How to get that Silver Highlight Look

[two40]

I'm really curious how some photographers manage to produce b&w images with that lovely silver highlight. Before I try to explain it any further and mess it up I'll just post a few examples from Sebastião Salgado.

Best example
http://scmg.files.wordpress.com/2007/11/sebastiao-salgado-2.jpg
http://www.unep.org/OurPlanet/imgversn/153/images/salgado.jpg

Others
http://noisydecentgraphics.typepad.com/design/images/2007/11/10/salgado_anta3.jpg
http://noisydecentgraphics.typepad.com/design/images/2007/11/10/salgado_giants_2.jpg
http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-images/Arts/Arts_/site_furniture/2007/05/11/salgado7_mn512.jpg

 

[keithwms]

So, there are many considerations, from lens choice to film choice to metering and, of course, how you print. In the print phase, one thing you can do is spot bleach the highlight areas. This 'brilliancing' is discussed in Adam's book The Print.

P.S. This link might get you started: http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=003wvI

 

[two40]

Thanks for the link.

Printing aside, how can you maximise your chances of getting those highlights. Which films? Anything different with exposure? Do you shoot for the shadows or highlights?

 

[2F/2F]

What exactly are you talking about? Can you be more detailed in your analysis? They look like pretty standard heavily-printed black and white photos to me; some of them very poorly manipulated and/or printed, IMO. Are you seeing more or less highlight detail than you are getting? Are the highlights darker or lighter than you are getting? To me the highlights look flat, but lower in tone than highlights usually are. A high-contrast print that is then carefully flashed can have this effect, but I would imagine that the prints are just printed down quite a bit. You can bet your bottom dollar that his negs are nowhere near ideal, and a lot of work goes on in Photoshop or the darkroom. This is due to the largely uncontrollable nature of the sorts of photography he does and the fact that he does not get to develop each shot individually since he is using roll film.

 

[keithwms]

Well I don't know how those particular shots were done or processed, so take this with a grain of salt, but...

Look at the high tonal and edge contrast in the prints and notice that the highlights appear slightly overexposed in spots, or right on the edge. To get this kind of result, you could shoot b&w slide, or shoot to colour slide and dupe to b&w, or just develop normal b&w film for higher contrast index. In some places the grain looks slightly unfilm-like to me, more like paper texture. (paper neg with some penciling?) But anyway, with multigrade paper and splitgrade techiques, and plain old dodging and burning, many related effects are achievable.

In short, there are many ways to get these kinds of effects, I don't want to say more because probably somebody here has seen Salgado's work in person and can provide better clues. Offhand, I'll just say that the highlight pop reminds me of agfa scala, though the grain is incompatible with that. Also, I have done b&w conversions from colour slide and seen similar contrast.

The densities in the blacks suggest glossy / RC paper finish.

 

[keithwms]

P.S. I had a look around the rumour mill and and apparently Salgado uses tri-X and rodinal, primarily, and tmax 3200...

 

[two40]

That's more like it. Now about Rodinal, would that have a big part in that look?

Thanks Keith.

 

[2F/2F]

That's more like it. Now about Rodinal, would that have a big part in that look?

Thanks Keith.

There is *absolutely* no magic bullet, so I would stop looking for one, lest ye drive yourself up the darned wall! The film and developer he uses are far from the main thing here. It has to do with how he envisions his pictures, the light in which he shoots, how he exposes and develops the film, and how he instructs the printers to print them. You can get this with any film and developer if you put the work into the necessary experimentation. One thing for sure is that you won't be able to predictably get it if you are jumping around from one film and developer to the next in search of somebody else's look. I would suggest to get a crapload of a versatile film such as HP5 or Tri-X, get some HC developer, or something else that keeps very well, is very consistent, and can be used in a variety of dilutions, and put the time into figuring out what to do with it to get your look.

 

[two40]

What exactly are you talking about? Can you be more detailed in your analysis? They look like pretty standard heavily-printed black and white photos to me; some of them very poorly manipulated and/or printed, IMO. Are you seeing more or less highlight detail than you are getting? Are the highlights darker or lighter than you are getting? To me the highlights look flat, but lower in tone than highlights usually are. A high-contrast print that is then carefully flashed can have this effect. You can bet your bottom dollar that his negs are nowhere near ideal, and a lot of work goes on in Photoshop or the darkroom. This is due to the largely uncontrollable nature of the sorts of photography he does and the fact that he does not get to develop each shot individually since he is using roll film.

