Do you control contrast by development and film choice?

[Vetus]

Extending or reducing development time controls contrast, fact. Does the subject brightness range and contrast in a scene affect your film choice?
For example would you choose Ilford xp2+ for a 7 stop sbr high contrast scene or Ilford panf+ for a low contrast 4 stop sbr low contrast scene?
Is it a rule of thumb that low asa films are high contrast and high asa films are low contrast?
Which films do you use for low contrast scenes/ high contrast scenes?
Do you stick with your favourite film that you are familiar with and control contrast by adjusting the development time and exposure?
Do you have the same film loaded in 2 film backs or two camera bodies, one for high, one for low contrast?
How do you approach contrast control?
Are any particular films such as, Fomapan, Rollei,Tmax and panf+50 more contrasty than say Hp5+ ?

 

[greg zinselmeier]

I use the same film all the time. I haven’t used any other for like 7 years.?The order in which I adjust for compression or expansion of tonal range: in developer: adj.time first, then concentration of dev., PH, agitation frequency, I never deviate from 68 degrees.

 

[Ian Grant]

It's the combination of film choice, developer choice, exposure (effective EI) and development time.

Ian

 

[Vetus]

It's the combination of film choice, developer choice, exposure (effective EI) and development time.

Ian

What's the best combination you use for low and high contrast scenes?

 

[Huub]

"Best" is a subjective term for me and would depend on quite a few factors. For instance the amount of light available - slow film in low light situations is not a good combination for handheld photography. Tonal scale would be a factor too - personally i don't like the tonal scale of PanF+and Delta400 for instance. A third would be the post-processing - are you wetprinting the old fashioned way or using some kind of hybrid system, involving scanning and digital manipulation? And a fourth would be the camera system you are using - sheet film makes it possible to assess the contrast of each individual sheet while using 35mm and medium format need a more general approach averaging the contrast of the whole film.

I generally use only one film (TMY-2 for 35mm and 120, HP5+ for 4x5) ) and one developer (XTOL) and adjust development time according to contrast of the scene, making sure my negatives stay on the soft side when i have a film with several contrast situations. I find it easier to use higher grades when printing a low contrast scene then going through the hassle of adjusting high contrast scenes, as this often involve way more manipulation to get a decent print.

 

[Ian Grant]

What's the best combination you use for low and high contrast scenes?

Personally I use Delta 100 & HP5 for large format developed in Pyrocat HD, and Delta 100 & 400 for 120 and the odd rolls of 35mm. I also use Fomapan 200 it needs less development than the Ilford films.

If I didn't mix my own Pyrocat HD I'd use Xtol again. I control contrast by adjusting development times and slight exposure adjustments.

Essentially you need to do some simple testing to determine your effective EI and development time under normal lighting conditions, then you have a base to adjust from for low and high contrast situations.

Welcome, where about in the UK ?

Ian

 

[Ivo Stunga]

Let's not forget another contrast control tool: agitation frequency! I don't know why it doesn't get as much attentions as the rest of the tools.

There are some films that handle huge range better than others - especially for slide shooters. For stupid range I know that APX 100 will handle it like a champ.
To build contrast I go for lower ISO films or just agitate more frequently whatever film I got.

 

[xkaes]

Get a copy of Richard Henry's book "Controls in B&W Photography". He shows how to do your own tests. ANY film can be handled to adjust contrast, but you are the judge.

 

[snusmumriken]

I choose the film to suit the light available, and adjust development to control contrast. Only exception is if - very occasionally - I want to do something like a still life when I might choose Pan F and Perceptol.

 

[Vaughn]

It's the combination of film choice, developer choice, exposure (effective EI) and development time.

Ian

But also toss in the photographic printing process to be used. The way I make carbon prints needs a bit more contrast than silver gelatin printing (DR of 2.5 to 3.0).

Carefully used, Kodak Professional Copy Film can effectively boost a 3 stop scene into a printable range for me.

