Boring shadow separation question

[pentaxuser]

I am just about 2 degrees further S but frequently experience toes bumps When they dismantled the BBC radio masts on Borough Hill they didn't remove all the mast anchor points from the ground. A real nuisance on a walk

pentaxuser

 

[DREW WILEY]

Well, I took an 8x10 shot a few days ago which is going to rely on quite a bit of deep shadow gradation on a less than ideal film - only had FP4 along, and no TMax. So I distinctly overexposed it, yet normally dev in pyro. Then I made a registered unsharp mask for it. It will be printed VC using a deep blue filter and come out with better gradation than even a contact print. No voodoo involved, just an entirely predictable technique.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

HP5 is my main film. I've developed it in pretty much everything. I revisited HP5 and D-23 1+1, 1+3. A lovely combination for contrasty situations. EI 200 with shadows on IV. Intermittent agitation...5s every couple of minutes... 15 to 18 minutes. Bob's yur uncle!

 

[DREW WILEY]

I found HP5 a poor choice for high contrast. There were/are way better options. Yes, loading the shadows on the fifth floor up (one EV overexp plus ludicrous Z4 placement) gets you way above the toe; but then you're forced to smash the microtonality sandwich using D23 compensating dev. I've done it that way, but really preferred full scale dev in staining pyro with its superb edge effect with this film, and again using unsharp masking to have my cake and eat it too with respect to tonal nuance. Requires special gear of course.

 

[Craig75]

I found HP5 a poor choice for high contrast. There were/are way better options. Yes, loading the shadows on the fifth floor up (one EV overexp plus ludicrous Z4 placement) gets you way above the toe; but then you're forced to smash the microtonality sandwich using D23 compensating dev. I've done it that way, but really preferred full scale dev in staining pyro with its superb edge effect with this film, and again using unsharp masking to have my cake and eat it too with respect to tonal nuance. Requires special gear of course.

I did buy a little selection of 400 speed films since going there. Im not a big fan of testing films as a rule but in this specific case I am so bored of blocking up deep shadows or finding them dull that I am willing to go through the pain. Lockdown seems to be killing my go to online retailers selection but I do have some delta 400 in amongst it.

It is probably a 9 or 10 stop scene (from experience of doing buildings before with a spotmeter) so it might just squeeze onto fp4+ but I think I'd be down to 1/30th second and I have to shoot handheld so I might be able to do it but it feels like its going to be a bit hit and miss to get it sharp enough. Im already a bit suspicious that my old Nikon shift lens is going to be a good performer at f4 at the best of times.

I do have an Alistair Inglis punch and easel - Id just set myself up - got that cheap masking film from freestyle, some sheets of ilford ortho (i think this was before you could get those 5x7 bergger sheets) got the punch and easel to try using those for whatever masks I would need but.. then i almost immediately lost darkroom. I never print bigger than 8x10 so I dont mind making a 5x4 or 5x7 contact print from 35mm. Unsharp mask will help drag those shadows apart a bit?

Blue filter will get more contrast than a max magenta filtration? I have a colour head on enlarger nut I could never seem to get close to grade 5 on multigrade with it without some decent overdevelopment. In this case though I'd be worried about putting things on the shoulder and creating a grey mess when it comes to burning in things.

 

[MattKing]

Blue filter will get more contrast than a max magenta filtration?

Yes - use them together, and expect the times to be long.
The high contrast response in the paper responds to blue light, so it is attenuated by a yellow filter and accentuated by a blue filter.
The low contrast response in the paper responds to green light, so it is attenuated by a magenta filter and accentuated by a green filter.
There are variable contrast systems (e.g. Ilford Multigrade 500 and 600) that use blue and green light instead of magenta and yellow filtration - they tend to have both advantages and downsides, although they may give higher maximum contrast.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I found HP5 a poor choice for high contrast. There were/are way better options. Yes, loading the shadows on the fifth floor up (one EV overexp plus ludicrous Z4 placement) gets you way above the toe; but then you're forced to smash the microtonality sandwich using D23 compensating dev. I've done it that way, but really preferred full scale dev in staining pyro with its superb edge effect with this film, and again using unsharp masking to have my cake and eat it too with respect to tonal nuance. Requires special gear of course.

