Getting the Wood Effect with Panchromatic Film

[Xander Fischer]

Hi, I have been trying for ages to get those striking black skies that Adams used to get in his landscape shots, but I have had no luck with a 25a or even a 29 red filter. my skies always turn out a mushy gray or lighter. I'm currently using Tmax 100 in Tmax Dev, and I would prefer to use a fine grain film if at all possible. I have obtained the results I want from IR film, but that won't be available forever. My current theory is that I probably need either need a less contrasty developer with the same exposure, or more exposure and shorter dev time.


What do you think? Is there a film/developer more suitable for darker skies? Is it more about ideal sky color/illumination (hasn't worked even with adequate blue sky)


What works for you?

 

[Anon Ymous]

Perhaps you need to burn the sky with a hard grade?

 

[Xander Fischer]

Perhaps you need to burn the sky with a hard grade?

But I shouldn't have to do that with a red filter; that's the whole point is that it blocks blue light from hitting the film, and lets more red light pass than any other wavelength. If the sky is sufficiently blue, I should get a nice dark sky pretty much straight out of the tank with the right film/dev combination.

 

[cliveh]

Try a polarising filter.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Try a film with a more traditional spectral response than T-max, and you should get a stronger filter effect--Tri-X, Pan-F, FP4+, any of the Adox films, etc. If you're worried about grain, shoot a larger format.

Clive's suggestion of using a polarizer or 25a plus polarizer for even more is a good one, as long as you're not using an ultrawide lens (in which case you'll get uneven polarization in the sky).

 

[pentaxuser]

You could try a red and polariser. I have found this combination to work well in the U.K. but it never gave me black skies. At high altitudes and with clear unpolluted light you would get close to black skies with panchromatic film but unless you have access to those conditions then I fear you might need to use IR film or film with extended red sensitivity.

pentaxuser

 

[gone]

Use Tri-X developed in D76 (or better, TD-16) and you will get beautifully dark skies when you use a red filter. Clouds will stand out like 3-D. To my mind T-Max is for portraits. It just has no 'pop' to the prints.

 

[Kawaiithulhu]

Many of the places Adams shot have skies that are naturally piercing, intense blue that a deep red filter will work well with. I see this deep blue on a number of days in LA/OC where I live, and in the Southwest where I drive on occasion, along with the gentler O'Keefe colors.

If you are working with a deep blue sky and not one that's hazy or bright then possibly your metering is countering the darkening of the sky. How are you metering, with the filter on and with an averaging or matrix meter?

 

[Xander Fischer]

I'm using 4x5 with a 90mm mostly, so the polarizer option is probably not gonna work, but a red 29 filter is about as high as they come without cutting all visible sensitivity. I agree with what people have said, I think my lack of result is probably mostly to do with the sky/lighting conditions, but I think I'll try Tri-X again. I love love love that film, and the grain should be acceptable in 4x5. I always did D76, but I'll try TD-16

 

[Xander Fischer]

How about Ilford SFX with a 29 red though? Anyone like that combo? What developer/time/temp?

 

[Dr Croubie]

Many of the places Adams shot have skies that are naturally piercing, intense blue that a deep red filter will work well with.

Don't forget that there was a whole lot less smog and air pollution in his day.
To conglomerate all the posts thus far, if you can't get a black sky with a red filter, polariser, 'oldschool' film, burning when enlarging, and changing the paper grade, then definitely something ain't right.

 

[Kawaiithulhu]

Adams must have an example or two of this in http://www.amazon.com/Examples-The-Making-40-Photographs/dp/082121750X does he not? It's been decades since I read any of his series.

 

[ROL]

Many of the places Adams shot have skies that are naturally piercing, intense blue that a deep red filter will work well with

AA rarely shot with a red filter (read his books), except in the early case of Monolith, for specific effect. You shouldn't either. It will wipe out your mid tones in other parts of your composition. It is an inartistic crutch. He did spend hours in the darkroom managing his tonalities (e.g., dodging and burning), to achieve his visualization, which sometimes included dark skies relating the deepness of the blue. Many of his more famous prints were only achieved with Grade 4 or 5 (then) papers of hard contrast. Photography as art can be all about the time you spend under the enlarger, in the DR.


OP, I have no idea what the "wood effect" is. Use nothing stronger than yellow filters to give you a head start with reducing blue and increasing contrast in the sky. Polarizers may be your best option, if the light can be polarized (90º to shooting direction and often not the case). All this assumes the use of panchromatic films, which you desire to record and preserve mid tones.

