How Often Do You Use Filters To Improve Your Prints & Why?

[DF]

There are times when my prints need an extra boost to come out satisfactory, so, I'll giv'em a "shot" of around 60 or so yellow on the color-head diffuser if they're too contrasty , so it ends up more pleasing than the un-filtered print. But I feel bad about it at times, having to "remedy" the prints shortcoming with a "fix" (filtering).

 

[MattKing]

Do I assume correctly that:
1) you are referring to black and white (not colour); and
2) you are referring to variable contrast paper.
If so, I adjust contrast using filtration for every single print I make.
And fairly frequently I will use split-grade techniques to arrive at different contrast in different parts of the image.
It is fine to have a "standard" or "most commonly used" contrast setting, but there is no good reason not to make use of the control available to you.

 

[Huub]

The darkroom offers a large set of techniques to arive at a satisfying print. It happens rarely that i don't use (local) contrast adjustment and burning and dodging to get the print that i have in mind. Often the first print is more or less a working print, to find the right overal exposure and contrast. When necessary i will adjust basic exposure and contrast in a second print and also use dodging and burning - often with different contrast settings - to improve on that first print. And often a third print will be needed to finetune all those actions. There is no need to feel guilty about 'fixing' things, for me it is part of the fun.

 

[cjbecker]

I print on all multigrade paper and standardized my development for printing on grade 2, when using sheet film, almost all my prints are grade 2. When shooting roll film, the exposures are a little more varied and have more range in contrast, Yes ideally all my prints would be a simple grade 2, but it does not affect me to have too use different grades. Its not a issue to have to use different grades depending on the negative.

 

[jp498]

I'm always adjusting a little bit.. Even 10-20 adjustment in magenta or yellow is very visible.

 

[ic-racer]

I occasionally use a diffusion filter when printing. When printing B&W, the black bleeds, which is opposite the same filter used during the camera exposure. I also have a UV and heat absorbing filters that I use almost all the time, but those are between the lamp and the negative. Lastly, some of my enlargers have a red filter I can swing in place if I need to do some adjustment or focus with paper in the easel.

I do a lot of my highlight burns with white light. White light burn is essentially the same as 200cc yellow, only it is easier to pull a lever and swing all the filters out of the way than to dial down the magenta and dial up the yellow to max. Also, I don't lose my settings when doing the next print.

 

[BSP]

I always have to use filters because I most often shoot without a lightmeter sunny 16 and indoor just try to grab as much light as possible at my desired shutterspeed. The use of filters allows me to fix most of the exposure errors I make.

 

[Pieter12]

Using darkroom techniques is not "fixing" it is part of the creative process.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Working with contrast filters on your prints in the darkroom is a natural thing to do. Don't feel guilty. I split print my 8x10 negs, so I always use two filters, green and blue... Even though I target my negatives to print on MG paper with settings that give me "normal" contrast (I have an Aristo 4500 adjustable head), some tweaking with filtration may be necessary.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I always use filters when printing black & white. Usually globally and sometime locally. That is what variable contrast paper is designed for.

 

[MattKing]

It is also a good reason to standardize on one filtration setting - often the equivalent to grade 2 - for your basic setup. The speed matching characteristics of the system make it easier to avoid large changes in exposure when you change contrast between two different "grades" if both "grades" are achieved through filtration.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Most colorheads have somewhat yellowish light to begin with due to tungsten-halogen bulbs. But there are other kinds of sources. For example, I have a blue-green cold light atop one of my 8x10 enlargers. I generally start with unaltered light when making a test strip, then tweak it as needed via filtration. But I've gotten so comfortable with this, that I pretty much know what to expect up front, even using different enlargers, different films and formats, different papers etc. The whole point is, pick the correct shoe size for the foot, meaning treating each specific negative as its own problem, rather than approaching this task with a "one shoe size fits all" or generic "silver bullet" mentality. There all kinds of tools available for improving print visual quality, and filter selection is integral to VC work.
I totally ignore any paper "grade" mentality. That might make sense when printing actual graded papers, but has little relevance in VC printing unless one is somehow stuck in a time warp - which is OK if it helps them think things out, but is apt to be just an unnecessary complication for someone starting out with VC papers to begin with. Of course, it is also important that one dials in their film exposure and development protocol for predictable results. Modern VC papers are quite versatile, but can't fix every flat tire.