I've been developing HP5 in Pyrocat-HD for 20 years. My favourite combination. D-23 gives a different look, which I like. To each his own.

 

[Craig75]

Yes - use them together, and expect the times to be long.
The high contrast response in the paper responds to blue light, so it is attenuated by a yellow filter and accentuated by a blue filter.
The low contrast response in the paper responds to green light, so it is attenuated by a magenta filter and accentuated by a green filter.
There are variable contrast systems (e.g. Ilford Multigrade 500 and 600) that use blue and green light instead of magenta and yellow filtration - they tend to have both advantages and downsides, although they may give higher maximum contrast.

Thanks Matt - do i need a specific number blue filter?

Lots of far more interesting discussion on here than my original question. (Thank you everyone)

 

[MattKing]

Thanks Matt - do i need a specific number blue filter?

As I understand it, there are several that work. I haven't had to source one myself, so its best to ask those who have.
I'm sure Drew Wiley will have a definitive suggestion!

 

[MattKing]

Another usable and easy to accomplish approach is what I usually do - add even more magenta filtration.
I do that by using an under the lens variable contrast filter - the highest number I have - in conjunction with my dichroic colour or VCCE heads.
It won't be as "pure" as all blue, but it will be quite effective.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Wrong. No magenta printing filter is as strong as a 47 or especially 47B sharp-cutting blue filter. Not that you always need something that strong. A true minus green M filter would be something like a 44A Wratten if I recall correctly, no longer made, though I have one. I also have a 34A deep violet. Don't use either for printing, just specialized color masking purposes.

 

[MattKing]

Wrong. No magenta printing filter is as strong as a 47 or especially 47B sharp-cutting blue filter. Not that you always need something that strong. A true minus green M filter would be something like a 44A Wratten if I recall correctly, no longer made, though I have one. I also have a 34A deep violet. Don't use either for printing, just specialized color masking purposes.

Told You!
(I think Drew missed the part where I said it wouldn't be as pure as blue)

 

[Adrian Bacon]

Yes!
If your subject is mostly highlights and shadows, and not much in-between, then split-grade printing should work well for you. Expose the paper for the shadows. Then burn-in the bright areas with the 00 or 0 filter, and the adjacent shadows will not darken substantially.
Mark Overton

It’s actually the opposite. Expose the paper for the highlights with a grade 0 or 00, then punch in the shadows with the grade 5. The grade 5 will have very little to no effect on the highlights. Grade 0 and 00 affect everything, grade 5 mostly affects the shadows and blacks.

 

[Craig75]

Another usable and easy to accomplish approach is what I usually do - add even more magenta filtration.
I do that by using an under the lens variable contrast filter - the highest number I have - in conjunction with my dichroic colour or VCCE heads.
It won't be as "pure" as all blue, but it will be quite effective.

The full magenta on the head + multigrade filter. Never even thought of that. Thats good idea. One for the stepwedge to see if it boosts it.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Michael, I really don't care what you highly doubt or not. I've actually been using these specific filters for decades. The Wratten 33 is a much stronger magenta than the 32. Good luck finding one of those! But they were once the standard minus-green in graphics work. I've got all these in front of me right now. None are as sharp-cutting as a 47B deep blue. But I have true narrow-band RGB colorheads anyway, in addition to other options. One doesn't always need the extremes to successfully split print. VC papers are mostly blue versus green sensitive, but differ somewhat product to product. Sometimes a high magenta setting on a colorhead will provide DMax to the blue-sensitive layer only, sometimes it won't. Just depends. A person has to work with a specific paper and developer combination for awhile to understand its particular signature or visual personality.

