His Own Fool
Senior HTF Member
- Aug 18, 2001
- The BK
- Real Name
I agree entirely. As I've mentioned elsewhere, I've projected many nitrate prints (IB and black and white) and they do look brighter (if that's the right word) than acetate or polyester bases.
You mention "something else". Could it be acclimatisation of the eye? Project a film onto a yellow wall, for instance. The eye acclimatises in the dark and the wall appears to be white in the picture.
Don't know to what exactly RAH is refering, but from what I understand, the color quality of light can't be fully, adequately described merely by color temp, which is very 1-dimensional... though it's the most common, simplest, maybe most basic/fundamental parameter that everyone learns about first...
Remember, not all light sources behave like a true black body.
For instance, flourescent light bulbs definitely do not fit neatly into that (part of the) spectrum as I've learned from my bits of amateur photography (in the digital world). Seems Nikon (at least in the more mainstream photographic world) may have been the first (mainstream, digital) camera maker to fully acknowledge that and started implemented that into their proprietary handling of image processing -- and there was some consternation about their early attempts to encrypt that part of the data in their RAW files (seemingly in likely misguided hopes to protect their IP) about a dozen years ago.
Color (at least in light) is (at least) 3D as far as I (minimally) understand it (and your light source might actually also vary slightly/somewhat over time or at some possibly regular frequency to add another D perhaps), so you can easily miss a lot just by going w/ color temp alone...