nk.
Member
Drew: Can you give a little more info on your technique? I was taught something quite similar once and have attempted to use it a few times, but I find that I can something that looks better to my eye by adding a 2-3 filter into the mix of the 0 and 5. The way we were taught was to make a test strip print using only the 5 filter and select the exposure with the most pleasing black. Print another piece of paper using the time before the most pleasing black, stop down one stop, do a test print using the 00 filter on top of the black exposure. Select the exposure with the best tonality and go back and print using 5 first and then stopping down and using 00.
pmu
Well-known
nk. said:
That is how I've done all my printing after I discovered that tehnique. If there is something lacking on the print I would try different papers and different developers instead...
EDIT: Oh not exactly... After grade 5 I haven't stopped down. Always the same f-number with both filters, 00 and 5.
In short; split grade printing is in my experience absolutely the best way to print if you wan't to change contrast in different areas on the image.
Last edited:
drewbarb
picnic like it's 1999
nk. said:
I looked through this thread, and the one about MC vs. Graded papers, because I thought I'd laid this out, but I can't find it, so I'll try to do it again briefly.
I know lots of folks start with the grade 5, and it is easier to judge where you get blacks, and then work for good highlight detail; but I prefer to build the tones up, rather than go to black and then work my way back. I start as you should always begin printing, by examining my negative carefully on a lightbox. I look to find the areas of greatest and least density, and try to judge the overall tonality available. Then I do my first test print- not a strip, but a whole frame print (maybe half frame, if you're really stingy with paper, but you need to see a lot of the print) at grade 0 or 00. I am only looking at highlights here- I want to see the finest most delicate highlight tones in the lightest areas. This establishes the soft contrast exposure. Now I make another full print at this exposure, and then make a grade 5 test over it. This time, I'm looking at my shadow areas, trying to find how much time I need to get true black in my darkest areas, but I'm also looking at how the rest of the print is affected by this exposure. The mid tones will get some detail from each exposure, but in my experience, they will come out right. You will have to adjust certain areas (burning and maybe dodging) at each exposure, but I find it's much easier to do this in split filter printing than in single contrast printing.
The thing to remember is that the highlights and the shadows are now separate exposures, and will not affect each other except in the middle tones. I find it a more precise way to expand the tonal range to it's fullest potential to build up slowly to black. It does seem to take more practice to judge the highlights alone while the shadows all look far to light, but the final prints retain a delicacy and precision I haven't seen from any other printing method.
Hope this is helpful- feel free to PM me if you want more info.
drew...
tblanston
Member
The last post here is the most informative, I think.
When split-filter printing, I start with with my 0 or 00 (actually I'm using a colour head, but whatever) and make tests for the highlight areas of importance, for me that's commonly skin tones. I make tests starting with a shorter exposure value, gradually increasing it until I find the exposure just before I start to lose my highlights.
Then I expose the next test with that low contrast exposure, then dial in my high contrast filtration and I work on top of the first exposure until I find the optimal high contrast exposure to reach the shadows that I want. Or, true black. So each test needs to be exposed twice, just like the final print will be. You need to build on top of your first result. Sorry that I'm so terrible at explaining this...
One other thing that I'm not sure has been discussed here really, is that one of the really powerful aspects of working with multiple contrast gradiations is that you can burn or dodge during either exposure, whichever is most appropriate to the result you're trying to achieve. Actually, sometimes you might want to make a 3rd exposure with yet a different filtration if you need to be really specific with the midtones that you're trying to achieve. And knowing which filter to do that sort of burning really only comes with time and experience. If you want to burn a blown out sky in you might not necessarily want to go right down to 00 because it could come out looking too 'soupy' so something closer to the middle might be more appropriate.. If you just need a solid black in one corner a higher contrast would be better.. or ditto if you're just trying to pull some extra "pop" out of a flat looking sidewalk... There's an endless list of examples.
You've just got to go ahead and take the patience to do it, if you want to find out. Although the struggle that I always have is.. would I rather spend extra hours in the darkroom or extra hours being out somewhere where I can shoot... yargh.
Edit: Btw, statements about being able to achieve an identical exposure (to a split filter contrast exposure) by fine tweaking a single exposure with a single filtration is bogus. The reason is because with split filters you can control properties of your exposure locally. Local to particular ranges of tonality that is... If, however your split-filter exposure is 2 exposures of the same value (in seconds.. ie. 15s at 0 and 15s at 5.0) then, yes, it is probably quite possible to achieve that with a single exposure with a single filtration. Otherwise, impossible.
