I'm at the point now where spending more on camera equipment - lenses specifically - would be a waste of time until I get a handle on my development times and e.i.

So I'm going to buy a densitometer.

Anyone out there have some wise words on buying my first and hopefully only densitometer? What should I look for and what should I avoid. Any thoughts on price would be appreciated.

thanks!

-- David Parmet (dparmet@bestweb.net), November 08, 1999

Answers

I'm no densitometer pro, but bought a used X-rite 810TR. It's a super machine, but I'd never be able to afford a new one. You need to be able to do both transmission and reflection to really accomplish much, and you need color if that's what you're into (I'm not). If you want to measure 35mm frame details, you need a really small aperture. My 4mm aperture is useless for that, but I only measure relatively large area step tablets and the like. I happen to be a "measurement guy", but my conclusion after using this for a while is that you can do everything you need without a densitometer- you just have to use your brain harder! Before spending a fortune, spend a little on some step tablets and a nice size ten step reflection standard like the Kodak (or make one). Place these in some photos and look at the results. It should be pretty easy to determine where you need to go with your E.I. and development. The next thing you'll find is that perfectly reproducing the scene values won't necessarily get you the photograph you want.

-- Conrad Hoffman (choffman@rpa.net), November 08, 1999.

David, Conrad is correct. You don't need a densitometer to calibrate your negatives and printing. A good denistometer is expensive, and a poor one isn't worth spit. If you want it to do both transmission and reflected measurement, and do them well, it will be in the thousands of dollars. Further, you can't just buy one, turn it on, put a print or negative on it and get results that mean anything. You have to learn both technique and theory to get results and interpret them properly. True, there are conditions where a good densitometer is worth its weight in platinum, but for 99.9999% of home and commercial work, it isn't worth it. Pure overkill. There is lots of help available in getting your processes and prints where you want them. Lots of books starting with gool ol' AA, and going to Z??. If I had the price of a good densitometer, I would spendi it on better lenses, or lighting or other more productive photo uses. Or maybe even pay some bills.....

-- Richard Newman (rnewman@snip.net), November 08, 1999.

I'll rephrase...

I've been using a densitometer at SVA to determine EI and development times and I'm planning on purchasing one to use at home for the same tasks since I can't always get access to the one at SVA.

I don't do color.

Any suggestions? Brands? Price is not a criteria, quality is.

-- David Parmet (dparmet@bestweb.net), November 08, 1999.

Well alrighty then, I'd head on over to the X-rite site at www.xrite.com/homepage.asp and see which one you like. They're built well, have software calibration, and a PC interface if you really want to go wild. What kind are you using now? A good argument can be made to go with what you know, unless there's something about it you don't like.

-- Conrad Hoffman (choffman@rpa.net), November 08, 1999.

Hi David,

>> Brands? Price is not a criteria, quality is. <<

I'll take you at your word on this. I have always considered the Macbeth units to be top of the line for general photographic use. I truly don't know if X-rite is any lesser a unit, though. Choosing between these on a quality basis is probably pointless for your application. I presume you want to do both transmission and reflection. I would highly recommend both the X-rite 810TR series and the Macbeth TR924. Two advantages to the Macbeth are the remote reflection probe for large prints (the X-rite 810 requires you to get the print within it's built in head) and the availability of different apertures (I think) for transmission. You need to check on this, but from my fuzzy memory, I think they come standard with a 3 or 4mm measuring aperture, but 2mm (and possibly 1mm) apertures are available. These would be useful for trying to read, for example, flesh highlight densities on a 35mm neg. If, as Conrad pointed out, you are just reading step wedges, aperture size is not an issue.

Both these units come normally equipped with 3 color responses plus the visual response. You would use the visual response for B&W. Both instruments come with serial interfaces. Note that the visual response does not necessarily match any real photo material in spectral response, so odd processes (with color casts) might not be accurately represented. Both these people are now making small spectrophotometer units, also.

I don't have much experience outside of these two brands. Here's a site for Macbeth. http://www.gretagmacbeth.com/photo.htm

-- fstop (bcarriel@cpicorp.com), November 09, 1999.

I mean from Bill C

-- Bill C (bcarriel@cpicorp.com), November 09, 1999.

denistometers, cont.

Anyone have any experience using the Heiland TRD2? Seems to have what I'm looking for.

tia

-- David Parmet (dparmet@bestweb.net), November 09, 1999.