Exposing to recover details in highlghts

[Luis Filipe]

I know this must have been discussed many times before but can't find any answer for what I need to know specifically.

So, let's say that in a scene I find important to reveal plenty detail in the shadows but there's also a considerable amount of highlights. I will have to develop the film to recover these highlights, so:

1) in order to obtain a full recover what is the maximum range in terms of stops between the darkest perceptible shadows and the lightest perceptible detail?

2) is there any math solution to calculate the amount of time to reduce or extend the developing time, e.g., if the difference mentioned in the previous question is 5 stops, is one stop certain percentage in time?

Thank you very much.

 

[Don_ih]

Depends on the film used and, to some extent, the developer used. Each film claims to have a certain tonal range. Generally, you will make use of the greatest range of the film by exposing at box speed - that is the middle between where no detail will appear in shadows and no detail will appear in highlights - you risk losing one or both of those if you push or pull the film.
Adox makes a film that they say has the greatest tonal range of any b&w film, if used in their developer.
I find FP4+ has great range when developed in d76 1:3.
Pushing the film runs the risk of overdeveloping, which increases contrast and loses detail everywhere.
Pulling the film runs the risk of having no detail in the shadows.
When I shoot Rollei film (and any film that's likely to lose shadow detail), I finish development and then pour in a Borax solution (5g borax to 500 ml water) and let it soak for a5 minutes or so. The shadow areas use the alkalinity to continue development. The highlights use it up right away - the effect lingers in the shadow detail. The important thing is that you don't rinse or stop the film after pouring off the developer, you carefully pour in the Borax solution, then you don't moved the dev tank for the next 5 minutes (no agitation). The work is done by the residual developing agents that are still on the film.
But the main thing is to know what your film is capable of. Then bracket your exposures.

 

[juan]

Generally film has a greater range than the paper you print on. Without knowing what your paper can handle, you can’t match the negative to it.

 

[Doremus Scudder]

The Zone System was developed as a simplified application of sensitometry to address this exact issue. I suggest you start with an introduction to the Zone System (there are lots of resources on the web) and digest the fundamentals. Even if you don't adopt the whole system, you'll be able to apply the principles to your particular situation.

Bottom line: to control highlight density, change development time (reduce it to decrease density and vice-versa). This means, however, that you need to make sure your exposure is adequate to get the shadow detail you want. How much? You have to test.

Best,

Doremus

 

[Alan9940]

Perceptible detail in deep shadows and same in highlights really depends on your own definition and acceptance of what constitutes perceptible detail. Some would argue that B&W film (FP4+, for example) can record an acceptable range of 8 stops--Zone II to Zone IX, in zone system terminology. Personally, I consider it closer to 6 - 7 stops; or, Zone III to Zone VIII. In my experience, the upper end of the curve can be pushed more than the lower end. But, then, again, if you use a film with a nearly straight line to its "curve", then you have a bit more leeway. However, as Doremus already said you should understand zone system basics and do some testing to obtain the full potential of any film. There are techniques like highly dilute developer, stand development, pyro-type developers, etc, that will enable you to push things a bit, but, again, these techniques require a solid understanding of the basics.

 

[Bill Burk]

If you meter around 7 or 8 stops between highlights and shadows, the standard already has you covered.

If there is a greater luminance range, then you can follow anyone’s advice here, they are all correct.

I was just reading The New Zone System Manual where they recommend “fine tuning” as they call it. The general approach is to dilute your developer more to compensate. So if you normally use D-76 1:1 then try 1:2 or 1:3 with corresponding adjustments to developing time.

They say doing this helps hold Zone I through Zone V and controlling highlights for example bringing Zone X down to Zone IX or Zone VIII

 

[DREW WILEY]

Proper metering of both the lowest shadow value you want as the threshold of texture, and at the other end, where you desire perceptible tonality in the highlights. A spotmeter helps.Then select a film which can handle the range involved. Not all are the same. I'm not giving specifics here, but axioms. Develop it to the density range reasonably printable on your chosen paper. VC papers help of course. There are various models that help planning this, such as the Zone System. It's not ideal, but certainly useful to learn. Otherwise, ditto with what others have already stated. Expose for the shadows (that is, the threshold of shadow gradation you want), and develop for the highlights in terms of dev time.

I can't commend any generic math silver bullet about controlling neg contrast. It all depends on the specifics of the film and developer. You can look up something like the Massive Developer Chart and see what others have done with all kinds of film and developer combinations; but you still need to test with respect to your own workflow variables, chosen materials, and personal expectations.

 

[MattKing]

Sometimes, you can't get what you want.
If you have a seaside scene, where your shadows are under the dock, and your highlights are amongst the bright white sand, any single exposure you make is going to either miss detail at one or both ends, or give you blah mid-tones, or all of the above.
The only way to deal with such situations and get pleasing results throughout all of the tones is to use techniques like multiple combined negatives or HDR.
It is always worthwhile to consider one of two options:
1) consider leaving at least one end to the brightness range featureless - that can actually look quite natural in many prints; and
2) consider not making that photograph (heresy, I know).

 

[Don_ih]

consider not making that photograph

Following that advice would have saved enough film from being ruined to put every film manufacturer out of business

 

[Sirius Glass]

Sometimes, you can't get what you want.
If you have a seaside scene, where your shadows are under the dock, and your highlights are amongst the bright white sand, any single exposure you make is going to either miss detail at one or both ends, or give you blah mid-tones, or all of the above.
The only way to deal with such situations and get pleasing results throughout all of the tones is to use techniques like multiple combined negatives or HDR.
It is always worthwhile to consider one of two options:
1) consider leaving at least one end to the brightness range featureless - that can actually look quite natural in many prints; and
2) consider not making that photograph (heresy, I know).

In scenes with the Subject Brightness Range [SBR] is fourteen f/stops, I can get that one film. Printing on paper takes some work.

 

[DREW WILEY]

From any realistic practical standpoint, "Getting it on film" means exposing and developing it in a printable manner to begin with. Otherwise, you're wasting your time. Film and print technique need to be learned in tandem.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I would more or less sort of agree with this. The range of the film is rarely the issue with most current general purpose films. Assuming one does not destroy highlight contrast, most films can easily record twelve stops, some significantly more.

The problem is people don’t want to work on their prints.

OR do not have the facilities OR do not have the knowledge.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Alas, contraction is the Achilles heel of classic ZS methodology. It's just easier to explain than getting deeply acquainted with specific films, and knowing which to use for what. But there are lots of well-known photographers who swear by big road asphalt rollers, willing to compress a few more stops of contrast into a nice neat thin indistinguishable hard layer for sake of printing. N minus this or that, maybe with the minus shown in an exponent position if necessary. N to the minus 10; that should work well for a hundred extra stops of otherwise unmanageable contrast.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Well yes that is frequently the case with any pursuit.

My point is really always that development contraction a la Zone System to fit the negative into a fixed paper grade is not a very good “control” to rely on in a generalized way.

I prefer to dodge, burn, bleach and tone on VC paper. I have not handled fixed grade paper in decades.

 

[Light Capture]

I know this must have been discussed many times before but can't find any answer for what I need to know specifically.

So, let's say that in a scene I find important to reveal plenty detail in the shadows but there's also a considerable amount of highlights. I will have to develop the film to recover these highlights, so:

1) in order to obtain a full recover what is the maximum range in terms of stops between the darkest perceptible shadows and the lightest perceptible detail?

2) is there any math solution to calculate the amount of time to reduce or extend the developing time, e.g., if the difference mentioned in the previous question is 5 stops, is one stop certain percentage in time?

Thank you very much.