When split-filter printing, I start with with my 0 or 00 (actually I'm using a colour head, but whatever) and make tests for the highlight areas of importance, for me that's commonly skin tones. I make tests starting with a shorter exposure value, gradually increasing it until I find the exposure just before I start to lose my highlights.
Then I expose the next test with that low contrast exposure, then dial in my high contrast filtration and I work on top of the first exposure until I find the optimal high contrast exposure to reach the shadows that I want. Or, true black. So each test needs to be exposed twice, just like the final print will be. You need to build on top of your first result. Sorry that I'm so terrible at explaining this...
One other thing that I'm not sure has been discussed here really, is that one of the really powerful aspects of working with multiple contrast gradiations is that you can burn or dodge during either exposure, whichever is most appropriate to the result you're trying to achieve. Actually, sometimes you might want to make a 3rd exposure with yet a different filtration if you need to be really specific with the midtones that you're trying to achieve. And knowing which filter to do that sort of burning really only comes with time and experience. If you want to burn a blown out sky in you might not necessarily want to go right down to 00 because it could come out looking too 'soupy' so something closer to the middle might be more appropriate.. If you just need a solid black in one corner a higher contrast would be better.. or ditto if you're just trying to pull some extra "pop" out of a flat looking sidewalk... There's an endless list of examples.
You've just got to go ahead and take the patience to do it, if you want to find out. Although the struggle that I always have is.. would I rather spend extra hours in the darkroom or extra hours being out somewhere where I can shoot... yargh.
Edit: Btw, statements about being able to achieve an identical exposure (to a split filter contrast exposure) by fine tweaking a single exposure with a single filtration is bogus. The reason is because with split filters you can control properties of your exposure locally. Local to particular ranges of tonality that is... If, however your split-filter exposure is 2 exposures of the same value (in seconds.. ie. 15s at 0 and 15s at 5.0) then, yes, it is probably quite possible to achieve that with a single exposure with a single filtration. Otherwise, impossible.
Last edited:
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
tblanston said:
No, they're not, because...
tblanston said:
...there is no such thing as "local tonality", unless you are referring to "local" as a spatial property.
The math is actually very easy. Variocontrast paper uses two emulsions, a "soft" one sensitive to green and a "hard" one sensitive to blue. The amount of light they're getting is proportional to the exposure time and inversely proportional to (well, dependent on) the amount of filtration. Two variables. When doing split-grade printing, you expose the two separately and leave the filtration variable fixed. When doing conventional printing using filters, you expose the two at the same time, leaving the time variable fixed.
So let's say you are making a splitgrade exposure where the "green" layer gets N units of green light and the "blue" layer gets M units of blue light. (We can assume that they get green and blue light, instead of yellowish and magentaish light, because of the way subtractive colour mixing works.) As we have seen, the difference between splitgrade and ordinary printing is that in splitgrade printing you control the amount of light via the exposure time and leave the filtration fixed, while in ordinary printing you use a fixed exposure time and control the respective amounts of light through filtration. So if you want to achieve the same results as in the M/N case above, all you need to do is to select a filter (or dial in a filter value) where the ratio of green to blue is N:M, resulting in different light intensities, and print the whole thing at once, using the same exposure time for the two emulsions. Because of the different filtration values, both emulsions get exactly the units of light (in terms of intensity x time) as in the splitgrade case. You have just made a conventional print with the same gradation.
Now in reality most of us use a colour head for splitgrade printing. The most extreme intensities of green and blue light, which we use for splitgrade printing, are those when the yellow and magenta dials are set to the max. These filter values control the most extreme gradations we can get at all, splitgrade or otherwise. Let's say that the maximum gradation reachable using splitgrade printing on your colour head is 5 or so. You reach this by dialing in the most extreme value of magenta, exposing for a given amount of time, and not giving it any yellow at all. Bingo, technically just didn't do a splitgrade print at all, but a single exposure for a gradation of 5. So if your colour head or filter set doesn't allow you to reach 00 or 5, you won't get them using splitgrade printing either. The most extreme values for high and low contrast attainable using splitgrade printing are exactly the same you get using single exposure prints, because the splitgrade prints you have to do to get this are single exposure prints using maximum filtration. This being so, all the intermediate N:M ratios on the gradation scale are reachable by selecting appropriate values of yellow and magenta. Therefore, every gradation that is reachable by splitgrade printing on a colour head can be achieved conventionally by dialling in appropriate filter values and exposing both emulsions at the same time. In other words, no, you don't get access to any extra tonal range of your paper (with filters or a colour head anyway, a blue LED head is a different story), and all the intermediate gradations and all the range of contrast between these extremes can be accomplished by conventional printing, too.