But usually I stick with FP4+ and use a print developer (Dektol or PQ Universal) to boost contrast to the desired amount. In scenes of higher SBR, I use a staining developer.

 

[ic-racer]

Adjusting development time only gets one to a different paper grade. If that is what is needed, fine. Otherwise, not needed.

 

[faberryman]

For 35mm and 120, I vary contrast with variable contrast filters at the printing stage. For 4x5, I occasionally vary contrast using plus and minus development.

 

[Doremus Scudder]

Adjusting development time only gets one to a different paper grade. If that is what is needed, fine. Otherwise, not needed.

That's kind of the whole point of adjusting development time. Admittedly, lots of different development times are not needed these days as much as in the past if we are using modern VC papers (or scanning...). Still, for getting extremely flat or contrasty scenes to a place where they print well on an intermediate paper grade, different development times are often the best approach.

For those using alt-processes or contact printing on graded papers that only have a few contrast options, adjusting development time based on subject luminance range is a basic tool.

Best,

Doremus

 

[Sirius Glass]

Extending or reducing development time controls contrast, fact. Does the subject brightness range and contrast in a scene affect your film choice?
For example would you choose Ilford xp2+ for a 7 stop sbr high contrast scene or Ilford panf+ for a low contrast 4 stop sbr low contrast scene?
Is it a rule of thumb that low asa films are high contrast and high asa films are low contrast?
Which films do you use for low contrast scenes/ high contrast scenes?
Do you stick with your favourite film that you are familiar with and control contrast by adjusting the development time and exposure?
Do you have the same film loaded in 2 film backs or two camera bodies, one for high, one for low contrast?
How do you approach contrast control?
Are any particular films such as, Fomapan, Rollei,Tmax and panf+50 more contrasty than say Hp5+ ?

The choice of film controls the grain, contrast, and SBR [Subject Brightness Range].
The choice of ISO or EI influences the grain, contrast, and SBR [Subject Brightness Range].
The choice of developer influences the grain, contrast, and SBR [Subject Brightness Range].
The development time controls the grain, contrast, and SBR [Subject Brightness Range].

Welcome to APUG Photrio!!​

 

[Thomas71]

My easy rule of thumb:
In a low-conrast scene (cloudy or rainy day) I use low speed film. My favourite is FP4 in XTOL: very nice micro-contrast, tight grain, good separation of mid tones
In a high contrast scene (sunny day) I use a medium speed film; they have a lower contrast than low speed films. My favourites are Delta400 or HP5 (Kodak are too expensive to me), even if I like them less than the FP4. Medium speed films have a greater latitude pose, they can manage high contrast scene more easily than FP4 or other low speed films.
My 2 cents

 

[Sirius Glass]

My easy rule of thumb:
In a low-conrast scene (cloudy or rainy day) I use low speed film. My favourite is FP4 in XTOL: very nice micro-contrast, tight grain, good separation of mid tones
In a high contrast scene (sunny day) I use a medium speed film; they have a lower contrast than low speed films. My favourites are Delta400 or HP5 (Kodak are too expensive to me), even if I like them less than the FP4. Medium speed films have a greater latitude pose, they can manage high contrast scene more easily than FP4 or other low speed films.
My 2 cents

An interesting approach that I never thought about, although I tend to use ISO 400 films.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I use exposure/development time to control contrast, regardless of film choice, and I have many to choose from. Depending on the subject brightness range, I may employ a Pyrocat-HD 2-bath. There are certain films where I'll always use the same developer, Pan F and D-23 1+3, XRAY and Pyrocat-HD 1+1+200, for example they have inherently more contrast.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I use exposure/development time to control contrast, regardless of film choice, and I have many to choose from. Depending on the subject brightness range, I may employ a Pyrocat-HD 2-bath. There are certain films where I'll always use the same developer, Pan F and D-23 1+3, XRAY and Pyrocat-HD 1+1+200, for example they have inherently more contrast.

