Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/02/11

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] re: does process matter
From: kcarney1 at cox.net (Ken Carney)
Date: Mon Feb 11 16:47:13 2008

The newer photographers probably wonder how "unsharp mask" got its name.
There is little new under the sun.  I have seen large silver prints made
with an unsharp mask that would make you run for sunglasses.

Ken

> -----Original Message-----
> From: lug-bounces+kcarney1=cox.net@leica-users.org [mailto:lug-
> bounces+kcarney1=cox.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of Lottermoser George
> Sent: Monday, February 11, 2008 3:43 PM
> To: Leica Users Group
> Subject: Re: [Leica] re: does process matter
> 
> There was actually a time when I did a few pin registered masks in
> the enlarger for contrast control.
> Also played with making new master negatives so wouldn't have to redo
> the dodging and burning in a print edition.
> Also did pencil retouching on negatives for portraits.
> 
> 
> On Feb 11, 2008, at 1:14 PM, H. Ball Arche wrote:
> 
> > I always thought of 'stripping' as the beginning of PS: rubylith
> > overlays, pin registered sheets of goldenrod, opaqueing ink, exacto
> > knives, etc.
> 
> Fond regards,
> George
> george@imagist.com
> www.imagist.com
> http://www.imagist.com/blog
> Picture A Week - www.imagist.com/paw_07
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information


In reply to: Message from imagist3 at mac.com (Lottermoser George) ([Leica] re: does process matter)