 

[koraks]

I don't see the need or value of trying to print without contrast filters. That sort of thing is relevant when you're making contact prints on fixed contrast media such as graded paper, azo or alt processes. With VC papers it's an unnecessary and counterproductive limitation.

 

[DF]

So I guess that correct exposure when out in the field taking photos - all the way to proper processing film > agitation for instance, all have their limitations on how we would like the negatives > photos to turn out.

 

[MattKing]

So I guess that correct exposure when out in the field taking photos - all the way to proper processing film > agitation for instance, all have their limitations on how we would like the negatives > photos to turn out.

Yes, unless you live in a world where you have full control over lighting, it is always consistent in character and your subjects never vary.
Catalogue photography and school portraits might be examples.
But more generally, contrast control is also an interpretive tool.
This photo was taken in soft, almost directionless light. For fun, I turned the contrast up to 11, and added lots of "sharpening" with an unsharp mask.
What you see here is probably the digitally processed negative scan - IIRC my print had much less of the edge effects.

 

[Arthurwg]

Yes, I use an yellow-green filter for almost all of my B&W pictures here in the Southwest.

 

[DREW WILEY]

We're talking about filters with respect to enlarging onto VC paper, not camera filters. But now that you shifted the subject, I always like to have a deeper green filter along for Southwest shoots to darken reddish sandstone and sky blue at the same time. When people use the ordinary orange or red filters, the sandstone and reddish soils come out paste-like. Hopefully, the next post will be back on track, in the darkroom itself.

 

[Paul Howell]

For contrast control for landscapes, yellow, green, orange and on occasion, I also use a polarizer, for cityscapes, yellow or dark yellow, for portuites fair skin tones, green, for action, sports, wildlife none. With VC paper, my negatives are scaled to print on grade 2 paper, so I usually print #2 or 2 1/2 will print at higher contrast if the shot calls out for it. I dont split grade print very often.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Yes, I use an yellow-green filter for almost all of my B&W pictures here in the Southwest.

We're talking about filters with respect to enlarging onto VC paper, not camera filters. But now that you shifted the subject, I always like to have a deeper green filter along for Southwest shoots to darken reddish sandstone and sky blue at the same time. When people use the ordinary orange or red filters, the sandstone and reddish soils come out paste-like. Hopefully, the next post will be back on track, in the darkroom itself.

This is something I should do. I have green filters and yellow filters but not a yellow-green filter.

 

[Pieter12]

This is something I should do. I have green filters and yellow filters but not a yellow-green filter.

I know we're off-track, but if the yellow-green filter darkens both the sky and the red earth, doesn't that negate the purpose of using a filter (with the exception of bringing out the clouds) in the first place?

 

[Sirius Glass]

I know we're off-track, but if the yellow-green filter darkens both the sky and the red earth, doesn't that negate the purpose of using a filter (with the exception of bringing out the clouds) in the first place?

Uh no. Filters control contrast for desired effects.

 

[Pieter12]

Uh no. Filters control contrast for desired effects.

Please explain in the context of the example.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Please explain in the context of the example.

We have already done that.

 

[etn]

It is also a good reason to standardize on one filtration setting - often the equivalent to grade 2 - for your basic setup. The speed matching characteristics of the system make it easier to avoid large changes in exposure when you change contrast between two different "grades" if both "grades" are achieved through filtration.

Matt, I hate to sound like a troll here (and it's really not my intention). Could you please elaborate on why it is a good reason to standardize?
I always thought that some images "work" better with a softer grade, others with a higher grade - for instance less contrast for portraits, more contrast for landscapes.
This generalization if obviously too broad, grade selection needs to be made on a case by case, image by image basis. But you get my point.

 

[MattKing]

Matt, I hate to sound like a troll here (and it's really not my intention). Could you please elaborate on why it is a good reason to standardize?

Not because you should aim for a particular contrast, but instead because it is helpful to start out at the same contrast point with initial test strips. That is why I use grade 2 filtration for my contact proof sheets.
If you start at grade 2, there is lots of room later to go up and down. And if you start at grade 2 with filter in place, the subsequent changes in contrast will involve much smaller necessary changes in exposure.
There is nothing wrong with looking at a particular negative and deciding to start your tests at a higher or lower contrast. Most times though it is better to see how the prints look before you fine tune the contrast.