Darkroom Printing Secrets

[brusby]

Me too.

I find that having to put things into words forces me to think through the whole concept more thoroughly and hopefully logically.

 

[Erik van Straten]

Yes, I've seen your Flickr, very professionally done, wonderful girls. They are clearly very happy with your pictures.

Erik.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/erik_van_straten/

 

[brusby]

Thank you Erik. Just doing it mostly for fun these days after literally not touching a camera for almost forty years.

Very nice photos you have on your Flickr too!

 

[Erik van Straten]

Thanks Brusby! I started with photography at the age of 12, 54 years ago. I started with printing; shooting came later.

Erik.

from 1971, my oldest picture on Flickr.

 

[brusby]

Nice. We apparently shared parallel paths.

One of my earliest from about '70. This girl -- my then girlfriend -- had just given me my first camera and we were in the park trying to learn how to do all natural light portraits. I was finding out how easy it is to have backgrounds blow out when exposing for faces in strong backlight.

park 4a by Brusby, on Flickr

 

[Erik van Straten]

Very nice portrait! Lovely girl! I've seen the picture before, I do not remember where.

In 1971 I was admitted to the art academy, the Gerrit Rietveld Academie in Amsterdam. After the base year I went in 1972 to the photography department. I made this portrait during a kind of work meeting. I forgot her name, I discovered the picture in my files recently, I call her now Maria.

Erik.

 

[ACullen]

Thanks to everyone for this fascinating discussion. The message I take away is find a printing style and method that suits your shots and be prepared to stand up and justify your choices. I've really admired Erik's photos but never really considered their contrast at all but enjoyed their relaxed mood and pictorial qualities. Equally I can see Corran's point that SF is not magic.

I think i'll continue to try SF prints particularly for prints where D&B in varying grades will be required.

 

[Erik van Straten]

What happens when you develop at higher temperature? Isn't it just done more quickly? Do you get adverse effects?

No, the exposed parts will get an extra developement (will become darker) so the gradation curve becomes too steep. Doing things quickly is not good for analogue photography.

When you want a special effect it is good to experiment. Try developing TriX in Eukobrom or Dektol @ 30 degrees C. You'll be back in the 1960's.


Erik.

 

[retinax]

No, the exposed parts will get an extra developement (will become darker) so the gradation curve becomes too steep. Doing things quickly is not good for analogue photography.

When you want a special effect it is good to experiment. Try developing TriX in Eukobrom or Dektol @ 30 degrees C. You'll be back in the 1960's.


Erik.

I thought this was about paper, which is normally developed to completion. This thread is about printing after all. But maybe he indeed thought about film.

 

[Erik van Straten]

I thought this was about paper, which is normally developed to completion. This thread is about printing after all. But maybe he indeed thought about film.

I guess you are right.

Silver gelatine paper is not so critical. I always develop 3 minutes. In my darkroom is automatic temperature control: 20 degrees C.

I use Eukobrom. Also the dilution of the developer is not very critical, but the developer must be strong enough. You are right, paper is always developed until the very end. That's important. For silver gelatine paper 3 minutes is enough.

Erik.

 

[Erik van Straten]

With an intermediate filter grade, you are exposing the soft and hard layers simultaneously. With split grade, one after the other. Makes no difference for the result in a straight print, just different workflows.

But this is wrong, because with split grade printing there are two exposures, each of them with a different filter. These exposures are also different from each other in time, usually with filter 00 long and with filter 5 short. By varying these times you influence the gradation of the print. That's the whole idea behind split grade printing. When only one (intermediate) filter is used there is only one exposure so the gradation cannot vary.

Sounds more complicated than it is.

Erik.

 

[brusby]

There is one issue I'm very curious about regarding split grade printing as it is done by those who don't use dodging and burning. I think I know the answer but I always prefer to verify by testing. If I still had a darkroom I'd try to answer it myself, but I don't. A simple test could provide the answer.

The issue is this: what happens to the darkest and lightest tones if the SOLE concern in making the print is achieving the most accurate or most pleasing mid tones with proper contrast.

As I understand the way some use split printing process, the choice of exposure times devoted to each of the 2 filter types is determined by whatever is required to get proper shadow and highlight details.

So my question is what happens if/when the optimum times needed for the best shadow and highlight detail are different from those that would produce the best midrange tones and contrasts?

If anyone is open for testing, I'd suggest making a print where the darkest and lightest tones are disregarded completely and the only consideration is producing the most beautiful, or accurate, or correct (choose your preferred quality) midrange tones and midrange contrast.

Only after doing that, evaluate that print for shadow and highlight details to see if those values are optimum or not.

 

[Erik van Straten]

No, this won't work, because in the world of tones everything is relative. You can not see a tone by itself, a tone is always created by the tones around it. Like music.

The funny thing about a halftone is that when it is next to black, it appears light, but when it is next to white, it appears dark.

Goethe has already said this in his Farbenlehre (Color theory), but every art painter knows this (or should know this).

If I understand what you are saying.

When the exposure in split grade is done with the 00 filter only, the image appears very soft and flat, but when the exposure is also done with the 5-filter, then, besides black, all kinds of grays appear in an unexpected way. That is a bit like wizardry. Of course you will not see that miracle if you only see the finished print.

Erik.

 

[brusby]

It's true that things are relative. But that doesn't mean different parts of the tonal range can't be evaluated and/or acted on independently from others. For traditional printing, a contrast grade and exposure times are usually selected first to bring out the best mid range tones. Then, if any shadow or highlight values exceed the range of the paper selected, dodging and burning is typically done to correct.

