Color heads and the colors they use

The Padstow Busker

A
The Padstow Busker

  • 0
  • 0
  • 23
End Table

A
End Table

  • 1
  • 1
  • 104
Cafe Art

A
Cafe Art

  • 8
  • 6
  • 219
Sciuridae

A
Sciuridae

  • 6
  • 3
  • 201

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
197,665
Messages
2,762,695
Members
99,436
Latest member
AtlantaArtist
Recent bookmarks
0

CMoore

Subscriber
Joined
Aug 23, 2015
Messages
6,191
Location
USA CA
Format
35mm
I would be happy to read some links, especially if this gets asked a lot.

Does a color head need different Lighting or Filtering to do B&W than it does to print color.?
What i am wondering is, why Cyan, Magenta, Yellow and not Blue, Green. Red
Is it easier to print color with a CMY head.?
Thank You
 

koraks

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Nov 29, 2018
Messages
20,996
Location
Europe
Format
Multi Format
Does a color head need different Lighting or Filtering to do B&W than it does to print color.?
You can print B&W with a color head without modifications. B&W (variable contrast) only needs a combination of blue and green light. A color head's magenta and yellow filters accomplish this.

What i am wondering is, why Cyan, Magenta, Yellow and not Blue, Green. Red
Cutting a somewhat more complicated story short: it works out as the same thing. Philips actually made a line of fairly popular enlargers that were additive and used R, G and B instead of C, M and Y. It has to do with technology; with additive, you first 'make' three colors (R, G and B) and then mix them together in the desired ratio. With subtractive, you start with full spectrum (white) light and filter away unwanted C, M and Y light to make the desired mix.
In the practice of printing C41/RA4 of course you don't really use the red/cyan channel so it's basically only magenta/yellow (subtractive) or green/blue (additive).

Is it easier to print color with a CMY head.?
Easier than what? Than RGB? No, it's just a matter of getting used to something. It's even possible to think one way and actually do it in another way. In my enlarger I use red, green and blue LEDs as a light source, but I learned color printing on a subtractive head (so CMY). Because I was already used to thinking in CMY terms, I just labeled Green and Blue as Magenta and Yellow respectively and inverted their values (I don't display Red/Cyan on the display as it's not used). Technically there's a difference of course, but functionally/intuitively it works the same.
 

AgX

Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2007
Messages
29,973
Location
Germany
Format
Multi Format
for graded paper:
set colour head at white light

for variable contrast paper:
-) set filters according ta a table
or
-) set at white light and use the dedicated sheet filters
 

Mr Bill

Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2006
Messages
1,436
Format
Multi Format
What i am wondering is, why Cyan, Magenta, Yellow and not Blue, Green. Red
Is it easier to print color with a CMY head.?

Like koraks says, it's just different ways of doing essentially the same thing.

Let me explain the "subtractive" thing a bit. This is where you use a nominal "white" light source, then insert filters into that light path, essentially "subtracting" colors from it. (Note that I say a nominal white light; historically this has been from a tungsten (filament) light source which actually tends yellowish, for what it's worth.)

Looking at the paper, it has three dye layers, called cyan, magenta, and yellow. Which are sensitive, respectively, to reddish, greenish, and bluish light. Now, if you start out with white light and want to reduce the amount of reddish light, what do you do? You insert a cyan filter; this reduces the red light without affecting the amount of green or blue light. You might ask, is there any other filter that can reduce red, and only red? No, there is not. Likewise with greenish light; only a magenta filter will reduce the green, and only the green light. And on to bluish light; only a yellow filter will reduce the blue, and only the blue light.

So the bottom line is, that in order to directly control each of the paper's dye layers, individually sensitive to red, green, and blue light, you need to use cyan, magenta, and yellow filters in a light path.

Now, you originally asked about the alternative use of red, green, and blue filters. Can these be used instead? Sure, here's how it would work: say that you want remove some reddish light, what would you use? Well, it won't be a red filter; red filters let all the red light come through unhindered. (A red filter blocks all colors that are NOT red, meaning that it blocks both green and blue.) So to block red light, using RGB filters, we'd have to use both green AND blue filtration. But there are side effects. The green filter blocks every thing that is not green, meaning it blocks both red and blue. And the blue filter blocks everything that is not blue, meaning red and green. So we ARE able to successfully block red light by using both green and blue filtration. But... we also have to block some green and blue along with it. You can use a similar line of thinking to figure out the situation for trying to remove just green, or blue, light. They work in a similar way - always requiring two filters, and having a side effect on colors that you didn't want to affect.

