Dealing with large Dynamic Range of the Negative . . . ??

John Galt · Nov 23, 2018

Hello everyone . . . I have recently begun printing in the darkroom again after an almost 50 year hiatus . . . I never took a photography or darkroom course, all self taught . . to be honest back in the day I was a real FNG noob greenhorn.

I have a negative I wish to print for a local art show next summer. This is a scan of it posted in the Gallery . . .

https://www.photrio.com/forum/media/portal.56924/

Tech Info:
Ilford FP4 Plus 120 roll film with Hasselblad 500C and 80mm Carl Zeiss lens
Developed in Microdol X, stock solution
Straight, no edit scan on Epson V600

I am having trouble printing where the shadow detail is there but the highlights are waaay blown out . . . I am using Dektol 1+2 with Ilford MGIV RC glossy straight through the Beseler 23C II (no contrast filters)with 80mm El Nikor 5.6 @ f22 @ 5-6 seconds or so . . .
Enlighten me . . . . I know the highlight and shadow information is there . . . it is in the scan . . . I am thinking a different print developer and maybe a contrast filter? I have a new Ilford contrast filter set . . .

Thank you in advance

Photo Engineer · Nov 23, 2018

Dodging and burning? Multi contrast printing?

PE

E. von Hoegh · Nov 23, 2018

Try a test strip with a grade 2 filter, orient the strip so you get shadows and the blown pillar. Without actually seeing the negative, I can't do much more than guess.

MattKing · Nov 23, 2018

Experiment with dodging, burning and contrast control on different, small segments of the image. Once you get highlights you like in the highlighted section, and shadows you like in the shadow section, and midtones you like in the midtone section, figure out how to incorporate all approaches into a single print.
In most cases, that is easier than it sounds.

Eric Rose · Nov 23, 2018

Give split grade printing a whirl. That combined with dodging etc. should bring it all in.

RPC · Nov 23, 2018

John Galt said:
Enlighten me . . . . I know the highlight and shadow information is there . . . it is in the scan . . .

Your problem is due to the fact that paper print material does not have the dynamic range of negative film, so printers occasionally have to resort to the techniques described above to bring in highlight and shadow detail in the print.

ic-racer · Nov 23, 2018

The scan of the negative looked like a positive on my screen. To know the dynamic range from the image (10/255 to 243/255) one would need to know the assigned log-d values for each step from 1 to 255. It literally could be anything. Hard to know how to solve the printing issues without seeing the print in question; can you show that. I think it would be informative. Also some image of the negative on a light table to get a sense of the dynamic range.

awty · Nov 23, 2018

Similar to what others said, but this is my process for such a print.
I would use a grade 2 filter to begin with, stop down to aim for around a 32 sec exposure. Start at around 8 secs and do 1/4 stop test strip. Check test strip to see if the contrast and time is correct. Do another if not.
Expose to the shadows and burn in the highlights. Shadow dodges are way more finicky than burns usually.
If you need more time with the burns or dodges, stop down 1 to double your time....and start filling the bin till you get it right.
Also a selenium bath may help.

John Galt · Nov 23, 2018

Thank you for the replies . . I was looking for guidance, not a definitive "This is how to make a print of this negative" . . and you all have provided "Guidance" thank you so much.

I will investigate "Split Printing" per Eric Rose . . . and I was aware that Paper does not have the range of the Negative per RPC. And thank you to MattKing for recommending the obvious (but not to me) of dodging the exposure!! LOL

And I will be doing test strips per E. von Hoegh with contrast filter #2 . . . yes E. von Hoegh, that front pillar is definitely blown . . .

ic-racer, thank you but as of this moment I do not have a light box, maybe soon.

Thank you all . . . what a great place this is!!

John Galt · Nov 23, 2018

awty said:
Similar to what others said, but this is my process for such a print.
I would use a grade 2 filter to begin with, stop down to aim for around a 32 sec exposure. Start at around 8 secs and do 1/4 stop test strip. Check test strip to see if the contrast and time is correct. Do another if not.
Expose to the shadows and burn in the highlights. Shadow dodges are way more finicky than burns usually.
If you need more time with the burns or dodges, stop down 1 to double your time....and start filling the bin till you get it right.
Also a selenium bath may help.

Thank you . . . this is the direction I was headed to tomorrow . . . . I am aiming for an 8" x 8" print . . . my current times are at 5-7 seconds at f22 . . . the grade 2 filter will help for a longer exposure, will it get my up to 20-30 seconds? . . . . I am hoping that exposing for the shadow detail and dodging the highlights will get me the resulting print I want
. . .

jimjm · Nov 23, 2018

Here's a nice write-up that might help you to get started. There are numerous techniques for using split-grade printing and dodging/burning, sometimes the hardest part is figuring out how to approach it. Good Luck!
http://www.theonlinedarkroom.com/2014/01/split-grade-printing-guest-post.html

E. von Hoegh · Nov 23, 2018

You can cut paper into little squares, for instance place one in the shadows and see what time you need, then one on the pillar - if you don't have experience dodging & burning this will give you some pointers. Also, make a rough diagram of where & how long you dodge & burn for future printing.

awty · Nov 23, 2018

John Galt said:
Thank you . . . this is the direction I was headed to tomorrow . . . . I am aiming for an 8" x 8" print . . . my current times are at 5-7 seconds at f22 . . . the grade 2 filter will help for a longer exposure, will it get my up to 20-30 seconds? . . . . I am hoping that exposing for the shadow detail and dodging the highlights will get me the resulting print I want
. . .