 

[grainyvision]

I don't really believe the split grade hype, but regardless, this advice should apply regardless. VC paper works by adjusting shadow contrast and the point at which the paper clips to black. So, increasing the contrast grade in printing will primarily increase shadow contrast. Some papers have this characteristic stronger than others. Ilford papers especially have this effect. Foma modern papers tend to be more conservative. Adox MC110 just barely has this effect.

Either way, If you want ultimate amount of shadow separation then, you should develop the negative for a lower contrast aim, with the intention of increasing contrast in printing... There's also of course print developers that excel at shadow separation as well, such as Ansco 130.

 

[Craig75]

I don't really believe the split grade hype, but regardless, this advice should apply regardless. VC paper works by adjusting shadow contrast and the point at which the paper clips to black. So, increasing the contrast grade in printing will primarily increase shadow contrast. Some papers have this characteristic stronger than others. Ilford papers especially have this effect. Foma modern papers tend to be more conservative. Adox MC110 just barely has this effect.

Either way, If you want ultimate amount of shadow separation then, you should develop the negative for a lower contrast aim, with the intention of increasing contrast in printing... There's also of course print developers that excel at shadow separation as well, such as Ansco 130.

well thats the rub tho - is the reduced development and consequent reduction in contrast less than the increase in contrast from printing harder ie do you actually get a bump in contrast or does everything cancel each other out.

I know michael has done the grind on this so im happy to steal his results

but paper developers is a question. Do different paper developers actually make a difference with multigrade papers ?

 

[grain elevator]

[snip] VC paper works by adjusting shadow contrast and the point at which the paper clips to black. So, increasing the contrast grade in printing will primarily increase shadow contrast. Some papers have this characteristic stronger than others. Ilford papers especially have this effect. [snip]

Where does this info come from? Conflicts with the curves in the Ilford paper data sheet.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Ho hum. A couple days ago, I simply put a med blue 82B conversion filter over the lens with my 8x10 V54 blue-green cold light enlarger, because I didn't want the full extreme effect of a deep 47 or 47B blue. Besides, that made it easier to see what the burning-in board was doing. There are all kinds of methods. But a factor rarely discussed is how final image tone is often somewhat affected by the relative degree each respective layer of a VC paper is exposed, and then in relation to degree of development. There's no simple formula to that, since brands of paper differ, and respond to differently developers in special ways too. But it's yet another way of fine-tuning the results, and quite important to me personally. It's klnda like watching a cooking show on the TV and seeing them debate the merits of this or that kind of sea salt versus Himalayan salt, etc - it's not vending machine potato chip with ordinary salt and msg talk. There are subtleties involved; and to a considerable extent, that's what fine print-making itself is all about.

 

[grainyvision]

Where does this info come from? Conflicts with the curves in the Ilford paper data sheet.

You can see the official curves on this for instance: https://www.ilfordphoto.com/amfile/file/download/file/1954/product/1701/ It's not a perfect effect of course, there is still a bit of highlight shifting, but I've confirmed the general appearance of the effect on every paper I've tested using a consistent setup and step wedge measuring grade 1 vs grade 3. Basically going to grade 3 caused shadows to get more contrast and to clip to black sooner . I'm unsure where a middle grey would fall in terms of density on paper, but it seems it'd be less than 1.0 density

I didn't do a good job really of scanning, but you can see my practical step wedge results documented here: https://grainy.vision/blog/darkroom-paper-step-wedge-references

 

[Craig75]

Craig - I would still suggest trying for yourself . We all print differently (and we all see differently) so in the end when it comes to darkroom work, unless the purported technique is just preposterous, it is good to try things out. To your eye, and with your printing technique, maybe you will prefer minus development with higher printing contrast grades. You never know. Also, even if you end up with the same end results, maybe you will personally find one way easier than the other.

The point I wanted to make is simply that printing is how you make great prints. It's where we can really exert fine control. N- versus N doesn't accomplish nearly as much as some people think it does.