So this is roughly the situation for a subtractive system, using a single light source. When you use the "subtractive primaries," cyan, magenta, and yellow filters, you can have direct control over the individual colors of the light, red, green, and blue, without side effects. Something else should also be said... this works only because the filters have only partial blocking power. Meaning that they modulate the amount of colored light. You could not do this with 100% hard-cutting filters, as they would completely block everything.

This whole thing might be hard to grasp if you're not already familiar with the filters. If you want to try to understand the mechanism you might try sketching a graph of the spectrum, labeled in wavelength. (We see roughly 400 to 700 nanometers, where roughly 400 to 500 is bluish, 500 to 600 is greenish, and 600 to 700cis reddish.) If you draw a high-up line across the top as the starting amount of white light, then you can sketch in the effect of different filters - that is, what is left when a colored filter removes certain wavelengths. I think this is about the only way to get a real understanding of the effect of filters. But probably not worth the mental effort for regular photographers or printers. Only if you find this sort of thing fun. Most workers in the field just learn some rules to follow, and this is generally good enough.

Hope this helps a bit. When I was a youngster no one could explain this sort of thing to me. So what I like to do here is to explain things the way the younger me would have wanted to know back then.
 

AgX

Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2007
Messages
29,973
Location
Germany
Format
Multi Format
Philips offered colour enlargers working on the additive principle, thus with Blue, Green and Red.
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
52,050
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
Is it easier to print color with a CMY head.?
It is, if you were originally trained on a CMY system.
And most of the commercial labs used CMY, because that is how the industry evolved.
A lot of the accessories and literature also was/were set up with CMY in mind.
I expect though if you were to start now, or if your experience was primarily with Cibachrome printing of slides, it probably wouldn't matter which way you started.
 
OP
OP

CMoore

Subscriber
Joined
Aug 23, 2015
Messages
6,191
Location
USA CA
Format
35mm
Thanks for the replies.
I understand it much better now.
Thanks Again
 

randyB

Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2005
Messages
534
Location
SE Mid-Tennessee, USA
Format
Multi Format
As others have said, it's what you get used to or more specifically, how you train yourself to think. Back in the late 80's I worked as a custom color printer operating 3 enlargers in an assembly line production. 2 were CMY and 1 was the Philips RBG. It was a bit of a challenge at first switching between the two but after a few screwups I got the hang of it. The repetition of assembly line production made it easy to get used to the change. Supposedly, the RBG system gives a slightly cleaner/sharper color but I never say any difference.
 
Last edited:

koraks

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Nov 29, 2018
Messages
20,996
Location
Europe
Format
Multi Format
Supposedly, the RBG system gives a slightly cleaner/sharper color
I wonder if this is really the case - I imagine it has/had something to do with the quality of the CMY filters it would have been compared to. I can see from a theoretical perspective the possible benefit of a *good* RGB system (good meaning: very pure colors, aligned very well with the response curves of the paper) in terms of hue purity etc. But I wonder to what extent the difference would be visible when printing color at home.

It was a bit of a challenge at first switching between to two but after a few screwups I got the hang of it.
Yeah, I get what you say. I learned color manipulations well into the digital age and for on-screen purposes, so I was used to thinking in terms of RGB instead of CMY (not being trained as a printer or anything). I know I found it very confusing when my mate at the local photo shop (when those still existed...) showed me how he printed RA4 for customers on a Fuji Frontier. CMY just didn't feel intuitive to me. Much later, when I started printing RA4 at home with dichroic heads, it all fell into place somehow. Today it doesn't matter to me in which system I color correct; it's really just the same thing, but inverted. Just as my mate told me more than 15 years ago, but it didn't click back then.
 

sasah zib

Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2021
Messages
192
Location
St Regis
Format
Hybrid
simplified:
additive uses 3 filters (changes time).. first printers were modified 2 filter varigam printers & Kodak velox boxes; eventually Pako (& others) designed built systems for 3 filter exposure . Correction is made through changes of exposure time.

subtractive uses 2 filters (has 3, but uses only 3-- if you use all 3 subtractive colors you have a neutral density added to your exposure. Correction is made through changes of filter density (0 --- 200 units)

Dodge/burn: typically much easier with subtractive system. Imagine that as you dodge or burn, you change colors (time of exposure is a color change)

Packs of paper used to list WL (subtractive corrections) as well as Additive Base times --

many of us use mixed mode exposure
 
Last edited by a moderator:

koraks

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Nov 29, 2018
Messages
20,996
Location
Europe
Format
Multi Format
additive uses 3 filters (changes time).. first printers were modified 2 filter varigam printers & Kodak velox boxes; eventually Pako (& others) designed built systems for 3 filter exposure . Correction is made through changes of exposure time.
Additive CAN be done with separate exposures, but doesn't HAVE to be.
 