What do you mean by flashed?

These are likely to be poor representations of his actual print work which would be fantastic in real life I think. All I wanted to know was how he gets the highlights to looks so shiny and silvery.

It's not just his work. I only used it as an example. I've seen many others with a similar shiny/silvery look to the highlights.

 

[two40]

There is *absolutely* no magic bullet, so I would stop looking for one, lest ye drive yourself up the darned wall! The film and developer he uses are far from the main thing here. It has to do with how he envisions his pictures, the light in which he shoots, how he exposes and develops the film, and how he instructs the printers to print them. You can get this with any film and developer if you put the work into the necessary experimentation. One thing for sure is that you won't be able to predictably get it if you are jumping around from one film and developer to the next in search of somebody else's look.

I'm just trying to learn. I'm only a newb and I understand there is no magic bullet to these things and yes I know it's a combination of things. My question was simply how can I maximise my chances in achieving the look. With that said, I'm not trying to copy his look. I don't believe it's his look anyway. His work was simply used to make a point.

Your point regarding not getting this look predictably is well taken.

 

[Poohblah]

if i understand what you're saying, you think there is a lot of highlight detail?

split filtering might help with that, but so would exposing for the highlights.

 

[keithwms]

That's more like it. Now about Rodinal, would that have a big part in that look?

Thanks Keith.

It could have a big part in the grain, but I don't know about the highlight transitions. My feeling is that it is that the glow you speak of is not a unique characteristic of the film/dev combo per se. Anyway, we really can't tell by looking at a computer screen, can we :rolleyes:

You can exert a good deal of control over contrast and tonality at every single stage in the workflow.... from lens choice to film choice to development to paper choice to printing to toning, to bleaching etc. There are a whole lot of ways to significantly affect contrast and tonality.

Working with some students, I've frequently heard that they wanted their prints to be more or less contrasty, and they wanted to delve into contrast filters and all that. In my view, that is a crutch; better to make sure that metering and exposure and development are optimal. The workflow is like a stream, you can divert it at any point to change its course. But the further upstream you divert it, the easier it will be.

So... let me ask you, what are you presently doing to control the contrast index in your negs? Do you feel that you are getting low CI?

P.S. 2F/2F, I will assume that the quality issues of which you speak arise from low-quality web versions. Let's not judge what Salgado and his printers are capable of doing, based on web snaps.

 

[Chris Breitenstein]

If you like Salgados work, then emulate him in every respect until you are unsatisfied with the work you are producing. There are many many ways to learn the craft and 'seeing' required in photography, and aping a photographer you admire is one of the best ways to find your voice and unique style.

What I would do if I were you is take a workshop with him. That is going to be the best, fastest, and most efficient way to learn exactly how he makes photographs.

Best of luck!

 

[Michel Hardy-Vallée]

It starts with the subject, then the lighting. You can't get "silver" highlights if your subject is not somewhat shiny (like the whale or the lizard) and dramatically lit (i.e. harsh light). After that, you have to look at tonal composition. Notice how areas of pure white are close to areas of deep black.

There is a lot of dodging and burning involved to place those tones where they are. The very dark skies of the first whale picture somewhat enhance the shiny wave tips--I suppose it's because the scene look so unreal: where is that light coming from, if not from the top?

Filters (yellow, orange, or red, according to the subject) were probably used as well.

Finally, way, way down the road is the role played by the film itself and the developer. I think Rodinal has a tendency to augment contrast in the highlights (thus depressing the midtones). But frankly, with so much manipulations &c, you could get that look with any film, any developer.

It's all about the subject, light, and darkroom manip.

 

[JBrunner]

If you like Salgados work, then emulate him in every respect until you are unsatisfied with the work you are producing. There are many many ways to learn the craft and 'seeing' required in photography, and aping a photographer you admire is one of the best ways to find your voice and unique style.

What I would do if I were you is take a workshop with him. That is going to be the best, fastest, and most efficient way to learn exactly how he makes photographs.

Best of luck!

Salgado does not print his negatives. Dominique Granier is the man doing the printing, or at least he was, last time I was around that loop.

 

[jamusu]

Salgado's printer does not use PHOTOSHOP!

Jamusu.