, 2003, at 06:23 PM, Ken Carney wrote:
>>
>>>> From my perspective, the point of the zone system is to get a
>>>> negative with
>>> reasonable shadow and highlight tones.  If you have a negative with a
>>> blown-out highlight, I don't think any scanner will help you.  For
>>> example,
>>> take a high contrast scene that may take N-4 development (here 
>>> reduced
>>> film
>>> speed and compensating development in dilute HC110 or TMax RS).  I
>>> have many
>>> negs like this that scan well, but I can't picture how I could get a
>>> good
>>> tonal range with say, normal development.  In fact, the only problems
>>> I have
>>> had in scanning LF negs with expanded and compressed development have
>>> been
>>> those developed in pyro (Rollo or PMK), since the stain produces some
>>> challenges in getting a good scan.  I would say go for the best neg 
>>> you
>>> would use for a silver print.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>>   --Ken Carney
>>>     www.kencarney.com
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Kevin Gulstene" <kevin@...>
>>> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 5:53 PM
>>> Subject: [Digital BW] Scanning and Zone Sys Development.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Is zone system development time manipulation irrelevant when 
>>>> scanning
>>>> film as opposed to traditional printing?   That is the question I
>>>> would
>>>> like some help with.
>>>>
>>>> My understanding is that the zone system is way of ensuring a
>>>> constant
>>>> density range on the negative independent of the brightness range of
>>>> the scene.  This is desirable because it makes most scenes printable
>>>> on
>>>> a grade 2 paper (leaving the other grades available for artistic
>>>> interpretation) and it helps minimize the stuffing around in the
>>>> darkroom required to get a good print.
>>>>
>>>> Since I am not doing wet prints but am scanning the negatives, it
>>>> seems
>>>> to me that the N- or N+ development dependent on the scene 
>>>> brightness
>>>> range is, mostly, irrelevant.  By setting the black point, setting 
>>>> the
>>>> white point and scanning the negative am I not mapping the entire
>>>> density range of the image to a numerical range of 0-256 or 0-64k?
>>>> This mapping would take place independent of the absolute density 
>>>> any
>>>> particular zone.
>>>>
>>>> As a hypothetical example lets assume a scene contains a 8 stop 
>>>> range
>>>> of brightness.  Three images are similarly exposed to capture that
>>>> brightnesses range. The three images are given different development
>>>> times and produce density ranges of  (1.0-0.3=.7), (1.4-0.4=1.0) and
>>>> (2.0-.5=1.5).  When the images are scanned each one will produce a
>>>> full
>>>> histogram from 0 to 255 and a scene brightness at the 6th of the 
>>>> eight
>>>> stops will show up at the same place in each of the histograms.
>>>>
>>>> Soooo, can't I simplify the zone mantra to "expose for the shadows 
>>>> and
>>>> let the highlights fall where they may with normal development".
>>>> Also,
>>>>   wouldn't it be better to generally use N+1 development times so 
>>>> that
>>>> the numbers from the raw scan occupied more of the scanner's range?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for your help
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls
>>>> and
>>> other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>>>>
>>>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>>>>
>>>> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish
>>>> to
>>> unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this
>>> same
>>> page.
>>>>
>>>> Please follow these basic guidelines:
>>>> - Include your full name with your message.
>>>> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
>>>> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages 
>>>> to
>>>> keep
>>> them short.
>>>> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject
>>>> header.
>>>> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
>>> &amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
>>>> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
>>>> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the
>>>> various
>>> resources on the homepage.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
>>>> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls
>>> and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>>>
>>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>>>
>>> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish
>>> to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting
>>> this same page.
>>>
>>> Please follow these basic guidelines:
>>> - Include your full name with your message.
>>> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
>>> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to
>>> keep them short.
>>> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject
>>> header.
>>> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
>>> &amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
>>> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
>>> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the
>>> various resources on the homepage.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
>>> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls 
>> and
> other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>>
>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>>
>> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish 
>> to
> unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this 
> same
> page.
>>
>> Please follow these basic guidelines:
>> - Include your full name with your message.
>> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
>> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to 
>> keep
> them short.
>> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject 
>> header.
>> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
> &amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
>> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
>> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the 
>> various
> resources on the homepage.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to 
>> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls 
> and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish 
> to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting 
> this same page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to 
> keep them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject 
> header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or 
> &amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the 
> various resources on the homepage.
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to 
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>

Hi Kevin,

> when you make the exposure the image is
> on the film.