Joel_L

Subscriber
Joined
Mar 12, 2011
Messages
579
Location
Colorado
Format
Multi Format
I haven't done wet prints in many years but used to have a Patterson ( Philips ) RBG enlarger and a Vivitar VI CMY. I could not really tell a difference in print quality between the two. What was interesting about the Patterson was you could select between RGB or CMY.

To the original question, both had a table on what filtration to dial to get different B&W filter values.
 

DREW WILEY

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2011
Messages
13,747
Format
8x10 Format
Sequential additive RGB printing is a real pain in the butt. Simultaneous RGB additive is easy to do, but hell to engineer a colorhead to do it well to begin with. Old Phillips RGB enlarger were only good for small prints and only up to 6x6 cm film, and the Minolta flashtube system was pretty underpowered too. Their later system had a lot of schizophrenic electronics, but worked much better if one had enough patience to de-bug it. I have both a high-power halogen 5x7 additive enlarger as well as a big 8x10 one. You can't buy anything that size. Maybe someday someone will figure out how to do it using LED's, but I'm a bit skeptical about that this early in the game, at least as a replacement to high-quality halogen output.

Ordinary CMY subtractive colorheads are way simpler to design, and are abundant. But both styles, additive or subtractive, can be used for VC papers too, and very easily. Note that I'm speaking of fully adjustable colorheads, not archaic filter drawers.

Joel, the reason you couldn't tell the difference between the two modes of the Patterson was that there probably wasn't any actual distinction in the filtration itself, but just the option of control settings. Or maybe your memory is flawed. Patterson was an entry level brand. Even with my custom pure RGB additive enlargers, the control panels are programmed to CMY settings for sake of convenience. But real C would require equal amount of B&G, real M, equal amounts of R&B, and real Y, equal amounts of R&G. No colorhead ever invented could ACTUALLY provide both additive and subtractive simultaneous light. It would be ridiculously complex and expensive to make, and there would be no point in doing that anyway.
 

Joel_L

Subscriber
Joined
Mar 12, 2011
Messages
579
Location
Colorado
Format
Multi Format
You are correct about the two modes of the Paterson, it's always RBG and CMY was just twiddling the appropriate RBG. When I said I could not really tell a difference, that was between the Paterson and Vivitar,

The Paterson was a Philips PCS 2000, not sure how entry level it was. In any case it worked well and gave many excellent prints
 
OP
OP

CMoore

Subscriber
Joined
Aug 23, 2015
Messages
6,191
Location
USA CA
Format
35mm
You are correct about the two modes of the Paterson, it's always RBG and CMY was just twiddling the appropriate RBG. When I said I could not really tell a difference, that was between the Paterson and Vivitar,

The Paterson was a Philips PCS 2000, not sure how entry level it was. In any case it worked well and gave many excellent prints
Sorry if i missed it.......what enlarger are you using now.?
Thank You
 

DREW WILEY

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2011
Messages
13,747
Format
8x10 Format
Well, the later of the version of the Phillips was decently made, but just way too under-muscled and undersized for any kind of serious lab usage. Additive filters require a lot more light than subtractive filtration because by definition you have to use dense narrow-band filters. But that's what hypothetically gives cleaner color, because there's no residual white light spillover affecting all three color layers of the color printing paper at once. Additive is more selective. But with later dichroic regular CMY subtractive heads, the results are nearly as good. Older CMY colorheads, especially those with spalling filter coatings, not so.

I'm kinda oversimplifying the subject. The only high output additive heads ever commercially built were super expensive 8x10 heads near the very end of Durst's commercial division. Those were never offered up for general sale, though several went to Govt use at the NSA. Everything made by Durst afterwards was out of the different amateur division, even their excellent 4x5 enlarger. The smallest enlargers the Commercial division made were the 138 5X7 series,
 

Joel_L

Subscriber
Joined
Mar 12, 2011
Messages
579
Location
Colorado
Format
Multi Format
I still have the same two enlargers, I just don't have a proper darkroom anymore. These days I shoot and process film then scan ( B&W, C41, and E-6 ).

Sorry if i missed it.......what enlarger are you using now.?
Thank You
 

Joel_L

Subscriber
Joined
Mar 12, 2011
Messages
579
Location
Colorado
Format
Multi Format
Yes, I would say the the enlargers I have are hobby/enthusiast grade. I rarely printed over 8x10 on the Paterson, though it was not too uncommon the be the equivalent of much larger cropping an image.

As far as oversimplify, I get it. I started doing color back in the late 70s, been on and off since then. At one point 25 - 30 years ago or so, I started designing my own color analyzer and was thinking of the exact thing you mentioned, LED enlarger. Was not at all practical at the time.