For #1 metering with meter that can show you how many stops over or under are your shadows/highlights is the best. Manuals for most light meters have instructions on how to compensate when measuring white and black or other shades that are not equal to 18% gray. Maximum range will solely depend on your film/developer combo and developing times. It would need to be tested with some type of step wedge. Bracketing works well in most situations.

Zone system doesn't work very well with 35mm film. Development can only be changed for whole roll. Bulk loading short rolls could work when needed.

A little bit different approach is to use filters. Filters are very helpful with this. ND, gradual filters, Polarizer, even contrast filters can help to get exposure and contrast under control.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

A technique that hasn't been mentioned yet is contrast control masking. You make a film positive contact print of your negative then sandwich the two to make your final print.

The result is a reduced contrast negative. You can play games with the mask, like underexposing and overdeveloping, so that the highlight masking areas are clear but there is density in the shadow masking areas. That way you can print through to the highlight detail and the mask holds back the shadow areas.

And, of course, there is always burning and dodging.

 

[DREW WILEY]

VC or not, you still need a versatile enough neg. And creating a versatile neg is a lot smarter than merely correct Zone placement or whatever. This past summer I reprinted a number of early negs prior to really understanding what I was doing, which once gave me hell, but are now rather easy to print well on today's excellent graded papers.

I've mentioned masking numerous times on other threads. It's a good idea to learn the basics first, so you realize what specifically you're masking for. But I first learned sheet film development strictly for sake of masking itself, back when I was doing color printing exclusively. Only later did I take up actual black and white photography and adapt my masking skills and equipment to it. But masking should be thought of as a very versatile optional tool kit in itself, and not a single technique. It's an excellent way to have your cake and eat it too, that is, preserve tonal gradation all the way from deep shadow to the highlights, and in between too, without smashing the midtones like conventional compression "minus" or compensating development does. Like anything else, there's a learning curve involved if you want to master masking.

 

[pentaxuser]

OP it might help if you were to tell us what film you intend to use and where you want to shoot it. Do you know that the range of subject brightness is likely to be and can you tell us how you will make a print from such negatives, i.e. is it scanning or in a darkroom with light sensitive paper.

I live some 70 miles North of you and I don't think I have ever come across a range of subject brightness that exceeds what a film will be able to hold. If then range is only 5 stops then normal darkroom printing will be able to capture this and a little more.

If the negatives cover a range in which you need to consider a N (normal development ) and N minus or plus development time then unless you are using sheet film then you cannot use N, N+1 and N-1 on the same roll

So yes tell us where you will be shooting and when in the year that will be and is it roll film or sheet film? I note that you are new to film and darkroom printing and I have a feeling that you may be over thinking the whole thing based on what you have heard or read.

Can you tell us the sources of your knowledge currently i.e. certain books, other forums etc. All of this will help us formulate more helpful replies

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[Sirius Glass]

OP it might help if you were to tell us what film you intend to use and where you want to shoot it. Do you know that the range of subject brightness is likely to be and can you tell us how you will make a print from such negatives, i.e. is it scanning or in a darkroom with light sensitive paper.

I live some 70 miles North of you and I don't think I have ever come across a range of subject brightness that exceeds what a film will be able to hold. If then range is only 5 stops then normal darkroom printing will be able to capture this and a little more.

If the negatives cover a range in which you need to consider a N (normal development ) and N minus or plus development time then unless you are using sheet film then you cannot use N, N+1 and N-1 on the same roll

So yes tell us where you will be shooting and when in the year that will be and is it roll film or sheet film? I note that you are new to film and darkroom printing and I have a feeling that you may be over thinking the whole thing based on what you have heard or read.

Can you tell us the sources of your knowledge currently i.e. certain books, other forums etc. All of this will help us formulate more helpful replies

Thanks

pentaxuser

Come to the southwestern US for a vacation and see a SBR of 12 to 14.

 

[Luis Filipe]

I think I don't have much reasons to worry about the difference in range, at least with the film I'm using (Tri-X) and where I'm shooting most of the time. Well the truth is that the more you search the more questions you come up, and this seemed important to know.

