Digital BW, The Print

Hi all,

I took another look at the specs on the 810 and found that it also 
measures transmissive densities. Now, since I assume everyone is 
using paper, why would it be a good idea to pay for this extra 
functionality? Also, I recently learned that photographic 
densitometers are calibrated for photo dyes (CYM) instead of process 
dyes (CMY) so doesn't this also present a problem?

Thanks
Dimitri Katsaros

Dimitri,

the 810 happens to be a commonly found unit in the used market, that's why 
it's popular. Otherwise, as you note, the extra transparency features are not 
particularly useful - unless you also process your own film and have an 
interest in calibrating that aspect of your photography.
As for the dyes, you are right again: these are densitometers, not spectros and 
they are meant for photo dyes. But in the case of digital bw printing the 810 is 
mostly used in  so-called "visual" mode, ie. it doesn't report color values but 
overall density. 
It is currently cheaper to buy a used 810 than a bw reflective-only 
densitometer with similar specs; i.e. one that is as consistent in its readings 
over time, as solidly built and as capable of reading into the deep shadows as 
the 810.  
The Eye One is the next step up, perhaps, but at  3 or 4 times the expense. It 
makes sense if one is also calibrating digital color  processes.

Antonis



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Dimitri Katsaros" 
<dcka@y...> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> I took another look at the specs on the 810 and found that it also 
> measures transmissive densities. Now, since I assume everyone is 
> using paper, why would it be a good idea to pay for this extra 
> functionality? Also, I recently learned that photographic 
> densitometers are calibrated for photo dyes (CYM) instead of process 
> dyes (CMY) so doesn't this also present a problem?
> 
> Thanks
> Dimitri Katsaros