Re: Basic question about contrast and gamma

In article 
<55c237f9-dc18-4ff2-8f02-5a00f838164a@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
 Monica Schulz <monica.schulz@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
 
> On the risk of beeing pu****ng I must still insist on the relation****p
> between neg contrast and paper contrast.

Neg contrast= 1.45 max
Paper contrast .85 < 

Gamma is not a good indicator of true paper capability try .85 or if you 
must use film gamma subtract .20 from the bottom and top of the 
Characteristic curve your using, use a shoulder around 1.45 or less more 
like 1.25


> 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´s true paper contrast cannot be
> calculated by simply using the reciprocal of the neg. Maybe that´s all
> what blocked me from recognizing the true connection?!
> 
> Best regards!
> Monica Schulz

Flare should not be an issue when using a modern lens if using something 
older producing flare you should replace it with a modern Apo lens.

-- 
Reality is a picture perfected and never looking back.