So if I've got my enlarger set up to make a 6x4 print, but then I cut down the intensity of the light (but increase the exposure time accordingly) I'll end up with a print with lower contrast?
> Pretty darned good analogy Bruce. Perhaps somewhat more like a photograph, > imagine putting an image on the deflated balloon (the balloon being much like > the negative in this case) and then blow up the balloon. You'll see the image > degrade as the balloon grows in size (like a print would degrade) > > Now, let's put an image on a partially inflated balloon, and then blow it up > further. The image still degrades, but the balloon has to be blown up bigger > to get the same degree of degradation you would with the image from the > deflated balloon. > > HTH, > > Shel > > > Bruce Dayton wrote: > > > Hello John, > > > > >From what I've observed, it seems a bit more like the balloon concept. > > Before you blow up a balloon, the color is quite rich and dark. The > > more air you put in (enlarge), the color gets thinner. I would > > suspect that the same holds true to some degree with enlarging. > > Because you are not enlarging the big negative as much, it would > > appear a bit richer than the small negative. This is just an > > observation, rather than a known fact. > > >
