keithwms
Allowing Ads
I certainly didn't mean to imply that someone will necessarily get poor results via the hybrid workflow. Rather, my point was... ach never mind
Yeah, with no clue as how to proceed with a digital workflow from a film scan one will always screw up.
Hybrid.com or the LF forum is a better place to discuss the merits of digital workflow from film scans.
Sandy King
I certainly didn't mean to imply that someone will necessarily get poor results via the hybrid workflow. Rather, my point was... ach never mindOf course, very fine results can be obtained via hybrid methods.
Ralph, for example the late Forte Polywarmtone was extremely sharp, the Agfa MCC not. Graded papers are also supposed to be sharper than VC papers: don't ask me why!
John Sexton uses a Jobo rotary processor for his 4x5 film sheets developed in Jobo Expert-Drums and his prints look sharp to me.
1. The way we perceive sharpness in the print has a lot to do with tone transitions i.e. lower frequency effects, and less to do with high-frequency sharpness and lp/mm and MTF etc. which is normally chatted about when people discuss sharpness.
2. By the way, I find that, quite generally, traditional-grain films give more perceived sharpness in print than the t-grain films. Honestly, I find it very hard to get a snappy, sharp-looking print from tmax or delta unless I shoot and develop for higher contrast in the neg. This isn't really a flaw of the film or a technical lack of sharpness in the film, it's just that the tonal transitions are just too gentle and gradual (i.e. dreamy) for my taste.
Probably not with rotary processing, but L.F.A. Mason recommends continuous agitation for the first 10 seconds, then 5 seconds every minute/8 twists of the spiral with High Acutance developers. That's about normal for any developer for me.
Mason was head of Research at Ilford and would have been involved with Hyfin, which was the compnies High acutance developer
Ian.
So I have usually stop down a lot.
John Sexton's prints are sharp as sharp can be, but he does not need acutance to get sharp images. He uses large-format film. Acutance is not important when using large format.
This might be where you're losing your sharpness!
Try to limit yourself to f/8-11 and compare.
I don't agree at alll. In IMHO acutance (combiantion of edge effects and contrast) is very important with LF and ULF film development.
With LF and ULF you are pretty much assured of resolution. Question is, will this detail be rendered sharply (which depends on edge effects and contrast).
Sandy King
That's what I am going to do for the test. Ilford HP5+, aperture for best resolution, scenery with lots of structural and textural details and then xtol, rodinal and pyrocat-hd, perhaps DiXactol also.
Ofcourse I don't have calibrated developing times for all developers and one film, so I have to guess good developing times and then hope that I can get somewhat equal prints in terms of tonality.
2. By the way, I find that, quite generally, traditional-grain films give more perceived sharpness in print than the t-grain films. Honestly, I find it very hard to get a snappy, sharp-looking print from tmax or delta unless I shoot and develop for higher contrast in the neg. This isn't really a flaw of the film or a technical lack of sharpness in the film, it's just that the tonal transitions are just too gentle and gradual (i.e. dreamy) for my taste.
I agree with 1. but isn't the effect you describe in 2. a high-frequency characteristic?
If you agitate once a minute, you won't get full acutance. Full acutance needs standing development until 'the bromide streaks come home'.
The only developer I know of that type that is still available from the more well known photo-chemical manufacturers, is Tetenal Neofin Blue. It`s still a great developer for slow conventional B&W films of around ISO 25-50.Depends on your definition of full acutance.
Developers like Hyfin, Definol were designed to give good noticeable acutance with that amount of agitation, if you cut the agitation significantly you would over exaggerate the acutance and eventually get extreme Mackie lines etc.
Ian
The trouble with that if you are using 35mm, is that you run the risk of getting streaks in areas such as clear sky in the image near the sprocket holes. Agitation at one-minute intervals is a good compromise. You could also try semi-stand to help prevent uneven development.If you agitate once a minute, you won't get full acutance. Full acutance needs standing development until 'the bromide streaks come home'.
Depends on your definition of full acutance.
Developers like Hyfi, Definol & Acutol-S were designed to give good noticeable acutance with that amount of agitation, if you cut the agitation significantly you would over exaggerate the acutance and eventually get extreme Mackie lines etc. I tried all three of those developers and they did give high acutance but at a cost, grain and tonality were affected and with 35mm that gave a distinct decrease in overall image quality, with 120 or larger formats this was far less noticeable.
Of course if a higher degree of acutance is desired then cutting the agitation or using stand development gives it, but the practice is more common with large format negatives for contact printing.
Ian
Do you have a different take?
Acutance has scale effects due to the fact that it has no scale effect. Nonsense? No, an edge effect depends on a local gradient. A black line of a certain true width will be seen as wider or narrower according to the developing agent and other factors by the same amount, not proportion, and that amount will be a greater proportion of a small negative than of a large negative of the same subject. Just something to keep firmly in mind, especially if you use both small and large format.
'Acutance' is an overblown term, not as overblown
as 'tonality' but close. In any case 'acutance' is something
I do my best to avoid - I don't want the perception of sharpness
- I want real resolution.
So, you agree that the more you agitate, the less acutance you get?
Makes sense, but from the way you posted it, it's not clear what message this response relates to. Could you elaborate on the impact of the edge effect with different formats, please.
Tonality = gradation true or false?
Tonality = Gradation, true or false?
At last a definition. Acutance is "the perception of sharpness"
Does a high acutance follow from a high resolution? Dan
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?