Agreed.

> There is no other opportunity to capture more
> information.

Agreed.

> The only thing that you can affect now is how dense the
> highlights are made.

Hum.  I'm not clear on that.  The discernability is what is at issue.  If
they aren't discernable, they don't do anyone any good...and once you
develop the film, it's permanent...you can't get them back.

To me, development is like setting setpoints...on the film.

> The highlight detail _is_ there.  If you use N-4
> development you bring the highlight density down to a range where it
> can be printed traditionally.

Or...is it that is makes them "discernable", not just "within the range"???

> Vuescan tells me (and I don't know how accurate it is)
> that the density range is from (~.6 to ~3.2).

You're right...you CAN'T tell how accurate it is, as your scanner/Viewscan
is not calibrated.  It can be off by a HUGE amount.

Regards,

Austin

On Thursday, January 9, 2003, at 10:46 AM, Austin Franklin wrote:

> Hi Kevin,
>
>> when you make the exposure the image is
>> on the film.
>
> Agreed.
>
>> There is no other opportunity to capture more
>> information.
>
> Agreed.
>
>> The only thing that you can affect now is how dense the
>> highlights are made.
>
> Hum.  I'm not clear on that.  The discernability is what is at issue.  
> If
> they aren't discernable, they don't do anyone any good...and once you
> develop the film, it's permanent...you can't get them back.

If I understand you correctly then I agree.  I am saying that there is 
a much larger range of what is discernible/printable/not-lost when 
using a scanner than when using traditional wet printing.  Once the 
film is exposed the only thing you can do with development is change 
the slope of the exposure/density curve.

By using N-2 development on a scene you are, primarily, reducing the 
slope of the curve ( I know you know that).  Without the development 
adjustment traditional printing could be a problem because the range of 
brightnesses produced by shining the enlarger's light through the 
density range of the film is outside the exposure latitude of the paper 
and either the shadows, the highlights or both get all crammed together.

With a scanner the exposure latitude is much greater.  You can shine 
the scanner's illumination through a much greater range of negative 
densities.

>
> To me, development is like setting setpoints...on the film.
>
>> The highlight detail _is_ there.  If you use N-4
>> development you bring the highlight density down to a range where it
>> can be printed traditionally.
>
> Or...is it that is makes them "discernable", not just "within the 
> range"???
>
>> Vuescan tells me (and I don't know how accurate it is)
>> that the density range is from (~.6 to ~3.2).
>
> You're right...you CAN'T tell how accurate it is, as your 
> scanner/Viewscan
> is not calibrated.  It can be off by a HUGE amount.

In absolute terms that is true, but in relative terms it is less likely 
an issue.  A TMAX negative I usually make, measured the same way, is in 
the range of ~.5 to ~1.8.  Its anecdotal evidence but there are a lot 
of zones between shrubbery shadows and sunlight on snow.

>
> Regards,
>
> Austin
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls 
> and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish 
> to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting 
> this same page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to 
> keep them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject 
> header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or 
> "flames."
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the 
> various resources on the homepage.
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to 
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Loris Medici" 
<lorism@t...> wrote:
SNIP
> 2) Low CYAN usage [It seems that the Randall curves/Epson driver
> combination substites CYAN with BLACK and this makes a negative
> influence on hue/chromacity I think]
SNIP

Loris:  Yes, the black kicks in soon after the cyan position ink 
(dark gray) starts. This is driven by the reflective density on the 
paper of the cyan position ink and the Epson driver controlling the 
black ink.  

Hue/chromacity are color terms.  Grayscale shades (brightness, value, 
lightness) are what are important to B/W.  If the combined black/cyan 
inks yields the correct tone, then there is no problem. 

Differences in lightness/darkness of midtones between the RGB 
Partitioned Workflow and PiezoBW is completely a matter of taste.  
There is NO absolute correct way to divide the grayscale range 
printed on paper between the value of the paper and pure black ink.

