Split grade printing. Useful?

[fidget]

I am a relative beginner in the darkroom, I'm getting a little better at visualising and then putting together what I want in my prints (it's a learning curve which operates bit by bit, but is very satisfying).
I wondered about split grade printing and have read several posts and articles about it, these sometimes contradict each other. For example, I read that any split grade exposure can be replaced by an appropriate other single grade exposure. I can understand this, I guess that this would use the average.
OTOH, I read with interest how, for example, weak highlights can be teased out of a poor neg at the lowest grade, for fairly long exposures, then a high grade used to build in the shadows and mid tones. I can understand this too!
I am not trying to compare or confuse this with good dodging and burning techniques, some negs area little too complicated for dodging and burning fine detail.
Is there a simple routine that I might use to try this out?
Is it useful?

Dave

 

[kaiyen]

I think that what's really being said is that not every print needs to be split-filtered. There are some that will print fine with a single filter, exposed once, with dodging and burning. Having said that, a friend of mine who is a fine printer split filters all the time, because he can sometimes get more highlight detail out of it, and has more control over the intensity of the shadows. He just figures that if some don't need it, but some do, he might as well do it all the time.

allan

 

[fidget]

I should add that as a beginner, I get a good proportion of thin, high contrast negs that might benefit from a little split grade printing.
My guess is that a single grade exposure might not expose the highlights enough, due to the property of the paper which tolerates some exposure before any actual change takes place, so needing a pre-flashing type of remedy, is that what this is?

 

[kaiyen]

Fidget,
First, some terminology. A high contrast negative cannot, by definition, be thin. At least not in the general sense. A high contrast negative has high density in the highlights, and traditionally that is a thick negative. Now, what I think you mean is that you don't have enough shadow detail, and therefore the negative is "thin" specifically in the shadows. Yes?

I haven't done a ton of wet printing so I'll leave this to others for the real nitty-gritty. Pre-flashing will help, but I think a good start would be to try split-filtering to see the difference. You will get be able to be a lot more aggressive on your times to get highlight detail because the low contrast filter is adding so little at a time.

allan

 

[drewbarb]

There's a lot of noise about split filtered printing out there. Of course there's a lot of really good information, but I have found that there's a lot of B.S. too. For instance:

... I read that any split grade exposure can be replaced by an appropriate other single grade exposure.

Dave

This is only true with a very small minority of negatives. Remember, print results are always a combination of materials and technique. Modern variable contrast papers are capable of producing a range of tones which exceeds what can be produced through a single contrast filter with 95% of negatives out there. Without covering the same territory we got into in another thread within the last 24 hours, I will just say that split-filter printing is a very useful technique, and when employed properly will almost always yeild prints which show a greater range of detail and tonal separation than prints made with simpler techniques.

Is there a simple routine that I might use to try this out?
Is it useful?
Dave

Check out the thread on MG vs. Graded papers- sorry I'm to lame to figure out how to post a link at the minute. Good luck!

 

[drewbarb]

One other great thing about split filter printing- it completely obviates the need for pre-flashing, which is a technique I simply can't stand- it's too heavy handed and clumsy!

 

[fidget]

Alan and drewbarb,
thanks for the explanations, sorry to labour you with newbie questions, which you've probably responded to many times.
I believe that I understand this better now, particularly since you mention that it can be an alternative to pre-flashing, as I couldn't easily understand how it could be wildly useful in addition to pre-flashing. So, on my next darkroom session, I will take my thin...er, poor neg and experiment. Thanks.
Dave...

 

[Tim Gray]

Not that I'm a master printer or that I've used split grade printing, but from what I understand, you *can* duplicate the results of split grade printing with a single exposure at a single grade. This however is assuming 2 things - you can get the appropriate grade (must use a VC head or a color head that lets you get in between settings) and that you can actually find the right grade and exposure.

This is an academic argument though. In reality, while you can achieve the same results with normal printing as you can split-grade, it might be much easier and faster to do it the split-grade method (or vice versa).

