>Tom, could you say in summary what makes the system fail in higher contrast
>situation? Can't one reduce the development time to reduce the contrast?
>I am suspecting there might be a problem from my experience with enlarging
>from b/w negative, but I would like to know what kind of problem you had to
>see if it is the same.
The problem is that the original transparency film go to a very low
contrast in either "extreme" highlights (above zone 7 or 2 stops over
exposure) or in "extreme" shadows (below zone 3 or 2 stops underexposure).
The "awful" in my original post refered to a lack of contrast. A bad case
of shoulder and toe! Often the transparency will look good, but the only
real differences in these "extremes" are slight color clues, not density
differences. My putting "extreme" in parenthesis is a bit of sarcasm.
Many of us would go beyond these limits without much thought, if shooting
B&W negative film.
This problem can't be solved by changing the enlarged negative's
development. If you extended the development enough to get contrast in
these "extremes", your overall contrast would be huge. You can "pull" the
transparency film, which will very slightly lower it's overall contrast.
Unfortunately I've found this of so little value, as to be a waste of time.
Fuji(??) has a new "low contrast portrait" transparency called Sensia(??)
I've been meaning to try.
Some might be tempted (as I was) to try the Agfa B&W positive film
(Scalia??). This material is even more high contrast with worse toe and
shoulder problems than typical E-6 color transparency film.
But don't take me as being overly negative about my own system. It works
great in low or mid contrast situations!
firstname.lastname@example.org (Tom Ferguson)