----- Original Message ----- From: "Shel Belinkoff" Subject: Re: pushing 800 MAX 1 stop?
> Yes, I think we can agree on that, but ... if, for example we shoot a > 400 speed film at 800 and extend development because the contrast range > of the scene is low - low enough so that "underexposing" the film by a > stop there's still enough shadow density to allow for good detail, with > the extended developing time being used not so much as an attempt to > rescue lost detail but to increase the highlight density, would you > still call that a "push"? IOW, there's no real attempt to increase film > speed so much as there's an attempt to increase the contrast range - a > typical expose for the shadows/develop for the highlights scenario. Of > course, for those not familiar with all this, we're discussing B&W > negative film here. > No, I would call that proper development for the scene type, combined with taking advantage of the film's inherent latitude. We are always attempting to fit the film gamma into the paper gamma as best we can. Utilizing extended or shortened development times is the tool we use to do this. When you get right down to it, I do not recognize the legitimacy of the term "push processing", because of the implication that goes along with the term that somehow we are getting a film speed increase. Of course, I am willing to be proven wrong, and I will be attempting to do that very thing in the near future. William Robb - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
