First of all, I never said that B&W negative didn't have a decent exposure latitude. However, similar results aren't exact results. The difference between a good photograph and a great photograph is found in the subtleties. While a film may have a wide exposure latitude, there is very little latitude for precise exposure - the exposure needed to get exactly what you want on the film. If you're willing to accept the results from three different exposures, then you're just not a very critical photographer, and you make my point. You're willing to accept the results you get rather than to expose and develop for a very precise result.
"J. C. O'Connell" wrote: > > > I don't think a good exposure is easier to produce with B&W negative > > film. There are those who feel that they can allow for the film's > > latitude to cover their exposure errors, but, IMO, that's bullshit. > > > I just shot a roll of TMAX 100 35 for the first time in a very long time. > Since I pull the development a little I decided to bracket my exposures > at ISO 64 and ISO 125. To my suprise the was a very subtle difference > between the resulting negatives. I ended up using the 125 for printing, > but still could have gotten vary similar results with the ISO 64 negs. > Some B&W negs film DO have a wide exposure latitude. -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/ http://home.earthlink.net/~belinkoff/darkroom-rentals/index.html - 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 .
