yes,i know that there are lots of options,that is the reason im asking what users here prefer(use the most, or prefer among others,dont know how to put it..),and why.At this point in the history of photographic materials/processes, it is usually easy to solve by simply increasing printing contrast. If you can plan for it in advance, you might also consider a more contrasty film and/or developer. In some cases filters can help if the scene has the right colors and color saturation. Of course you can also extend development time and/or intensify the negative with varying results depending on the materials. Lots of options.
Thanks for joining in RobC!how low contrast?
I would probably push develop 1 stop (2 stops if really very low contrast) with my standard devloper and then fine tune with printing contrast.
are you serious?I can understand the desire for correction, but if you choose to photograph a low contrast image, should you not print it as such. Or do you wish to distort reality and join the Photoshop bandwagon?
im going to make my first experiments with selenium very soonIntensifier. Selenium 1:3 Victors is absolute best if you can get ingredients.
im going to make my first experiments with selenium very soon
got 2 kinds of selenium,one ilford and one amaloco.going to make tests with both,and we see
Thanks for sharing "your way" with us!
im not really into the color change either,but indeed(as i red),if you dont ovedo it,than there is no shift.Selenium will just blacken the blacks if you are toning a print. If you use it too strong or too long you will get a colour change towards plum or red depending on paper and print developer used which personally I really don't like. You won't get enough contrast change to make up for a low contrast subject unless possibly you haven't printed your shadows dark enough to start with and even then its doubtful, especailly without a massive colour change.
But you need to play with these things to find what you like and don't like.
Greetings!
was wondering what solutions do you prefer in low contrast situations?(and why?)
N+(or N++) development?higher paper grade?selenium toning?double bath development?or ANYthing else..
just tell us your preference..and tell us why.
if you dont mind,preferably with 120 film and 4x5..
monk
well I think the real crux of it is firstly whether you are using roll film or not and secondly how much testing calibration you have done.
If you are using roll film you must consider that there are other images on the roll which may not be low contrast so there is a decision to be taken about whether to compromise all the other images on the roll. It may be that normal dev is required to suit most of the roll and you just use increased printing contrast for the low contrast neg.
If you are using sheet film, then you can use zone system N+1 or N+2 etc, but only if you have tested to find out what your development modifications should be.
Greetings!
was wondering what solutions do you prefer in low contrast situations?(and why?)
N+(or N++) development?higher paper grade?selenium toning?double bath development?or ANYthing else..
just tell us your preference..and tell us why.
if you dont mind,preferably with 120 film and 4x5..
monk
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)
tried caffenol as well,in my more experimental period,but the results were not so pleasing.
i think caffenol is not for me..but im supperglad it works for you!keep it up!
[
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?