An approach to increase contrast is to develop the film 10%, 15% or 20% longer than normal. This takes some experimentation and careful note taking to have the quickest learning curve.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

By film choice, we limit or not our possibilities.
If we choose PanF or TMX, they can be well used, but there are few things we can do, even after we learn how to control tone with EI, developer, dilution, time and agitation.
If we chose HP5+, we have a broader horizon.
Not only about contrast control: HP5+ is like having several films.
@160 in Perceptol it's one film. @400 in D-76 stock, another one. @1600-3200 in Microphen, a different film. In my case, @800 in D-76 1+2 I find it unique: I can have different contrast scenes in the same roll, and sunny scenes have decent tone no matter the push. I can't get the same with Tri-X, Delta400, TMY, or K400: I've tried. HP5+ has such real speed and low native contrast it allows us, IMO, more freedom -more tools- than any other film.
Of course if someone doesn't do street, but just tripod work preferring minimal grain, they'll enjoy TMX, or those wanting low grain and speed, but at EI400 only, then they'll use TMY, etc.
So, yes, we control our film contrast with EI, time, developer, dilution, and agitation, but we also control our scenes' contrast considering films: PanF isn't the best option for direct sunlight contrast control filtering without tripod...
I don't mind if I have big or small grain: my only reason for ISO100 films is -instead of higher resolution or less grain- they're more comfortable for portraiture at f/2.
Any photograph is better when it works well from the point of view of visual narrative, and when it was well crafted from the point of view of technique: format and grain level have no relevance when image structure, composition, and content are what mattered to the author.
If I have no ISO100 film at hand, HP5+ @160 in Perceptol is close to an ISO100 film.

 

[Vaughn]

The best tool depends on the job that needs to be done. I stay away from HP5+, as I find it difficult to build up the higher contrast I need. But I have a bunch of it anyway in 11x14, so I'll break some out someday and see how it handles high SBR and a bit more development to see if I can get some life out of it! If not, I'll save it for a possible cyanotype project that would be fun to do around town.

But I have a motley collection of film sizes and types -- just scored two 100 sheet boxes of Kodak Copy Film 4125, expired mid-80s, 4x5 and 5x7. Blue and green sensitive and an odd beast (contrast controlled by both exposure and development) that I have learned to love.

I was also given a couple boxes of 8x10 Kodak Commercial Film 4127...which is another beastie altogether, being not sensitive to red or green. 50 ASA in daylight...I'll have to give this film some thought -- redwoods being a bit on the red and green side of things... Skyless desert/redrock images? Rough-looking portraits?

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Once, as a student I developed HP5+ by mistake -slow shutter speed while pushing, apart from more development time and agitation than optimal- in Microphen stock to an unusable (to me and my silver printing) high contrast. Wild negatives.
As you said, the other extreme is, in some developers and dilutions, like Rodinal 1:50, it's so weak it works for condenser enlargers only.

 

[otto.f]

I do not often choose the contrast of a film for situations. I choose a film that I like or that I want know better. But I do watch the contrast in situations to adapt my development time if necessary. Multigrade paper however is quite forgiving and scanning with digital pp even more. If you use 35mm film with 36 exposures in very different contrast situations XP2 can be usefull indeed. Main criterium however is whether I like the film.

 

[albireo]

I do not often choose the contrast of a film for situations. I choose a film that I like or that I want know better. But I do watch the contrast in situations to adapt my development time if necessary. Multigrade paper however is quite forgiving and scanning with digital pp even more.

Not true in general. I purely scan my negatives and find it's incredibly easy to spot scans from poorly exposed/developed negatives that have been photoshopped to make up for errors upstream in the chain.

Post processing is no replacement for optimal exposure+development control, regardless of the final output sought.

 

[Chuck_P]

I use one film, TMX100, and use basic exposure and development time decisions to control contrast. This simplifies things, imo.

 

[Rick A]

I use one film and one developer then adjust exposure and development as necessary. What ever else needed to make the print come out as envisioned is done when printing.