Splitgrade printing does have an advantage when you want to burn and dodge the two emulsions separately. This can't be achieved at all with conventional filtration (well it can, if you dodge with a filter instead of a black mask, or if you burn with a maximum filter setting, but that's a major hassle). However, few of us actually need to do this. On the other hand, the main disadvantage of splitgrade printing is that with many enlargers you run the risk of moving the enlarger head a little bit when changing filter values, resulting in an uneven and unsharp exposure.
This is a very boring special case, because normally what you are describing is a gradation of 2 (more or less, depending on the paper), and in order to get this, you don't have to filter at all, just leave all the filters at zero.tblanston said:
EDIT: A very good introduction to splitgrade printing is http://www.darkroomagic.com/Book/BasicSplitGradePrinting.pdf (it's a book chapter). He, too, says on page 82 (p. 6 in the PDF) that "some quite distinguished photographers have made claims that the print quality obtainable with this system are [sic] unique and cannot be accomplished with any single exposure system. In retrospect, much of this is human nature and enthusiasm and otherwise due to the fact that the comparisons made between prints were not of the exact same effective contrast and exposure. So far, there has been no evidence that demonstrates a difference between a Split-Grade exposure and a single exposure print at the same ISO print contrast."
Philipp
Last edited:
canonetc
canonetc
When I want better gray scale, shadow detail AND high contrast but low grain, then split-toning is the way to go (as long as I have a good negative). I sometimes use split-tone printing if my negatives suck for some reason.
Here's my method:
1) Make two (2) 4-second test strips on multigrade paper: a) Strip 1 using a +4.5 contrast filter, then b) Strip 2 using NO filter or a +1. Aperture for both strips at f/8, time 24-32 seconds for each strip.
2) Once you have one basic "good" times for your image using a +4.5 filter, and one basic "good" time using no filter, write these times down in a notebook.
2) Now make an 8x10 print of your image, lens aperture at f/8. Make the NO-filter time on this print approximately equal to 1/3 of your +4.5 filter time. For example, fifteen seconds using the +4.5 filter, then five seconds using no filter.
3) If the print is too dark, stop aperture down to f/11 or f/16 and repeat steps 1-2.
4) Keep adjusting the mutual split-tone times until you get the print tonality you desire. Your final print might require 16 seconds at +4.5 filter, then six seconds with no filter. Or, 12 seconds of no filter with 4 seconds of +4.5.
5) Burn or dodge where necessary.
Eventually you'll end up with a print with good grey scale and good contrast. But, like everything darkroom, there are no quick answers. You have to experiment and find out what method works best for you.
Cheers,
Chris
canonetc
Here's my method:
1) Make two (2) 4-second test strips on multigrade paper: a) Strip 1 using a +4.5 contrast filter, then b) Strip 2 using NO filter or a +1. Aperture for both strips at f/8, time 24-32 seconds for each strip.
2) Once you have one basic "good" times for your image using a +4.5 filter, and one basic "good" time using no filter, write these times down in a notebook.
2) Now make an 8x10 print of your image, lens aperture at f/8. Make the NO-filter time on this print approximately equal to 1/3 of your +4.5 filter time. For example, fifteen seconds using the +4.5 filter, then five seconds using no filter.
3) If the print is too dark, stop aperture down to f/11 or f/16 and repeat steps 1-2.
4) Keep adjusting the mutual split-tone times until you get the print tonality you desire. Your final print might require 16 seconds at +4.5 filter, then six seconds with no filter. Or, 12 seconds of no filter with 4 seconds of +4.5.
5) Burn or dodge where necessary.
Eventually you'll end up with a print with good grey scale and good contrast. But, like everything darkroom, there are no quick answers. You have to experiment and find out what method works best for you.
Cheers,
Chris
canonetc
S
Simon Larbalestier
Guest
I have found success and a lot of control by printing first with a grade 5 filter to set the level of black and then using a grade 00 filter to bring in the highlights and midtones. This works well on the more contrasty Leitz Focotmat enlargers i use - the filters are slid into a trade above the negative and condensor and below the light source. The negs are always processed in PMK Pyro where the highlight detail is retained. This method works well on slower papers like Ilford Warm Tone MC and Fomatone MC.