Here's some good info at APUG:
http://www.apug.org/forums/forum41/33142-splitgrade-vs-single-filter.html

 

[markinlondon]

I'm a yes and no person on this one. I sometimes use it for very contrasty negatives where it seems to work well. I use it much less now my negatives are more "normal". I think the only thing to do is try it and see if you prefer the results.

 

[markinlondon]

Incidentally, split filter printing is mentioned in my early '50's Ilford Manual of Photography as a way to use multigrade paper (invented 1940).

 

[sepiareverb]

I often use a very short second exposure at grade 5 to really set a good black tone in the deepest shadows- most recently an image of a railing against a very bright white and yellow wall, with some dark wood stairs below. I printed a touch soft to get good separation between the white and the yellow, and to keep the stairs from getting too dark. The second exposure of .8 seconds was just enough to take the railing back to a complete black.

A tool. I don't use it always, but nice to know how when it's needed. I make the best print I can say grade 2, forgetting about trying to keep the deep black tone, then run a strip of paper at that time/grade 2. This strip is then left in the easel, the filter is brought up to G5 and I run a test strip on that same sheet, in the same place at .2 or .3 second steps. The final print then gets two exposures, and I get all the highlight detail I want and a maximum black. Again, this isn't for every print, but it can sure save a lot of time tweaking exposure & development time.

 

[PlantedTao]

I think that what's really being said is that not every print needs to be split-filtered. There are some that will print fine with a single filter, exposed once, with dodging and burning......
allan

Some of my prints have benefited greatly from split filter. The only way I have been able to determine is by doing test prints. I'm a beginner too, so I go thru lots of test strips, but it has helped the learning curve.
Do a test strip with a #2.5 and see where you are at. If it looks like you can get all you tones in on a 2 or 2.5 or 3 then use one filter.
If you are losing detail in shadow and highlights then try split filters...say a #1 and 4 at about the the correct time for the 2.5 filter...play around with the different times for the 1 & 4, splitting the time 50/50, 80/20, 20/80 and so on.
Until you have experience and a "feel", then test print often.

Also, Try using different filters (#1/2 or #5) to burn with...this has helped just as much as splitting the filters. A #5 filter takes a lot of time for results so don't be scared to burn for 20-30 seconds.

I'm still learning, so this is by no means a pro statement...but it has helped me to learn and get some really great results.

Cheers.
Jason

 

[drewbarb]

Try this- if you like the look of your prints made with a single grade, try reducing the contrast, and look at the highlights. Ignore the shadows- just make a really flat print. If your prints are good at grade 2, see how they look at grade 1- do the highlights show more detail? Greater range of delicacy? Only look at the highlights- Zones VI, VII, VIII, maybe IX. Are you getting more detail there? OK, good. Now try it at grade 0. Once you reach a low grade filtration that yeilds no more detail, you're done with the highlights- this is your filter and your exposure time. Now make a print that uses that time and filtration, and then do a grade 5 test strip over that, to find your shadow areas. Look for true blacks in your darkest areas. Now make a print with these two exposures, and see if it shows an increased range in tonality across the board vs. the print you did before at a single grade. It probably will. If not, there's no need to split filter. If you see an increase in your tonality, then use the technique.

 

[Finder]

This technique is basically used to bring the negative tonal range down to the paper. The cause is usually very dense highlights. For example, in a landscape, the land tones can print very well with a grade 3 filter, but the sun behind the clouds is still burnt out. The normal burn to try to bring out the sun/cloud detail is not possible because of the excessive contrast. So the sun/cloud burn is made with a number one filter which places the extreme tones of the highlights on the print.

So the 3 filter printed the normal tones of the landscape in the base exposure, the number 1 filter controlled the high-contrast tones in the highlights during the burn.

 

[Biggles]

Really interesting thread. Some great explanations of something I'd previously discarded because I didn't understand it.

Think I'm gonna print this thread and tape it to the darkroom wall.