Jeff Randall

I think I see your point.  I have not followed all the messages in this
thread, but basically it is that the scanner is capable of resolving more
detail and range than silver paper.  That is probably true.  I know inkjet
prints appear sharper than silver prints, unless you go to the trouble of
unsharp masking the negative for a silver print (I don't do that since I
haven't seen what it brings to the image except to make it...sharper).  I
will say that the scanner allows you to salvage a neg that might not be
possible in the darkroom.  That plus using TriX are two good tools if you
are, as I am, prone to gross exposure errors at times.  And, now that I
think about, I think there is something to what you say about the highlight
detail being there.  For example, a neg that I have exposed and developed
for platinum printing will usually not print on silver paper because of the
density, unless maybe you were to use VC paper and burn in the highlights
with a number 0 filter --yechhh.  (That is with a "conventional" developer -
with Rollo or PMK pyro you can get a neg that will work for both because of
the pyro stain).  Now I'm curious - I'll dig up a few _really_ bulletproof
negs and see what I can do.

Regards,

  --Ken Carney
    www.kencarney.com

----- Original Message -----

From: "Kevin Gulstene" <kevin@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 12:33 PM
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Scanning and Zone Sys Development.


> Ken,
>
> It seemed counterintuitive to me as well.  But here is a more
> traditional way to look at it.  when you make the exposure the image is
> on the film.  There is no other opportunity to capture more
> information.  The only thing that you can affect now is how dense the
> highlights are made.  The highlight detail _is_ there.  If you use N-4
> development you bring the highlight density down to a range where it
> can be printed traditionally.
>
> As I said there are going to be extreme cases where this is not true.
> Maybe N-4 (which I have never done) is that extreme.  The
> film/developer combination you use will also make a big difference.
> You can create situations where highlight detail is lost because the
> film just won't get any more dense.  If you are doing N-4 development
> you may have those circumstances.
>
> I have one TMAX negative of my old house in Chicago.  It was taken in
> bright sunlight, snow on the ground and shadows in the front
> porch/garden.  Vuescan tells me (and I don't know how accurate it is)
> that the density range is from (~.6 to ~3.2).  Using vuescan and my
> normal scanning workflow I get detail in the snow drifts and on the
> porch.  Mind you it looks pretty flat cramming all those zones in.
>
> So, I think, it comes down to where do you want to do the work.  In
> managing the density range on the negative or finessing the scan and
> adjustments
>
>
> On Thursday, January 9, 2003, at 10:00 AM, Ken Carney wrote:
>
> > Kevin: I can very quickly run out of knowledge about scanning (or
> > exactly
> > how electricity works, for that matter).  I may well be missing the
> > point,
> > but here is where I'm stuck.  Let's suppose I have a common
> > high-contrast
> > scene, say a long 10-15 minute exposure and the meter says, e.g., that
> > Zone
> > 8 is placed four stops above where I need it.  I don't know any way to
> > capture that image without adjusting the film speed downward and using
> > compensating development ("N-4" in my example, or thereabouts).  In
> > other
> > words, I wouldn't know how to get a negative with enough info to scan
> > without first getting all the info on the neg.  Normal exposure or
> > development would get me a bullet-proof neg with no high detail.  Help.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> >   --Ken Carney
> >     www.kencarney.com
> >

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Loris Medici"
<lorism@t...> wrote:
SNIP
> 2) Low CYAN usage [It seems that the Randall curves/Epson driver
> combination substites CYAN with BLACK and this makes a negative
> influence on hue/chromacity I think]
SNIP

Jeff Randall wrote:

>  Yes, the black kicks in soon after the cyan position ink
>(dark gray) starts. This is driven by the reflective density on the
>paper of the cyan position ink and the Epson driver controlling the
>black ink.  ...

The Epson driver looks at the three RGB curves and starts the black when the
three of them together add up to some combined volume of ink.  To avoid the
black ink from coming in too soon, some prefer to use the lightest gray
(usually blue curve, yellow position ink) as an indirect switch for the
black ink.  For this approach, the blue curve is pulled down sharply in the
highlights, as usual.  However, once the darker gray inks are flowing the
blue curve is pulled back up.  So, there is a reverse curve for a while.
Some curves pull the blue curve almost to the top of the graph.  You
ultimately have to pull the blue curve back down to "turn on" the black ink.
The curve ends up looking like a radical roller coaster.

