Digital BW, The Print

Steve,

I agree. There are so many subtle differences in lighting, paper and 
most importantly human eyeballs and the eyeball-to-brain connection. 
The very slight differences need to be ignored.

I tend to be very sensitive to print color when I am in the middle of 
working on a print, silver included. If I revisit a print some time 
later, I no longer see many of the slight differences in contrast, 
exposure or tonal shift that seemed so importantly large when I was 
originally working on it!

I think that as you get very close to a true neutral gray tiny, tiny 
shifts in tone become much more noticeable. My though is that if the 
inks were a little farther from neutral these shifts would not be 
visible. So I will take a shot at the VM inks and try to stop being 
overly particular. No guarantees on the latter!

Martin




--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., sdmey4@a... wrote:
> In a message dated 08/25/2001 11:37:51 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
> mwesley250@e... writes:
> 
> << I believe this is counter to what Steve reported recently that 
the 
>  MIS prints looked greener than Piezo prints in daylight, so 
perhaps I 
>  am color blind after all. Or if both MIS and Piezo have metamerism 
>  perhaps it is in the opposite directions. 
> YES!
>   >>
> This is on Royal plush paper With Standard Hextone MIS inks. The 
MIS is still 
> greenish looking compared to the Piezo print in daylight. You cold 
ALMOSTsay 
> the reverse in Tungsten Light. The variety of what eyes are seeing 
is 
> probably the tone and nature of the photo. If my image was heavy in 
the black 
> tones you wouldn't see it. Lots of mid and light tones then yes!  
Since we 
> are all looking at different pictures is probably nothing to be 
stressing 
> about.