Replacing Agfa FB...

Yes, I do a bit of both.

First, with flashing, you can do a partial flash - that is, flash part
of the paper (using a sheet of cardboard waved under the flashing
enlarger). You can even deliberately lightly fog part of the paper
(post exposure) in its easel (in which case, as an aesthetic matter,
you will be relying on other parts of the print for true white).
However, you don't get the precision you can with burning - because you
can't see the image when you're doing it.

Secondly, flashing and burning are conceptually different. Flashing
(in effect) increases the sensitivity of the paper - primarily
affecting the printing of the highlights. Burning has a more uniform
effect - increasing shadows, mid tones and highlights.

Regards
Gareth

Flashing is ridiculous. Why bother with safelights then?

wrote:
Yes, I do a bit of both.

First, with flashing, you can do a partial flash - that is, flash part
of the paper (using a sheet of cardboard waved under the flashing
enlarger). You can even deliberately lightly fog part of the paper
(post exposure) in its easel (in which case, as an aesthetic matter,
you will be relying on other parts of the print for true white).
However, you don't get the precision you can with burning - because you
can't see the image when you're doing it.

Secondly, flashing and burning are conceptually different. Flashing
(in effect) increases the sensitivity of the paper - primarily
affecting the printing of the highlights. Burning has a more uniform
effect - increasing shadows, mid tones and highlights.

Regards
Gareth

UC spake thus:

Flashing is ridiculous. Why bother with safelights then?

Well, as ridiculous as flashing may be (I think it probably is), there's
a difference between it, which is at least under the user's control, and
fogging due to non-safe light, which isn't.

wrote:

Yes, I do a bit of both.

First, with flashing, you can do a partial flash - that is, flash part
of the paper (using a sheet of cardboard waved under the flashing
enlarger). You can even deliberately lightly fog part of the paper
(post exposure) in its easel (in which case, as an aesthetic matter,
you will be relying on other parts of the print for true white).
However, you don't get the precision you can with burning - because you
can't see the image when you're doing it.

Secondly, flashing and burning are conceptually different. Flashing
(in effect) increases the sensitivity of the paper - primarily
affecting the printing of the highlights. Burning has a more uniform
effect - increasing shadows, mid tones and highlights.


--
If the United States government, with all its capacity to collect
and interpret information, did not see Hamas doing very well in the
Palestinian election in the wake of these other Islamist victories,
then it is either willfully blind or totally incompetent—-
and neither possibility is a very comforting thought.

- Rami G. Khouri, editor at large of the Beirut-based _Daily Star_

I come back to what I said originally

- fine printers do use flashing

- it is different in use and effect to burning

- before you dismiss it, you should try it! Properly!

Cheers
Gareth

"Gareth" schreef in bericht
oups.com...
| I come back to what I said originally
|
| - fine printers do use flashing
as they use soft burning-in
|
| - it is different in use and effect to burning
.... with the same filter as the one you printed with, whereas burning with
#00 is to my feeling very close to flashing. I'd call it flashing with the
negative itself serving as a 'mask', hence much more accurate.

|
| - before you dismiss it, you should try it! Properly!
.... just as one should try soft burning. I never need flashing anymore.

|
| Cheers
| Gareth
|

BTW - ever tried soft or hard flashing?
If you never heard of it, just read "Way beyond monochrome" by Ralph W.
Lambrecht & Chris Woodhouse. Recommended!

have fun printing!