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.
Yes - use them together, and expect the times to be long.Blue filter will get more contrast than a max magenta filtration?
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.
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.
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.Thanks Matt - do i need a specific number blue filter?
Told You!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.
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
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.
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.
Where does this info come from? Conflicts with the curves in the Ilford paper data sheet.[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.
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.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.
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.
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?