If I'm not wrong:

Got clear that most films offers plenty range and the more precise your exposure is the easier will be printing in darkroom, specially with Multigrade paper.
That is important to expose considering the more limited range of certain paper.
And unless I compromise shooting the entire roll under the same certain exposure parameters I shouldn't extend or reduce the developing time when shooting with the box speed. If I ever feel the need to do it would try N-1.

I'm completely new to film photography but have some notions of zone system and how to expose. The major problem about exposing seems to be the fact that I'm using the Olympus OM-1 that uses centre-weighted average meter, which I never used before(spot only), so sometimes I just pull my digital camera to have a more accurate reading. Not sure if I should do this, but how big the difference could be?

I would consider buying a different camera or even a spot meter device in future.

 

[MattKing]

I have thousands and thousands of well exposed slides and negatives that were exposed using the centre weighted meters in OM-1s and other OM bodies. They, like most centre weighted meters, are extremely effective and usable meters.
Particularly with negative films, you need not worry. Just familiarize yourself with how the meter works.

 

[voceumana]

You might try Ilford XP2 chromogenic film--develops in C41 color chemicals. It is supposed to have a shoulder that doesn't stop--i.e., highlights just keep getting denser (and with lower grain).

 

[DREW WILEY]

Try high altitude open sun involving everything from specular highlights on snow and ice clear down to deep shadow pits in dark volcanic rock in the same scene. 12 stop range. Or in our deep redwoods, 12 stop ranges in open sun are common. I often encounter that kind of range; some photographers never do. Not every panchromatic film will handle that range without throwing away the sparkle and rich gradation by using reduced development. They're not all the same by any means. Apples to apples, without resorting to compression, Pan F only has a 5 stops dynamic range, FP4 about 7, T Max films nearly 9, discontinued "straight line" films like Super XX and Bergger 200, around 11. Note this is approximate dynamic range - the texture and tonality BETWEEN typically printable pure black and pure white.

So film choice does matter if high-contrast scenes are involved. And in such cases, a spotmeter is also valuable. Averaging meters do just that, average; they don't identify the values of the extremes. I'm talking about real handheld meters, like the Pentax digital spotmeter. They're going to give you better readings than in-camera TTL meters once you understand them. In camera meters, whether the camera is film or digital, inherently introduce a bunch of other variables beside the reading itself. It's good to get weaned from that and learn basic elements so that you're the one making the decisions and not some built-in program. The most important thing is to simply be familiar through practice and experimentation with whatever meter you decide to work with. But anything like the Zone System would be hard to master without a real independent meter.

Chromogenic b&w film? - about as appealing to me as Pepto Bismol served soggy on stale bread. Bland. That would be a non-starter if one is trying to learn about conventional films and their development anyway.

 

[voceumana]

Chromogenic b&w film? - about as appealing to me as Pepto Bismol served soggy on stale bread. Bland. That would be a non-starter if one is trying to learn about conventional films and their development anyway.

You asked how to record the range--that's one option. If you dismiss tools out of hand you're limiting your options for success. I would say, however, that at this stage, C41 process is pretty conventional. Final prints can be on any B&W material you want to use. The negative is just a step towards the final image. If bland is what it takes, then consider bland. And, by the way, "bland" is pretty much what you will get in the negative if you develop to cover an extreme exposure range--you're just asking for bland and don't know it. The drama can come in the final print, and will require dodging and burning in.

 

[Luis Filipe]

I have thousands and thousands of well exposed slides and negatives that were exposed using the centre weighted meters in OM-1s and other OM bodies. They, like most centre weighted meters, are extremely effective and usable meters.
Particularly with negative films, you need not worry. Just familiarize yourself with how the meter works.

Sure, but maybe because I basically always used spot I feel some red flags when exposing that way.
Just have to understand how it works exactly and get used to it.

Its normally easier if there's an area that I can get closer and covers the whole frame with uniform light conditions.