I sometimes go for a lower wattage bulb or a piece of grounded glass above the negative to give me more time.
If you can at least get around 16 secs base, should give a bit more time to work with.
Good luck, look forwards to seeing how you go.

John Galt · Nov 23, 2018

Thanks Paul, I have a round piece of ground glass I got with my 23C II . . . . Gotta figure out where and if it goes . . .. .

RalphLambrecht · Nov 23, 2018

Photo Engineer said:
Dodging and burning? Multi contrast printing?

PE

that won't help much; and if you squeeze the contrast range into a paper range the print will look flat bu, the image is worth making a contrast mask; that will increase sharpness, control the contrast and make a dynamic print!

John Galt · Nov 23, 2018

"that won't help much; and if you squeeze the contrast range into a paper range the print will look flat bu, the image is worth making a contrast mask; that will increase sharpness, control the contrast and make a dynamic print!"

What is this "Contrast Mask" thou speaketh of . . . ??

Loren Sattler · Nov 23, 2018

I use a Beseler 23C enlarger. When the exposure time is too short I put a neutral density acetate filter in the filter drawer which absorbs light and lengthens the exposure accordingly. You can buy in roll form from someone like B&H and cut it with a scissors to fit the filter drawer.

John Galt · Nov 23, 2018

Loren Sattler said:
I use a Beseler 23C enlarger. When the exposure time is too short I put a neutral density acetate filter in the filter drawer which absorbs light and lengthens the exposure accordingly. You can buy in roll form from someone like B&H and cut it with a scissors to fit the filter drawer.

Thanks for the tip Loren! I have an order going into B&H in few days. I will add this to the order . . Question . . . would not the Ilford Grade 2 filter also add a stop or two?

Photo Engineer · Nov 23, 2018

Ralph, I agree, but this is a lengthy complicated process and paper prints always compress the range so whatever you do depends on cost, time and etc... My suggestions can accomplish the goal without film intermediates and other complex processes.

PE

RalphLambrecht · Nov 23, 2018

Photo Engineer said:
Ralph, I agree, but this is a lengthy complicated process and paper prints always compress the range so whatever you do depends on cost, time and etc... My suggestions can accomplish the goal without film intermediates and other complex processes.

PE

I'm in the fortunate position that time is no issue to me.Maybe spli=grade printing would offer a compromise.

MattKing · Nov 23, 2018

With the greatest respect to Ralph, techniques like masking make a lot more sense for someone with his depth and breadth of experience than for someone who is a near beginner.
Looking at the posted scan, I have a feeling that the apparent wide dynamic range might be at least partially a result of aesthetic choices favouring contrast over tonality.
I am guessing, but I expect that if I were printing this the result might lean more to a dreamlike appearance than the choices taken by the OP. If the negative supports that, the print might be easier to make.

Vaughn · Nov 23, 2018

John Galt said:
Thanks for the tip Loren! I have an order going into B&H in few days. I will add this to the order . . Question . . . would not the Ilford Grade 2 filter also add a stop or two?

It will add one stop. And if you go with split filter printing, the darker filters (3.5 and above) add two stops.

Have fun!

Alan Edward Klein · Nov 24, 2018

This may not make a difference to your intent. But the scan is not a no edit scan or you edited a no edit scan in post processing. The scanner software or your PS has automatically adjusted the black and white points.

Loren Sattler · Nov 24, 2018

John Galt said:
Thanks for the tip Loren! I have an order going into B&H in few days. I will add this to the order . . Question . . . would not the Ilford Grade 2 filter also add a stop or two?

John, yes the #2 filter will shorten the exposure also, but often not enough to get your exposure into a comfortable range especially if you want to use an f stop that is in the "sweet spot" of your enlarger lens. The sweet spot is typically 1-2 stops from wide open. Consequently I try to print around f8 with my lenses to yield the best possible results (sharpness, contrast etc). I find that the most comfortable exposure times are 10-20 seconds. This allows for adequate time to dodge or burn and comfortable times to add or subtract 10% exposure times if the print feels a little too dark or light.
Another tip would be to always use a contrast filter even if you are printing with the #2 filter (same contrast as no filter). This allows you to adjust up or down without making a major change to the exposure time.

bernard_L · Nov 24, 2018

John Galt said:
I will investigate "Split Printing"

Be aware that split grade printing, per se, accomplishes no more in terms of end result than a suitable intermediate grade. It is not a magic bullet. It may be (depending on individual tastes) more convenient to determine suitable exposure times through #0 and #5 filters than to determine a single paper grade and an exposure time.
Selective (dodging, burn-in) exposure through different filter grades does enable results unobtainable by oter techniques.

Dealing with large Dynamic Range of the Negative . . . ??

John Galt

Photo Engineer

E. von Hoegh

MattKing

Moderator

Eric Rose

RPC

ic-racer

awty

John Galt

John Galt

jimjm

E. von Hoegh

awty

John Galt

RalphLambrecht

John Galt

Loren Sattler

John Galt

Photo Engineer

RalphLambrecht

MattKing

Moderator

Vaughn

Alan Edward Klein

Loren Sattler

bernard_L

Dealing with large Dynamic Range of the Negative . . . ??

Moderator

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency