Digital BW, The Print

This may apply only to users of Gamma 1.8 and 5000K color temp, which 
is how my monitor is calibrated. A while back I noticed a 
considerable difference in my prints which looked too dark for the 
image on the screen, so I simply made a curve to raise the midpoint 
of 127 to 145; which seemed to correct the difference. I posted a 
question here asking if anyone had noticed a similar condition if 
they worked in Gamma 2.2, and received many responses. Some were 
well intended but none answered my question; which was not very well 
formed by me. Today while looking through a book called "Photoshop 7 
Artistry-Mastering the Digital Image" by Barry Haynes and Wendy 
Crumpler, I came across my answer. It dealt with creating a custom 
RGB workspace to replace the Adobe 1998 RGB workspace. This is how it 
goes Edit>Color Settings>Working Space:RGB >Custom RGB>Gamma 
1.8>White Point 5000K (D50) Save as JohnnyRGB.

This has opened the shadows (Zone I-III) considerable and now the 
image prints as it is on the monitor without any need of a printing 
curve anymore. Now all my image work is done at Gamma 1.8 and 5000K 
color temp by default regardless if I'm in color or Black and White. 
I'm happy now and can go out and hunt some images. I finally was the 
high bidder on an X-Rite 810 densitometer which I think will help me 
make paper curves for the different paper/ink combinations I'll use.

Your friend in Photography,

Johnny

Johnny,

How did you arrive at 145? Trial and error?

Or is there a "specific reason".

Scott

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Johnny Eades" 
<jeades1@s...> wrote:
> 
> This may apply only to users of Gamma 1.8 and 5000K color temp, 
which 
> is how my monitor is calibrated. A while back I noticed a 
> considerable difference in my prints which looked too dark for the 
> image on the screen, so I simply made a curve to raise the midpoint 
> of 127 to 145; which seemed to correct the difference. I posted a 
> question here asking if anyone had noticed a similar condition if 
> they worked in Gamma 2.2, and received many responses. Some were 
> well intended but none answered my question; which was not very 
well 
> formed by me. Today while looking through a book called "Photoshop 
7 
> Artistry-Mastering the Digital Image" by Barry Haynes and Wendy 
> Crumpler, I came across my answer. It dealt with creating a custom 
> RGB workspace to replace the Adobe 1998 RGB workspace. This is how 
it 
> goes Edit>Color Settings>Working Space:RGB >Custom RGB>Gamma 
> 1.8>White Point 5000K (D50) Save as JohnnyRGB.
> 
> This has opened the shadows (Zone I-III) considerable and now the 
> image prints as it is on the monitor without any need of a printing 
> curve anymore. Now all my image work is done at Gamma 1.8 and 5000K 
> color temp by default regardless if I'm in color or Black and 
White. 
> I'm happy now and can go out and hunt some images. I finally was 
the 
> high bidder on an X-Rite 810 densitometer which I think will help 
me 

> make paper curves for the different paper/ink combinations I'll use.
> 
> Your friend in Photography,
> 
> Johnny

That came from the same book. GAmma 2.2 is more contrsty (shadows 
darker) so 43% black will look like 50% Gamma 1.8.  RGB values of 
127,127,127 in Gamma 2.2 will look just like 145,145,145 in Gamma 1.8 
and both will show LAB of 61,0,0 and 50%K. This is a direct quote 
from the book and what got me thinking.

Your friend in Photography,

Johnny


--- In 
DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "scott_now_coming" 
<scott_now_coming@y...> wrote:
> 
> Johnny,
> 
> How did you arrive at 145? Trial and error?
> 
> Or is there a "specific reason".
> 
> Scott
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Johnny Eades" 
> <jeades1@s...> wrote:
> > 
> > This may apply only to users of Gamma 1.8 and 5000K color temp, 
> which 
> > is how my monitor is calibrated. A while back I noticed a 
> > considerable difference in my prints which looked too dark for 
the 
> > image on the screen, so I simply made a curve to raise the 
midpoint 
> > of 127 to 145; which seemed to correct the difference. I posted a 
> > question here asking if anyone had noticed a similar condition if 
> > they worked in Gamma 2.2, and received many responses. Some were 
> > well intended but none answered my question; which was not very 
> well 
> > formed by me. Today while looking through a book 
called "Photoshop 
> 7 
> > Artistry-Mastering the Digital Image" by Barry Haynes and Wendy 
> > Crumpler, I came across my answer. It dealt with creating a 
custom 
> > RGB workspace to replace the Adobe 1998 RGB workspace. This is 
how 
> it 
> > goes Edit>Color Settings>Working Space:RGB >Custom RGB>Gamma 
> > 1.8>White Point 5000K (D50) Save as JohnnyRGB.
> > 
> > This has opened the shadows (Zone I-III) considerable and now the 
> > image prints as it is on the monitor without any need of a 
printing 
> > curve anymore. Now all my image work is done at Gamma 1.8 and 
5000K 
> > color temp by default regardless if I'm in color or Black and 
> White. 
> > I'm happy now and can go out and hunt some images. I finally was 
> the 
> > high bidder on an X-Rite 810 densitometer which I think will help 
> me 
> > make paper curves for the different paper/ink combinations I'll 
use.

> > 
> > Your friend in Photography,
> > 
> > Johnny