Roy, what I was referring to, particularly with regard to the Zone System, was not the increase of contrast but the expansion of the tonal range. Almighty Ansel did this, as did I, with quite favorable results using B/W neg film. In my experiments, the tone/detail WAS there; the resulting images had considerably more detail in the shadow areas, as well as in the highlights. Without going too heavily into the process, I used an expanded-tonal-range treatment (as prescribed in Chris Johnson's elaborate description of the Zone System) in the developing process (using PMK, or "Pyro" developer), then giving the print a delicious bath in good ol' selenium toner, which expanded the tonal range even more. No burning, no dodging, but I was still looking at a representation on paper of what was about a 9-stop difference in the real world. Unfortunately, though, the overly convenient subject matter (the rear of my parked car, complete with my "35TO4X5" license tag) made for an uninteresting image apart from the lack of blown-out highlights or loss of shadow texture. This deviates a bit from my original question, which was aimed primarily at ascertaining the maximum tonal range of a print (whether digital or chemical) and how it relates to the ability of the capture device. As analogies go, I suppose this is loosely sort of like shooting with a 12- or 16-bit CCD and being limited to an 8-bit printer. In short, where are the limits of print blackness in relation to a "pure" (read: 93% reflectance, for example) white paper? Yours very truly, Darin Heinz Melbourne, Florida USA See my photographs online at http://www.darinheinz.com ----- Original Message ----- From: PhotoRoy6@xxxxxxx <snip> I don't think you can create tones/detail which are not there. At least not with Photoshop 7.0 You can make something more contrasty but you are just stretching out the tones you got. </snip>