Getting meaningful sky values into your prints mostly has little to do with many of the points made in this thread. Any use of contracted film development or any particular panchro film, will likely have little to do with the skies. Good light and good printing are what you seek. You may find this example of a printing session helpful. Take a look at the rest of the galleries at this link. No red filters (and darned few polarizers) were harmed in the production of these pictures.

 

[MattKing]

The "Wood Effect" is the glowing appearance of photographs taken with IR or near IR sensitive film and the appropriate filter.

It is named after Robert Williams Wood, an American physicist.

 

[brian steinberger]

I recommend an orange filter and polarizer together. I use this combo all the time. I get great results regardless of film. I'm surprised you're not getting good results on Tmax. I found Tmax films to have less blue sensitivity than traditional emulsions.

Here is an example with Neopan 400 in Xtol 1:1, orange and polarizer:

 

[DWThomas]

I have negative scans from a quick check of SFX200 posted in my PBase galleries. Given that it barely gets into IR, I was pleasantly surprised at the results. If I were printing those, I could probably get slight improvement in the relative tones on the last couple. This was the first roll of SFX200 I had shot and I wanted to get some idea of where it goes.

I developed in HC110 1+47 (Dilution E, as I recall) at 69ºF (20.5ºC), agitating three inversions every thirty seconds for 13:30 (the first 30 seconds used constant inversions with thumping to dislodge bubbles).

There's my two cents, tax free!

 

[jim appleyard]

Does SFX come in LF?

 

[DWThomas]

Does SFX come in LF?

Alas, according to the Ilford website it's only 35 mm and 120.

 

[Maris]

I've tried for the Wood effect by exposing Tmax 100 behind an IR720 infrared filter. Exposure time turned out to be 5 minutes at f4 for a front-lit sunny day scene. I got a very dark sky but no glowing green foliage; so NO Wood effect. Apparently TMX has no IR sensitivity and was exposed by the tiny amount of red light leaking through the filter away from its main transmission band.

 

[piu58]

The aerial films Agfa Aviphot Pan 200 and Avi Pan 80 are available in 35 mm and in medium format film as well. They are sensible for the nearer infrared and can be used with an 720nm filter. You get a decent wood affect and a real black sky from them.
Avi Pan 80 is sold as Rollei Retro 80s. Aviphot 200 comes in different names. Look for Rollei Superpan 200 or Rollei Retro 400s.
Avi Pan 80 has a tendency for blocked highlights and should be developed carefully.

 

[paul_c5x4]

Then there is the Rollei IR400 - Has a (claimed) sensitivity up to 820nm and is available in 35mm, 120, and 5x4 formats.
The downside is the same base material is used for all sizes - 5x4 sheets are a pig to work with and a real pain in the butt when developing in an inversion tank.

 

[pentaxuser]

How about Ilford SFX with a 29 red though? Anyone like that combo? What developer/time/temp?

With SFX I got black skies with a lower 25 red filter so a 29 might be even better. This was by the seaside and in very clear air. However as I stated this is an extended red sensitivity film but one that without filters behaves like a normal panchromatic film so a good combo but I have no idea if it is made in LF sizes.

Any dev will work. Use the times given by Ilford.

pentaxuser

 

[AgX]

Hi, I have been trying for ages to get those striking black skies that Adams used to get in his landscape shots, but I have had no luck with a 25a or even a 29 red filter. my skies always turn out a mushy gray or lighter. I'm currently using Tmax 100 in Tmax Dev, and I would prefer to use a fine grain film if at all possible. I have obtained the results I want from IR film, but that won't be available forever. My current theory is that I probably need either need a less contrasty developer with the same exposure, or more exposure and shorter dev time.


What do you think? Is there a film/developer more suitable for darker skies? Is it more about ideal sky color/illumination (hasn't worked even with adequate blue sky)


What works for you?

This is not the Wood Effect you are talking about.

The Wood Effect means over-exposure of leaves from deciduous trees to an extend that they apear white in the positive, whereas the rest of the image looks rather normal.
The latter is dependant on the reflection of those other objects in the non-IR part of the spectrum.

This effect can only be achieved by use of film sensitive to IR plus at least blue radition and appropriate filtration, making use of the high IR-reflectivity of those leaves.

 

[pentaxuser]

Adding to AgX's post I don't think you will ever achieve the wood effect with a 29 filter and films like SFX although as I said the black sky effect is possible. With SFX you need the SFX filter or its equivalent( Hoya 72?) to get this effect.

pentaxuser

 

[Jim Jones]

When dramatic clouds were the most important feature of a scene, Tech Pan with a red and sometimes polarizing filter were my favorite. The foreground has to be carefully chosen to retain detail, or it can go black as a silhouette. I haven't tried the newer films that are claimed to be somewhat similar to Tech Pan.