 

[fidget]

Many thanks for your ideas and suggestions. I've had three darkroom sessions, trying to get a better print from some poor negatives (poor, because of over, under exposure or inappropriate development expanding the contrast).
It's been very useful and far easier than I expected. I've got much better prints from these examples, probably because I didn't spoil them through over enthusiastic burning in, most needed no burning in at all.
As you say, it doesn't suit all negatives, my "well balanced" negatives printed well on a single grade, BUT....I found myself fascinated by the ease with which I can set the highlights, then shadows and print.

Dave.....

 

[drewbarb]

As you say, it doesn't suit all negatives, my "well balanced" negatives printed well on a single grade, BUT....I found myself fascinated by the ease with which I can set the highlights, then shadows and print.

Dave.....

Dave- I'm glad you found this useful. It's a good technique- as you noticed, it will often reduce the amount of burning and dodging you need to do with tricky/contrasty negatives. But I will also say this- try it with one of your "well balanced" negatives, and see if it doesn't give you a greater range of tones into both highlights and shadows. I'm not saying you should use this technique for every print, but the better you get at it, the more you'll find it can improve the quality of many of your prints. Good luck!

drew...

 

[tetrisattack]

This is a great thread!

I'm dubious about the claim that split grade printing can yield prints otherwise impossible with a single filter. I think the origin of the claim is that you wind up with a fractional contrast that falls between the standard half-step contrast increment.

If you've ever printed b&w with a color head, you know you can dial in any arbitrary amount of blue and green light! One filter pack, one exposure.

That being said, I use split-grade techniques, though I never, ever do it with the 0 and 5 filters.

I print on a dichroic multigrade head now, made by Ilford, that only has half-grade precision, but I frequently find myself adjusting to the quarter-grade by splitting my exposure (12 seconds at grade 2.5) into two equal exposures, one half-grade apart (6 seconds at grade 2.5, 6 more seconds at grade 3, for a total of 12 @ 2.75).

The effect is the same as a split-grade print, which is to say, I obtain a fractional contrast grade, but my reasons for doing so are fundamentally different. I'm not trying to first find a grade for my shadows and then a second grade for my shadows, I'm simply noticing that the jump from 2.5 to 3 causes me to lose information, so I need something in between.


---


As a side note, I have this piece of advice to offer. Print with the lowest contrast you can get away with. Shoot and process your film to retain the maximum amount of detail from the shadows to the highlights. High contrast is for xerox machines, tonality is for the gallery wall.

 

[Bryce]

Conor-
Split grade printing in photoshop terms is like using the "curves" function to adjust contrast rather than using "contrast". My point is that you gain the ability to control contrast in the highlights separately from the contrast in the blacks.
That said, using the 2 filter method cannot make exactly the same print as say a grade 2 filter; the closest equivalent would yield similar highlights and shadows, but with midtones rendered more nearly like grade 0 than 2....
I guess one could add a third filter to control primarily the midtones, such as a grade 2, but now things are getting truly complicated. Has someone tried this? Was there a useful difference?
For the first couple of years I printed on a color head enlarger, and found it very convenient. I switched to a condenser enlarger for two reasons- I bought a 6x9 camera and couldn't live with a 6x7 enlarger any more, and I was after maximum sharpness. At least with smaller negatives, the condenser delivers noticeably sharper images, so I'm content with the current setup.
Have you continued to work with alt printing methods? I was impressed with the Van Dyke prints you brought to the local RFF meet awhile back!

 

[drewbarb]

This is a great thread!

I'm dubious about the claim that split grade printing can yield prints otherwise impossible with a single filter. I think the origin of the claim is that you wind up with a fractional contrast that falls between the standard half-step contrast increment.

This is a great thread- but as for your next point, I have to differ. It's not about trying to get "fractional contrast" between half steps, it's about expanding the print into the greatest tonal range the paper will allow, and you just can't get all the paper can yeild with just one contrast filter.

That being said, I use split-grade techniques, though I never, ever do it with the 0 and 5 filters.

Dude. You gotta try it before you know what I mean. I'm not saying it's a magic bullet, but it does work. Don't take my word, or Bryce's or anyone else's, just try it and then judge the method for yourself.