For me, I just enjoyed doing the process, having to get a print to an exacting standard was not a goal, just a pleasing image.

Well, the later of the version of the Phillips was decently made, but just way too under-muscled and undersized for any kind of serious lab usage. Additive filters require a lot more light than subtractive filtration because by definition you have to use dense narrow-band filters. But that's what hypothetically gives cleaner color, because there's no residual white light spillover affecting all three color layers of the color printing paper at once. Additive is more selective. But with later dichroic regular CMY subtractive heads, the results are nearly as good. Older CMY colorheads, especially those with spalling filter coatings, not so.

I'm kinda oversimplifying the subject. The only high output additive heads ever commercially built were super expensive 8x10 heads near the very end of Durst's commercial division. Those were never offered up for general sale, though several went to Govt use at the NSA. Everything made by Durst afterwards was out of the different amateur division, even their excellent 4x5 enlarger. The smallest enlargers the Commercial division made were the 138 5X7 series,
 
Joined
Dec 10, 2009
Messages
6,297
Format
Multi Format
Both color and black and multigrade white papers are balanced for tungsten lighting. From my years of printing, I only use the magenta and yellow filters both for black and white and color printing. If you're thinking of being a dichroic head just for black and white printing, you're better off buying a set of Ilford Multigrade filters. I used a color head for years for black and white printing because I have a color head. I ended up stop using it when I started to do split grade printing. It's easier to use Ilford multigrade under the lens filters than to fiddle with the knobs on the color head in the dark. That's my 2¢ worth.
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
52,050
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
I recommend the colour heads for black and white variable contrast printing because they are diffusion light sources, while many/most of the alternatives are not.
And I prefer working with diffused light.
But it certainly is true that with some colour heads, split grade printing can be less convenient.
I'm currently working with a variable contrast light source, which (with Mainecoonmaniac in mind) I would describe as the "cat's pajamas" for both regular and split grade.
 
Joined
Dec 10, 2009
Messages
6,297
Format
Multi Format
I recommend the colour heads for black and white variable contrast printing because they are diffusion light sources, while many/most of the alternatives are not.
And I prefer working with diffused light.
But it certainly is true that with some colour heads, split grade printing can be less convenient.
I'm currently working with a variable contrast light source, which (with Mainecoonmaniac in mind) I would describe as the "cat's pajamas" for both regular and split grade.
I agree. I like diffusion light heads vs condenser heads. Printing with condenser heads can block up highlights if your film is over developed.
 
OP
OP

CMoore

Subscriber
Joined
Aug 23, 2015
Messages
6,191
Location
USA CA
Format
35mm
Both color and black and multigrade white papers are balanced for tungsten lighting. From my years of printing, I only use the magenta and yellow filters both for black and white and color printing. If you're thinking of being a dichroic head just for black and white printing, you're better off buying a set of Ilford Multigrade filters. I used a color head for years for black and white printing because I have a color head. I ended up stop using it when I started to do split grade printing. It's easier to use Ilford multigrade under the lens filters than to fiddle with the knobs on the color head in the dark. That's my 2¢ worth.
Oh Man......Truer Words.! :smile:
I am no expert, but for "Normal" B&W printing, the dichroic is great.
But Yeah.............for split grade, cranking those knobs back and forth from Min to Max can be a pain. Not the end of the world, sure.
But like you say............I have just used the under lens with ease.
For test strips, i have (at times) just held the filter under the lens.

I recommend the colour heads for black and white variable contrast printing because they are diffusion light sources, while many/most of the alternatives are not.
And I prefer working with diffused light.
But it certainly is true that with some colour heads, split grade printing can be less convenient.
I'm currently working with a variable contrast light source, which (with Mainecoonmaniac in mind) I would describe as the "cat's pajamas" for both regular and split grade.
Again, no "Expert" but my limited experience mimics yours.
It seems like i do prefer the results and process better with the 45S Dichroic than my Condenser Head, because of the diffused light.
 

DREW WILEY

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2011
Messages
13,747
Format
8x10 Format
Colorheads are the ideal solution for VC printing too. Super easy to use with continuous cc adjustability, and now relatively affordable. Plus you can do color printing too if you want to. If you want to do hard filtration split grade, simply have a flip-out arm for under the lens, or a threaded adapter, for sake of colored blue versus green glass filters, and set the colorhead itself neutral. But some colorheads have pushbutton control panels, so no need to turn dials on the head itself.
 

flavio81

Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2014
Messages
5,059
Location
Lima, Peru
Format
Medium Format
I agree. I like diffusion light heads vs condenser heads. Printing with condenser heads can block up highlights if your film is over developed.

I also prefer diffusion light heads. They work just fine for B&W too!
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom