Re: Basic question about contrast and gamma

On 22 Feb., 10:57, "Richard Knoppow" <dickb...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

<snip>

> You are right that the overall contrast of aprint
> should be on the order of 1 but reflection prints are
> limited in the range of brightness they can reproduce so the
> unity contrastis usually true only of a range of mid tones,
> the shadows and highlights generally being compressed or
> simply going out of the range the paper can reproduce.

<snip>

> While there
> is some choice in contrast of colorprinting materials it is
> much less than for B&W. This is because the eye is much more
> sensitive to variations in the contrast of color. If color
> is too low or too hight in contrast the effect is quite
> obvious. So, the contrast of color recording and printing
> materials is much more highly standardized than for B&W.

On the risk of beeing pu****ng I must still insist on the relation****p
between neg contrast and paper contrast.
As we agree that both must balance to about 1 and color negative film
is normally developd to about 0,6, the paper should show gamma of 1,7.
But almost all color printing papers have gamma values far in excess
of 2. So how does the steeply raised contrast of the print fit into
your above statement? Does the contrast have to be raised that much so
offset the unavoidable flare? If that=B4s true paper contrast cannot be
calculated by simply using the reciprocal of the neg. Maybe that=B4s all
what blocked me from recognizing the true connection?!

Best regards!
Monica Schulz