If no dodging or burning of highlights and shadows were permitted, it would often require a compromise in the optimum exposure and contrast for midrange values in order to compensate for highlight and shadow exposures.

But in a very real sense, for most prints, the lionshare of info is in the middle values or mid tones. With traditional printing, I could easily make a print that gets global contrast and exposure correct for most mid tones.

Are you saying that's not possible with split printing to make a test print where the main concern is mid range exposure and best contrast?

 

[Corran]

When only one (intermediate) filter is used there is only one exposure so the gradation cannot vary.

I'll chime in once more here. Erik can print however he likes, and if he likes mud, he can have mud.

But, Erik is simply wrong here about how S/F printing works. I will say it again - any combination of 00 and 5 filtration exposures still can be exactly replicated by a given single exposure using an intermediate filter. Admittedly, the equivalent intermediate filter might be "3.63," but a 3.5 filter should be near enough as to be functionally equivalent.

Consider these addition problems:

1+1+1+1+1+10 = 15
5+5+5 = 15

In this example, "1" is the #00 filter, "10" is the #5 filter, and "5" is a #3 filter. Both equations equal the same despite using different numbers in different amounts. This is how S/F printing works.

As for burning and dodging...S/F printing still does not preclude the need for it. Just because you used enough 00 filtration to bring down the highlights to a reasonable level doesn't mean the rest of the scene (midtones) are where you would want them to be. It's like color filters on b&w - darker red filters can be used to push down the sky tonality but if it's simply too bright - like say during the sunset - you'll still have to burn in the sky (or use a GND, which is pre-exposure dodging of the sky to lower the exposure).

All of these techniques are useful for different reasons, and one may choose to use them how they see fit. The use of burning and dodging is a separate issue altogether. Insisting on not using it is comparable to the adherence of some digital photographers to a "SOOC" jpg as some kind of standard.

 

[BernardL]

The issue is this: what happens to the darkest and lightest tones if the SOLE concern in making the print is achieving the most accurate or most pleasing mid tones with proper contrast.

If anyone is open for testing, I'd suggest making a print where the darkest and lightest tones are disregarded completely and the only consideration is producing the most beautiful, or accurate, or correct (choose your preferred quality) midrange tones and midrange contrast.

Only after doing that, evaluate that print for shadow and highlight details to see if those values are optimum or not.

+1 !!
I used to agonize over placing the lightest and darkest part of the picture at their respective ends of the paper's reproduction curve. Now I give priority to the global rendering, including midtones (placement, contrast), and possibly dark and light values insofar as they are significant for the picture as a whole. Sometimes one should let a deep shadow take care of itself (but then make sure it's maximum paper black, not muddy black). Ditto for specular highlights.

And, of course, there may be several interpretations of the same negative. <insert here AA quote>

Asides.

• As said by others, split grade is a means to achieve results similar to filters. Except for 1/4 grades or selective dodging using different grade; another story.
• Mutigrade does not consist of hard/soft emulsions, but two (or three) emulsions with variable (according to blue/green mix) overlap of their D-logE curves.

 

[brusby]

Now I give priority to the global rendering, including midtones (placement, contrast), and possibly dark and light values insofar as they are significant for the picture as a whole.

That's my normal approach too. Prioritize by getting the most important things right first and clean up the rest by dodging, burning or sometimes printing part of the image with a different contrast grade filter.

What I probably didn't make clear is that the purpose of this exercise is just to see how much the best achievable midrange tones have to be compromised, if any, by trying to optimize shadow and highlight details in the same printing exposure(s).

And fiinally, I'd like to make clear I'm not criticizing anyone for their choice of process, whether it is split printing or dodging and burning or whatever.. 'Just don't know of another way to discuss the advantages and drawbacks of the process without it seeming like a personal slight. It's not. I respect everyone's choices, even if they wouldn't be mine.

edit: just did an experiment on 3 outtakes from an older session that I thought might be well suited to a digital approximation of the analog split printing process. Main exposure was made very low contrast. I'll just put a small thumbnail here because the images are nsfw. But full size images are available by clicking on the link.

_MG_8553 by Brusby, on Flickr

 

[Erik van Straten]

But, Erik is simply wrong here about how S/F printing works. I will say it again - any combination of 00 and 5 filtration exposures still can be exactly replicated by a given single exposure using an intermediate filter.

I you can do this, it is OK with me - everyone is entitled to his or her illusions - but for me this is physically and logically impossible, as I have explained above. You do not take in account de difference in exposure time that is possible with the different filters - the 00 and the 5. If you use one filter, then there is only one exposure time. If you use two filters, then you have two exposure times. That creates endlessly more possibilities.

Show me your results if you do not agree.

Erik.

 

[Erik van Straten]

That's my normal approach too. Prioritize by getting the most important things right first and clean up the rest by dodging, burning or sometimes printing part of the image with a different contrast grade filter.

This creates more problems than it solves. It is physically impossible to burn and dodge on various parts on the image in this way. First: many, many test strips are necessary. Second: you can not make two prints alike. This is practically impossible to do. Why doing so difficult? Split grade printing is much easier and is logically coherent. You can make twenty prints for 100% the same if you want.

These are typically thoughts of people that have not been in a darkroom for ages.

Erik.

 

[Erik van Straten]

The issue is this: what happens to the darkest and lightest tones if the SOLE concern in making the print is achieving the most accurate or most pleasing mid tones with proper contrast.

As I understand the way some use split printing process, the choice of exposure times devoted to each of the 2 filter types is determined by whatever is required to get proper shadow and highlight details.

As I have explained above: there are no midtones that can live by themselves. Always other tones are necessary. It is useless to think about a part of a picture separate from other parts. A picture is a whole.

Erik.