This one has the punch that the other slightly lacks and yet both are the same grade. I suspect that both grades are technically right and it is simply the range of tones that gives this one more punch. There is more light and dark here to emphasise contrast
Yes. This one was much easier to get to a point where I was satisfied (in fact it is the first and only print of this). The other one took 4 prints of playing around and somehow it is a bit lacking. "Europe" was actually in different light because the sun kept going in and out of the clouds. I tried Europe at a softer grade and it was rather bland. The print looks better with less exposure (the marble is brighter) but then it loses detail so it was a compromise. If you look at "Europe" here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/144059001@N05/37921064266/in/dateposted-public/ then it is a bit better. Same print but in higher resolution.
The AMOUNT of exposure that you gave the respective negatives oftentimes determines ultimate contrast. Perhaps the 'Europe' negative was somewhat underexposed, I don't know, but that would deliver a lesser contrast. - David Lyga
@David Lyga Yes, it's possible that "Europe" got less exposure. I can't remember. I was actually in Hyde Park to watch some friends running a half-marathon to raise money for a liver transplant unit (the unit where my partner had a liver transplant in March). The photos of the Albert Memorial were an aside and there were a lot of people around so a bit rushed. There are four statues at the corners around the memorial, Europe, Africa, Asia, America. All of them feature an animal. I only had time to take pictures of 2. "Europe" was very brightly lit, dazzling in fact. I found that if I printed Europe so that the marble still appeared bright that too much detail was lost (e.g. the folds in the dresses became indistinct). I've added a link to "Europe" to show the same print with a 1/4 stop less printing exposure.
@David Lyga Yes that may have happened. I could have taken a spot reading on the statue and then added +2 stops to the reading (the highlight button does this on my OM4-Ti) in order to get the statue white. I'm not sure what the result would have been at printing time but it would have been worth a few frames of experimentation with different exposures. If I had deliberately overexposed the statue (i.e. added exposure to keep it white rather than 18% grey) what would have happened to the rest of the photo? The rest of the picture would be overexposed and especially the sky so would that have meant no pretty clouds in the print? Or would I have just ended up with a rather "thick" negative but better statue detail? Incidentally, "Europe" took a bit longer to print than the other negatives on the roll suggesting it is at least as exposed as other frames if not a bit more.
Usually (to a degree) if you OVERexpose the negative by one or two stops you will have fuller saturation, thus enhanced printing contrast. However, if you give a gross amount of overexposure you will begin to flatten out the image. - David Lyga