On the subject of print developers with current papers, mostly they all do the same thing. Occasionally if you use a special purpose developer with powerful additives you can change the print colour, and some developers can influence toning processes, but when it comes to tone reproduction, print development is print development, more or less. It may not have always been this way but that's ancient "history". PE used to say that the characteristics of modern and/or VC printing papers are more "baked in", which means you have to do relatively drastic things to change their inherent properties. In my experience he was quite right, but as above I still think it can be worthwhile to try things out and decide for yourself.

Also note people sometimes see what they want to see. That's a pretty powerful bias, but it doesn't do any harm, and this is supposed to be fun also.

Oh totally agree. The eye is the final judge. Its good just to play around with the materials and think ok if i do this it should do this and then test it out. If my darkroom ever reappears out of the ether of builders hell then i will def still develop a stepwedge at n and n-1 and print them at different grades to see what happens. Its a 10 minute job and its just interesting to see. Only way to learn is do it, print it, look at it then work out why it looks the way it does in my book.

Yes im very suspicious of print developers and multigrade papers. Ive done a couple of experiments and they did next to nothing for me as they seemed related to older materials and the knowledge was dragged over to modern materials without any testing to see if it was still valid.

 

[Craig75]

carbonate!!! yes i did that one. I cant remember how much i ended sticking in the developer tray but I think I did get a half stop increase in contrast and then just kept putting more and more in with no effect until the wedge print fell apart.

annoying though as now I need to rely on my "printing skills" rather than just throwing onions into the stop bath.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I haven't been using amidol much lately. If the glycin is reasonably fresh, I get just as cold tones with 130 and MG Cooltone as I did with amidol (gold-toned either way). And 130 is a great MG Warmtone developer too, so I can use both types of the paper in the same session if I want to. Once glycin gets a bit old and more mocha color powder, it's starts staining a bit, and is best for warmer papers only.
My amidol formula is really very simple and way more economical to use than most, but is acidic rather, so needs a plain water stop, which is not the best idea with Ilford Classic or Cooltone. Those are two papers that risk going blotchy without an instant traditional stop bath. One more reason I've mainly switched to 130 for most things.
Michael seems to despise ancient wisdom; but I've found out that interchanging KBr vs Benz, or mixing them in various proportions, can make a significant difference in final image color with some papers. But in general, by gram weight, you need about ten times as much KBr as Benz to do the same job with respect to mere highlight clearing.
I won't go into the distinction with film development - I don't want Micheal accusing me of being Yoda - I'm not that ancient. Besides, I snapped the fan belt on my truck a few weeks ago right beside George Lucas's driveway, with that darn bronze Yoda statue there. Yoda didn't help me a bit. At least the tow truck had a turn around spot on that winding road.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I really like it. The first two boxes I got had a few blemished sheets in each box, but the last two boxes have been fine. Rich DMax, excellent highlights; it's a much better paper overall than MGIV.
But I don't get good neutral blacks with the same MQ developers I used with Polygrade V - a bit greenish. Either amidol or 130 will do the trick, provided you go to full development (typically 2 min or more), followed by gold toner like GP1. Selenium toner makes it go a bit brown instead. But like I already hinted, with both Cooltone and Classic, you have to move fast getting the paper completely immersed in each solution or there's a risk of blotchy highlights. These are fussier papers than MGWT in that respect.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Because im all about the most grueling questions at the minute.

In these two situations which (if either) will produce the most shadow separation

Standard manufacturer's development and printed on grade 2

Vs

N-1 development and printed on grade 3
my guess is, Grade 2 will make for lighter shadows and Grade 3 for more shadow contrast and separation.
Does the increase in contrast of the paper outstrip amy reduction in contrast in the toe region by reducing development?

I was shooting in an abandoned building handheld where some parts were in deep shadow and other parts were in f8 sun (where roof or part of a wall was missing). No spotmeter to check how dark the darkest parts were but which of these options, if either, would give me best deep shadow separation.

The way id check would be just taking a picture of a grey card at -5 -4.5 -4 -3.5 -3 -2.5 in both scenarios, contact printing them and seeing if there is a difference but i wont have a darkroom for a year at least so i appeal to the hive mind.

My own feeling is n-1 and harder grade.