The same can be done with the magenta to a lesser extent, although the need
for this is questionable.

What this roller-coaster blue curve allows is the cyan ink to be virtually
full-on before the black ink is needed.  This usually hides the dots better
and keeps the tone of the cyan ink predominant through the entire midtone
section of the print.

The bad news of this approach is that the more radical curves are, I
believe, more sensitive to printer variations.

At any rate, how the curves are drawn significantly affects when the black
ink will be pulled into the mix.

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com

Hello Jeff,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeff Randall <jrandall@...> [mailto:jrandall@...] 
> Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 10:01 PM
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Need help - PiezographyBW and Dot Gain Curve
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Loris Medici" 
> <lorism@t...> wrote:
> SNIP
> > 2) Low CYAN usage [It seems that the Randall curves/Epson driver
> > combination substites CYAN with BLACK and this makes a negative 
> > influence on hue/chromacity I think]
> SNIP
> 
> Hue/chromacity are color terms. Grayscale shades (brightness, value,
> lightness) are what are important to B/W.

Then why there are Selenium, Cool, Warm, Sepia, Variable Mix, Neutral
inksets present around?

> If the combined black/cyan
> inks yields the correct tone, then there is no problem.
>
> Differences in lightness/darkness of midtones and darks between the
> RGB Partitioned Workflow and PiezoBW is completely a matter of taste. 
> There is no absolute correct way to divide the grayscale range 
> printed on paper between the value of the paper and pure black ink.

Jeff, first of all let me tell that I'm very grateful and greatly
appreciate your efforts to design this workflow and I use it with
pleasure. I want to thank you (and many others that share their hard
work with the rest of us). Please understand that I'm not trashing your
wonderful workflow just looking for a less ink laying alternative (the
wavy prints I get using light papers - EAM and HPR max. 192 gsm - are a
concern to me).

Best regards,
Loris.

Peter & Clayton, thanks both for the replies...

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Baumbach [mailto:info@...]
> Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 5:01 PM
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: AW: [Digital BW] Re: Need help - PiezographyBW and
> Dot Gain Curve
>
> ... available for printing. Loris can achieve good WYSIWYG if he
> uses a self made soft proof profile (cf <Matching Your 
> Monitor view to Your Prints.pdf> from Tyler Boley in the 
> files section of this group).
> 
> Peter Baumbach

My problem is 'exactly and totally' what is described on Tyler's
document (and PiezographyBW manual).
1) I have a perfect 21 step wedge and
2) want to print it as a perfect 21 step wedge.
3) Both my scanner and monitor are calibrated using appropiate
tools/software

Either when ...

A) I set a custom "dot gain" curve (non-linear, stair-steps-like) and
apply to the image or
B) I use the previously mentioned curve as a soft proof profile, then
tweaking the image to get it right

... I'm changing the original gamma2.2 data. This doesn't sound right.

I just want scan/edit/view in gamma 2.2, I don't want to archive
different files for different papers. Is there a method to do it?

Regards,
Loris.

Loris - I've not tried this and I'm just thinking out loud (I've not had
your symptoms with 308 PR or 190 WT) but how about a curves move before
going to RGB where you just bring in the blackpoint. You could do a series
of black square tests in small increments to decrease the amount of black
laydown stopping where you measure a decrease in density?

Julian
----- Original Message -----
From: "Loris Medici" <lorism@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2003 8:17 AM
Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Re: Need help - PiezographyBW and Dot Gain Curve


