Curves in the analog darkroom

Hey doing some thinking while at work (since I cant print at work I can at least think about it though). I cant really get it clear in my head so I hope someone with more experience can explain it to me in a more easily digestible manner.

When scanning film the only post processing I ever do is to do some curves to darken some shadows and sometimes to boost the highlights. Then maybe a little sharpening if needed. How do you apply "curves" in the analog darkroom to a print? I know about filtering and VC paper but boosting the contrast is not the same as darkening the shadows to get those deep dark blacks and leaving the highlights and midtones alone. Anyone try to do anything similar in their printing endeavors?

(Edited to add that I'm pretty sure its just split grade printing - anyone have any good examples of this technique and how they achieved them?)

There are many variables, and it's probably best to read a book or three about all the possibilities you have in the wet darkroom. I like Ansel Adams' _The Negative_ and _The Print_.

Using VC paper or using different graded papers is like using levels in PhotoShop--expose for clean highlights and adjust the contrast grade to get solid blacks, just as if you were setting the endpoints of the histogram.

Then you've got lots of options--using a different paper and or developer or development technique (these will change the overall curve of the final print), dodging and burning, local bleaching, flashing, contrast masking, unsharp masking, and more.

There are also lots of options when you're exposing and producing the negative that will change the overall tonal range of the final print. Many of these are covered in _The Negative_.

I believe that you did answer your own question. Split grade printing is one very good way to alter the contrast of your print. You can stretch out the range by bringing the shadows down as low as you like while keeping the highlights nice and bright. You can also produce a very stark, soot and chalk print by using only the hard filter, or a low contrast print with the soft filter.

If I understand you correct, you want to alter shadow and/or highlight contrast while conserving mid tone contrast. At least that is where I see the strength of "curves".

VC, different grades of graded paper and even split grade only alter the overall contrast.

While I think it can be done up to a certain point (e.g. increase shadow contrast with lith printing, softening highlights with preflash, choosing paper / developer combos) the effect is rather limited.

The best technique I've found so far for controlling contrast or density in a print without having to compromise other areas of the print is by using sharp and unsharp masking. Check out Lynn Radeka's site and be sure to scroll down the page to the 'Bisti Badlands' example where he controls the deep shadows without effecting the highlights at all;

http://www.maskingkits.com/maskingexamples.htm

The possibilities are endless. With this technique you can make a print of a leafless tree against a sky, print the sky as dramatically and with as much contrast as you want, but use a contrast reduction mask (CRM) to lighten only the tree and all its branches. After using those two pin registered masks, you can then make a shadow contrast increase mask (SCIM) to selectively put some texture and fine detailed blacks back into the tree...and even into the smallest branches. Its easily the most demanding thing I've tried to tackle in photography, and will keep me on the steep part of the learning curve for years to come!

Murray

Concur with David. Adams provided excellent overview of normal practice.
BIG curve shape difference possible with hard and soft developers.
Add to that different grade papers, or variable paper grade papers,
and you have enough to manage everything you'll ever encounter.

Refinements like splitgrade are more about how you think about making a print,
and sometimes verge on magical thinking. Masks... well, hardly basics, and not for everybody.

The basics, as Adams lays them out, will be a fast and economical way to find your answer.
Its essential to get into the dark, and practise. Printing is NOT a predictive or theoretical science.

Have fun.

Thanks for all the thoughtful responses everyone. I'll be spending the rest of today reading before I get some practice. Murray thanks for the link, that looks really interesting and I can clearly see how this technique can be very demanding. I hope to be able to tackle it as well one day.

synj00 said:

Thanks for all the thoughtful responses everyone. I'll be spending the rest of today reading before I get some practice. Murray thanks for the link, that looks really interesting and I can clearly see how this technique can be very demanding. I hope to be able to tackle it as well one day.

Click to expand...

One thing that I think important is that digital and analog are different, and it may not be entirely possible to duplicate what you can do with either using the other.

Also, prior to doing any of the suggested means of modifying regions of the curve, it is very important to get the best straight print you can as a place to start. I print with white and black patches, which helps me avoid the machinations of my brain when it tries to convince me that everything is just fine, that the darkest tone I see is really black, that the lightest tone is really white. Our brains work well in comparing but are not very good with determining absolutes without a standard for comparison.

The digital grayscale is quite unlike the photographic grayscale. I do the kind of thing you do when I convert from one to the other, because that linear equal step scale that you get naturally with the digital just doesn't look right to me. I want the steps to be unequal, as they are in the traditional silver medium. I suspect that what you are trying to do may well be what you would get anyway without doing much to change anything. Just a hunch, but if it were me, I know that would be true.

I work with students a lot. It is often hard to convince them that most of the problems they see in a print would disappear if they simply made a straight print. The tendency is to try all manor of complicated things without ever doing the simple ones.

We humans are very strange creatures.

bowzart said:

I work with students a lot. It is often hard to convince them that most of the problems they see in a print would disappear if they simply made a straight print. The tendency is to try all manor of complicated things without ever doing the simple ones.

We humans are very strange creatures.

Click to expand...

So true!

Wicked first post - welcome aboard APUG

Murray

MurrayMinchin said:

Wicked first post - welcome aboard APUG

Murray

Click to expand...

Thanks.. It is great to come out of hiding.

I don't know if this thread is closed or not but I thought I'd put in my two cents on masking. You're right about Radeka's masking procedures Murray. I've had the kit and his registration system for some time now and I have to admit these masks have made a huge difference in the quality of my prints. Like someone said, the downside is that now I'm looking back on all my older negatives wanting to print them all over again with these newer techniques.

I agree with Bowzart too, always try to get the best negatives to start with and try the simplest printing methods first. Then if you aren't happy with the results or you feel you need to enhance your print quality you've got these other techniques to rely on.