However i have not found that split grade printing works effectively when making lith prints - with stubborn negs or something where i want a very soft overall tone that will split well in selenium toner - i tend to favor paper flashing after the initial exposure.
Thinking about this a little more my method is fairly crude and simplified - if i had the money i would invest in something like the Heiland Split Grade printing system which is a light source that adapts to various enlarger types - (including the Focomat 1c and 2c series) and offers you specialized filters and a sophisticated timer system allowing for infinite variations of combinations and times. Expensive but very neat.
Split grade printing works for me when i have a lot of prints to make in a short space of time. If i have more time and am working on only a few negatives - i can usually get what i want with some thing like a grade 1.5 and punch the blacks with split toning in selenium.
However i have not found that split grade printing works effectively when making lith prints - with stubborn negs or something where i want a very soft overall tone that will split well in selenium toner - i tend to favor paper flashing after the initial exposure.
Thinking about this a little more my method is fairly crude and simplified - if i had the money i would invest in something like the Heiland Split Grade printing system which is a light source that adapts to various enlarger types - (including the Focomat 1c and 2c series) and offers you specialized filters and a sophisticated timer system allowing for infinite variations of combinations and times. Expensive but very neat.
Split grade printing works for me when i have a lot of prints to make in a short space of time. If i have more time and am working on only a few negatives - i can usually get what i want with some thing like a grade 1.5 and punch the blacks with split toning in selenium.
Last edited by a moderator:
Bryce
Well-known
Chris-
The hard filter/ no filter technique is interesting, and one I haven't tinkered with enough yet. It should be similar to playing with "curves" in photoshop, and working with the shadow and midtone areas rather than the shadow and highlight areas like when you use only the hard and soft filters.
You're making me want to go play in the dark right now... maybe I will.
The hard filter/ no filter technique is interesting, and one I haven't tinkered with enough yet. It should be similar to playing with "curves" in photoshop, and working with the shadow and midtone areas rather than the shadow and highlight areas like when you use only the hard and soft filters.
You're making me want to go play in the dark right now... maybe I will.
titrisol
Bottom Feeder
I started with split grade printing by trial and error:
- I was printing several photos or a friend, and I guessed grade 3 would do but the first did look a tad thin, So tha one I had on the enalrger I added a few more secs of exposure with a #5 filter (for time). The result was some awesome blacks and I got hooked.
- When the internet came along I saw more details on it and they helped me refine my technique so basically it works out as follows:
- Make a test sheet/strip using filter 0 and see if the detail in the highlghts is enough (exposure 1)
- Expose a 2nd test strip with filter 0 per the exposure set above and then with filter 5 make the strips again over the 1st exposure. You will definitely see if there is an improvement here (shadows) and it will be easy to have exposure #2.
- However for any normal picture I see what contrast number I need using n Ilford EM10 and then calculate the split by simple rules
Grade time 0 time 5
1 1 0.5
2 1 1
3 1 2
4 1 3
5 0 4
At least in my filter set exposure with 5 should be 2x than that with 0
Give it a shot in hard to print negatives and you maybe amazed!
- I was printing several photos or a friend, and I guessed grade 3 would do but the first did look a tad thin, So tha one I had on the enalrger I added a few more secs of exposure with a #5 filter (for time). The result was some awesome blacks and I got hooked.
- When the internet came along I saw more details on it and they helped me refine my technique so basically it works out as follows:
- Make a test sheet/strip using filter 0 and see if the detail in the highlghts is enough (exposure 1)
- Expose a 2nd test strip with filter 0 per the exposure set above and then with filter 5 make the strips again over the 1st exposure. You will definitely see if there is an improvement here (shadows) and it will be easy to have exposure #2.
- However for any normal picture I see what contrast number I need using n Ilford EM10 and then calculate the split by simple rules
Grade time 0 time 5
1 1 0.5
2 1 1
3 1 2
4 1 3
5 0 4
At least in my filter set exposure with 5 should be 2x than that with 0
Give it a shot in hard to print negatives and you maybe amazed!
canonetc
canonetc
Bryce said:
Hey Bryce,
yeah, for some reason the idea of having to use a +0 or +1 filter just did not seem so necessary. I'm kinda lazy; guess I just didn't want to inset another filter into the enlarger. So, I played around with no filter and got good results.
On another note, one time I went to a big-time Los Angeles photographer group show, and one guy who did a series on cowboys told me, when we discussed split-tone printing, that I was "doing too much work!" He said I should just use 1 +3 on everything! Needless to say, I was no longer impressed by his "art"...
chris
canonetc