>
> Hello Jeff,
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jeff Randall <jrandall@...> [mailto:jrandall@...]
> > Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 10:01 PM
> > To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Need help - PiezographyBW and Dot Gain Curve
> >
> >
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Loris Medici"
> > <lorism@t...> wrote:
> > SNIP
> > > 2) Low CYAN usage [It seems that the Randall curves/Epson driver
> > > combination substites CYAN with BLACK and this makes a negative
> > > influence on hue/chromacity I think]
> > SNIP
> >
> > Hue/chromacity are color terms. Grayscale shades (brightness, value,
> > lightness) are what are important to B/W.
>
> Then why there are Selenium, Cool, Warm, Sepia, Variable Mix, Neutral
> inksets present around?
>
> > If the combined black/cyan
> > inks yields the correct tone, then there is no problem.
> >
> > Differences in lightness/darkness of midtones and darks between the
> > RGB Partitioned Workflow and PiezoBW is completely a matter of taste.
> > There is no absolute correct way to divide the grayscale range
> > printed on paper between the value of the paper and pure black ink.
>
> Jeff, first of all let me tell that I'm very grateful and greatly
> appreciate your efforts to design this workflow and I use it with
> pleasure. I want to thank you (and many others that share their hard
> work with the rest of us). Please understand that I'm not trashing your
> wonderful workflow just looking for a less ink laying alternative (the
> wavy prints I get using light papers - EAM and HPR max. 192 gsm - are a
> concern to me).
>
> Best regards,
> Loris.
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
&amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
resources on the homepage.

>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>

Julian,
You mean a linear curve starting like say... In: 8 Out: 0 and ends with
In: 255 Out: 255?
Can you please describe further so I can try it?

Regards,
Loris.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Julian Thomas [mailto:julianthomas@...] 
> Sent: Friday, January 10, 2003 11:13 AM
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: Need help - PiezographyBW and 
> Dot Gain Curve
> 
> 
> Loris - I've not tried this and I'm just thinking out loud 
> (I've not had your symptoms with 308 PR or 190 WT) but how 
> about a curves move before going to RGB where you just bring 
> in the blackpoint. You could do a series of black square 
> tests in small increments to decrease the amount of black 
> laydown stopping where you measure a decrease in density?

I was thinking more about maybe using the bottom bar in levels - bring the
black in point by point, although you'll need to compensate with the grey
slider. I've never tried this, and I guess it depends if you are over-inking
or not. If in curves you kept the output at 0 but incrementally altered the
input maybe. You'll need to do some black wedges I guess, and then work out
some way of not screwing up the whole image. But I'd certainly do some black
tests to check for over-inking.

Julian
----- Original Message -----
From: "Loris Medici" <lorism@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2003 4:14 PM
Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Re: Need help - PiezographyBW and Dot Gain Curve


> Julian,
> You mean a linear curve starting like say... In: 8 Out: 0 and ends with
> In: 255 Out: 255?
> Can you please describe further so I can try it?
>
> Regards,
> Loris.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Julian Thomas [mailto:julianthomas@...]
> > Sent: Friday, January 10, 2003 11:13 AM
> > To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: Need help - PiezographyBW and
> > Dot Gain Curve
> >
> >
> > Loris - I've not tried this and I'm just thinking out loud
> > (I've not had your symptoms with 308 PR or 190 WT) but how
> > about a curves move before going to RGB where you just bring
> > in the blackpoint. You could do a series of black square
> > tests in small increments to decrease the amount of black
> > laydown stopping where you measure a decrease in density?
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
&amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
resources on the homepage.

>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>

Loris:

Sorry, all I saw was the FS-N part of your inkset system.  There is 
no problem with the FS or FS-N inksets and the 1160 RGB Partitioned 
Workflow. The workflow was designed for these inks.  Any of the 
inksets/workflows that rely on a toner ink such as VM etal. will not 
work with this workflow.

Jeff Randall


> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Loris 
Medici" 
> > <lorism@t...> wrote:
> > SNIP
> > > 2) Low CYAN usage [It seems that the Randall curves/Epson driver
> > > combination substites CYAN with BLACK and this makes a negative 
> > > influence on hue/chromacity I think]
> > SNIP
> > 
> > Hue/chromacity are color terms. Grayscale shades (brightness, 
value,
> > lightness) are what are important to B/W.
> 
> Then why there are Selenium, Cool, Warm, Sepia, Variable Mix, 
Neutral
> inksets present around?
> 
> > If the combined black/cyan
> > inks yields the correct tone, then there is no problem.
> >
> > Differences in lightness/darkness of midtones and darks between 
the
> > RGB Partitioned Workflow and PiezoBW is completely a matter of 
taste. 
> > There is no absolute correct way to divide the grayscale range 
> > printed on paper between the value of the paper and pure black 
ink.
> 
> Jeff, first of all let me tell that I'm very grateful and greatly
> appreciate your efforts to design this workflow and I use it with
> pleasure. I want to thank you (and many others that share their hard
> work with the rest of us). Please understand that I'm not trashing 
your
> wonderful workflow just looking for a less ink laying alternative 
(the
> wavy prints I get using light papers - EAM and HPR max. 192 gsm - 
are a

> concern to me).
> 
> Best regards,
> Loris.

I don't think that any of Cone inksets rely to "a toner ink" like MIS' VM
inkset - I base my view to the q-tip (cotton buds) test I did in order to
check ink densities before priming my CIS; there was nothing like a blue
toner ink among them -  it is just how they design the inks (specific
pigments per density/ink?).

My problem is mostly about the "amount of ink" sprayed on the paper - I
don't have any tonality and/or screen matching problems (maybe
not-so-pleasing-muddy-like-hue in %90-70 gap but that is bearable - it may
be an ink problem too); your workflow uses "Heavyweight Matte" paper setting
in the Epson driver and unfortunately the most up-to-date driver doesn't
supply any "Archival Matte" paper setting (if it had, I would have certainly
tried it) so maybe this is the source of my problem.

Anyway, I still couldn't manage to make a decent print with PiezographyBW. I
think I will follow Peter's suggestion and wait for the new Piezography
software...

Regards,
Loris.

----- Original Message -----

From: <jrandall@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2003 11:21 PM
Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Need help - PiezographyBW and Dot Gain Curve


> Loris:
>
> Sorry, all I saw was the FS-N part of your inkset system.  There is
> no problem with the FS or FS-N inksets and the 1160 RGB Partitioned
> Workflow. The workflow was designed for these inks.  Any of the
> inksets/workflows that rely on a toner ink such as VM etal. will not
> work with this workflow.
>
> Jeff Randall

I received my first 25-sheet pack of HPR from inkjetgoodies today and 
want to give it a try, but I'm having a really hard time telling which 
side is the coated side. Does anyone have a sure-fire way of telling 
which is the coated side? I once think I remember someone saying they 
could always tell by touching the tip of their tongue to each of the 
sides, and whichever side it stuck to most was the coated side. Aside 
from any negative chemical effects (are there any??), does this work? 
Is there a less "distasteful" way to tell which side is coated?

Thanks,
/eddie

Eddie,

Hehnemuhle papers leave a lot to desired amount marking the print 
side.  But, if you note the fine print on the label (should have a 
rooster on it), you will note it says "coated side on top".  I have 
found that side is also the one where a plain brown paper is on top 
of the stack.

If for some reason, you don't know which side faced the label, and 
have removed the brown paper, the tongue trick is what I have read 
about (but I have never had to use it.)

Regards.

Shilesh
--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Eddie Gilbert 
<lists@e...> wrote:
> I received my first 25-sheet pack of HPR from inkjetgoodies today 
and 
> want to give it a try, but I'm having a really hard time telling 
which 
> side is the coated side. Does anyone have a sure-fire way of 
telling 
> which is the coated side? I once think I remember someone saying 
they 
> could always tell by touching the tip of their tongue to each of 
the 
> sides, and whichever side it stuck to most was the coated side. 
Aside 
> from any negative chemical effects (are there any??), does this 
work? 

> Is there a less "distasteful" way to tell which side is coated?
> 
> Thanks,
> /eddie

That's the way I do it... just on a corner

Helps remind me we are alchemists, not digital plebes  :-)

tim

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eddie Gilbert [mailto:lists@...]
> Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2003 3:31 PM
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Digital BW] Hahnemuhle Photo Rag UpSide
>
>
> I received my first 25-sheet pack of HPR from inkjetgoodies today and
> want to give it a try, but I'm having a really hard time telling which
> side is the coated side. Does anyone have a sure-fire way of telling
> which is the coated side? I once think I remember someone saying they
> could always tell by touching the tip of their tongue to each of the
> sides, and whichever side it stuck to most was the coated side. Aside
> from any negative chemical effects (are there any??), does this work?
> Is there a less "distasteful" way to tell which side is coated?
>
> Thanks,
> /eddie
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks,
> Polls and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you
> wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by
> visiting this same page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier
> messages to keep them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
> "flames."
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the
> various resources on the homepage.
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>

Hi Eddie
On Saturday, January 11, 2003, at 02:30 PM, Eddie Gilbert wrote:

> I received my first 25-sheet pack of HPR from inkjetgoodies today and
> want to give it a try, but I'm having a really hard time telling which
> side is the coated side. Does anyone have a sure-fire way of telling
> which is the coated side? I once think I remember someone saying they
> could always tell by touching the tip of their tongue to each of the
> sides, and whichever side it stuck to most was the coated side. Aside
> from any negative chemical effects (are there any??), does this work?

Yes, this works.  And no, - hic ergg arghh - there doesn't seem to be 
any side effects.

>
> Is there a less "distasteful" way to tell which side is coated?

No that I know of.

>
> Thanks,
> /eddie
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls 
> and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish 
> to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting 
> this same page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to 
> keep them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject 
> header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or 
> "flames."
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the 
> various resources on the homepage.
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to 
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>

Thank you all for your responses. Just so happens that the side 
protected by the plain brown sheet was also the tongue stickiest side 
as well.

Now I know  :-)

Cheers,
/eddie

Try licking your finger and then touching the paper.  It works.

Steve


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Eddie Gilbert 
<lists@e...> wrote:
> Thank you all for your responses. Just so happens that the side 
> protected by the plain brown sheet was also the tongue stickiest 
side 

> as well.
> 
> Now I know  :-)
> 
> Cheers,
> /eddie

Hi Jeff-

I see that you have posted a couple of updated curves recently. Is 
there any place where one can see comments on what the changes are? I 
started using the latest 1160 (e, I think) and started using this new 
one and love it, but being an inveterate tweaker, wanted to make some 
comparisons with the older versions?

thanks for the great service you've provided us with with this 
partitioned workflow...no way could I have gotten here on my own.

cheers,

Tom O'Connell

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Randall 
<jrandall@c...>" <jrandall@c...> wrote:
> Loris:
> 
> Sorry, all I saw was the FS-N part of your inkset system.  There is 
> no problem with the FS or FS-N inksets and the 1160 RGB Partitioned 
> Workflow. The workflow was designed for these inks.  Any of the 
> inksets/workflows that rely on a toner ink such as VM etal. will 
not 

> work with this workflow.
> 
> Jeff Randall

Yes, it works great. There's nothing in paper that can hurt you. Be sure 
your tongue is fairly dry before tasting.

Jerry

Eddie Gilbert wrote:

> I received my first 25-sheet pack of HPR from inkjetgoodies today and 
> want to give it a try, but I'm having a really hard time telling which 
> side is the coated side. Does anyone have a sure-fire way of telling 
> which is the coated side? I once think I remember someone saying they 
> could always tell by touching the tip of their tongue to each of the 
> sides, and whichever side it stuck to most was the coated side. Aside 
> from any negative chemical effects (are there any??), does this work? 
> Is there a less "distasteful" way to tell which side is coated?
> 
> Thanks,
> /eddie
> 
> 
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> 
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same page.
> 
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or "flames."
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various resources on the homepage. 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> 
> 
>

Hello Eddie,

>Does anyone have a sure-fire way of telling which is the coated
side? 

The paper has a curve to it and the coating is on the concave side. 
That's what I usually look for.  You can also mark lightly with a
pencil on the edge.  The coated side resists the pencil mark more than
the back side.

Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm

Eddie asked:

Is there a less "distasteful" way to tell which side is coated?

Use a loupe and you'll see that one side is "smoother" and you can't
distinguish the individual paper fibers. This is the coated side. On the
back side, the individual fibers are clearly distinguishable.

Tom Keesling
Intelligent Design, Inc.

There is simple test which is non destructive to sheet - use a sharp 
blade (cutter) and scare with caution surface of paper in a corner of 
sheet. The coated surface produces white powder, the uncoated the 
fibers of celulose. There is very  emphatic difference between them.

Martin


At 23:54 -0500 11.1.2003, Thomas Keesling wrote:
*******************************************

>Eddie asked:
>
>Is there a less "distasteful" way to tell which side is coated?
>
>Use a loupe and you'll see that one side is "smoother" and you can't
>distinguish the individual paper fibers. This is the coated side. On the
>back side, the individual fibers are clearly distinguishable.
>
>Tom Keesling
>Intelligent Design, Inc.

--