Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Guest
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Community Talk, Chatter & Stuff General Photography Talk 
Thread started 19 Aug 2009 (Wednesday) 20:32
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

Im not sure what to make of this

 
FreezeFramePhto
Goldmember
1,130 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 15
Joined Sep 2006
Location: Columbus, Ohio
     
Aug 19, 2009 20:32 |  #1

Pulled from another forum


Dang, I wish it did. I'd have done much better in those graduate level B&W courses at OSU. (All those are gone now, sad.) Unfortunately it's the two extremes of the grey scale that suffer, and have to be corrected, without the lose of the middle greys.

When checking a photo, it was always the highlights and shadows that I checked first. If I thought I could bring out more detail, then it was probably originally over saturated or under saturated and required correction. (Or bad contrast, and both ends of scale or middle are gone.) Once corrected, the middle greys might shift or vanish.

Bad contrast or exposure in an original are almost never recoverable. I would go the art route, and apply techniques to create something impressionable. Commercial art, in other words, not photography at that point. I would only do that if I thought I was losing an original exposure that I wanted really bad.


www.freezeframe.photo

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ShamusMcFly
Junior Member
22 posts
Joined Jul 2009
Location: NJ, USA
     
Aug 19, 2009 20:45 |  #2

Well, there is no point of reference, but... I don't know how to react to that.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
alabama1980
Goldmember
Avatar
1,213 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Mar 2008
Location: Gadsden, AL
     
Aug 19, 2009 20:49 |  #3

Was the title of the thread the predicted reaction to the thread itself?


Name's Andy! :)
Facebook (external link)
My 500px (external link)
asheltonphoto.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
yogestee
"my posts can be a little colourful"
Avatar
13,845 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 41
Joined Dec 2007
Location: Australia
     
Aug 19, 2009 20:55 |  #4

CliffordPhotography wrote in post #8490009 (external link)
Pulled from another forum

Dang, I wish it did. I'd have done much better in those graduate level B&W courses at OSU. (All those are gone now, sad.) Unfortunately it's the two extremes of the grey scale that suffer, and have to be corrected, without the lose of the middle greys.

When checking a photo, it was always the highlights and shadows that I checked first. If I thought I could bring out more detail, then it was probably originally over saturated or under saturated and required correction. (Or bad contrast, and both ends of scale or middle are gone.) Once corrected, the middle greys might shift or vanish.

Bad contrast or exposure in an original are almost never recoverable. I would go the art route, and apply techniques to create something impressionable. Commercial art, in other words, not photography at that point. I would only do that if I thought I was losing an original exposure that I wanted really bad.

What the writer is saying is to evalute print quality in a B/W print you look at the shadow areas and highlight areas.. Blacks must be black and whites must be white.. Shadows must have some detail as do the highlights.. If the print is printed on the correct grade of paper, the negative exposure/development is correct, the print is developed correctly you should have blacks, whites and a full range of grey tones..

"Expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights"


Jurgen
50D~EOS M50 MkII~EOS M~G11~S95~GoPro Hero4 Silver
http://www.pbase.com/j​urgentreue (external link)
The Title Fairy,, off with her head!!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FreezeFramePhto
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,130 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 15
Joined Sep 2006
Location: Columbus, Ohio
     
Aug 19, 2009 21:00 |  #5

Thank you, yoge


www.freezeframe.photo

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FreezeFramePhto
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,130 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 15
Joined Sep 2006
Location: Columbus, Ohio
     
Aug 19, 2009 21:01 |  #6

How about 256 shades of grey? I thought there were only 11? 0 to X


www.freezeframe.photo

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
yogestee
"my posts can be a little colourful"
Avatar
13,845 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 41
Joined Dec 2007
Location: Australia
     
Aug 19, 2009 21:32 |  #7

CliffordPhotography wrote in post #8490166 (external link)
How about 256 shades of grey? I thought there were only 11? 0 to X

256 shades of grey is a computer screen thing..

Talking only about a silver based image/print the numbers of shades of grey is dependant on many things.. Film format, exposure, development, printing grade, paper type, developer etc etc..

Depending on what combinations you use from the above will effect the tonal range of a print.. Example a 4x5 negative printed on fibre based paper will give you a longer tonal range than a 35mm negative printed on multigrade paper..

I truely don't know how many shades of grey are possible in a silver based image..I'd say infinite.. Anyone??

0 to X is the exposure factor,,the Zone System and shouldn't be confused with print tonal range..


Jurgen
50D~EOS M50 MkII~EOS M~G11~S95~GoPro Hero4 Silver
http://www.pbase.com/j​urgentreue (external link)
The Title Fairy,, off with her head!!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

1,105 views & 0 likes for this thread, 4 members have posted to it.
Im not sure what to make of this
FORUMS Community Talk, Chatter & Stuff General Photography Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Forums   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset   •  Home

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.58forum software
version 2.58 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Monkeytoes
1369 guests, 177 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.