Neutral Density Filter with B&W?

[peter k.]

How many of you use a neutral density filter with B&W?
~~~~~~
Background: Gotten so frustrated in trying different development procedures in shooting Arista EDU 400 @ 200 (aka Foma) with a Pacemaker 4x5, in trying to 'control' this high contrasty films 'burnout' of sky, that I have actually quit shooting for a while. Love the film.. but... .. so suddenly got a thought of using a neutral density filter for the sky, and wondered if any use it for B&W.
Thanks 4 ur replies..

 

[E. von Hoegh]

An ND filter just reduces the overall exposure, it's useful to allow a larger aperture than your shutter speeds will support and so on.
Try a yellow or light orange filter to darken the sky, and/or reduce your exposure - although I must say I have no experience with the film you are using.

 

[BrianShaw]

Sure, comes in handy sometimes to allow longer shutter times (or smaller apertures) without changing tonal relationships.

 

[Jeff Kubach]

I don't use ND filters just the yellow, orange and red filters.

Jeff

 

[snapguy]

Let me see

Let's see if I got this right -- you are overexposing your film by one stop and are complaining about burnt-out skies. I think you should expose you film at the real ASA for starters. A yellow or red filter might help, too.

 

[peter k.]

Let's see if I got this right -- you are overexposing your film by one stop and are complaining about burnt-out skies. I think you should expose you film at the real ASA for starters. A yellow or red filter might help, too.

Velll u got a point dar... when I first started testing, I shot it @ 400, but not since I got the development down I like.
Hmm will give it a new try.. and while at it... ok.. you guys I will try the yellow and red filters again... but liked the shots without them.. and my 35mm neutral density filter, held up in place fer a test...

Ha... back in the saddle again...
thanks guys..
where a friend is a friend...
(does this date me or what)

 

[wildbill]

sounds like you need to look into graduated neutral density filters (rectangular type). At least that's what would help in this case. I rarely use them with b+w work but they are handy to have in your kit once and a while.

 

[Alan Gales]

sounds like you need to look into graduated neutral density filters (rectangular type). At least that's what would help in this case. I rarely use them with b+w work but they are handy to have in your kit once and a while.

Yeah, the rectangular type are good. I used to use them a lot with color slide film.

I don't know why they make the round ones. They are pretty much useless.

 

[shutterfinger]

when I first started testing, I shot it @ 400, but not since I got the development down I like.
Hmm will give it a new try.

Then there is always EI320 and EI250 if you don't like EI400.

 

[Trail Images]

I use ND grad filters and Reverse grad filters all the time in the field. I cannot say I've done a lot of B&W shooting to date, mostly all transparency stuff. However, I would not hesitate using any of my filters to help balance the contrast or exposure latitude between light and dark with any film whatsoever.
I find the Lee wide angle holder setup the best for my needs with a variety of brand name rectangle filters.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Sounds like your development is way off.

 

[ToddB]

That's what I would of suggested is a red or orange filter.

Todd

 

[henpe]

I have been in a situation where I had no filters but still needed to hold back the sky on a sunset. The exposure time was quite long. I actually managed to quite successfully dodge the sky by waving a black cardboard in front of the upper part of the lens while exposing. Not exactly a standard procedure to recommend, but when in desperate need it might be interesting to try...

 

[DREW WILEY]

Not many people manage to hide their hand when it comes to the "nuclear option" trick of neutral grad filters. You can try. Every time I see an image done that way (generally color) it just plain looks like it was done that way. What works far better than the film you are currently using for extreme contrast subjects would be the Foma/Arista 200 speed stuff, which is actually quite a bit slower in the real world, but it doeshave a tremendously long straight line which will handle the extremes without resorting to "minus" or "compensating" development. Colored filters change the contrast of scene colors relative to one another. A deep red or orange filter might appreciably darken a deep blue
sky, but it won't do much to a bright white one, or shooting into the sun. You need to address each of these characteristics in their own right : the film choice, your development of it, potentially controlling the scene with filters. There's no single silver bullet out there.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Not many people manage to hide their hand when it comes to the "nuclear option" trick of neutral grad filters. You can try. Every time I see an image done that way (generally color) it just plain looks like it was done that way. What works far better than the film you are currently using for extreme contrast subjects would be the Foma/Arista 200 speed stuff, which is actually quite a bit slower in the real world, but it doeshave a tremendously long straight line which will handle the extremes without resorting to "minus" or "compensating" development. Colored filters change the contrast of scene colors relative to one another. A deep red or orange filter might appreciably darken a deep blue
sky, but it won't do much to a bright white one, or shooting into the sun. You need to address each of these characteristics in their own right : the film choice, your development of it, potentially controlling the scene with filters. There's no single silver bullet out there.

All of this is great advice.

Some of the Foma films develop very quickly, and they react fast to development changes. Some have poor antihalation properties too, but I think this is mostly among the 35mm films, not 120 roll and sheet.
I've used all of the films, and you simply have to be precise, and be critical of the final result and realize that the single biggest control a darkroom worker has is how long we develop our film for. Too much time will yield excessive contrast and sometimes blocked highlights. Too little time will yield poor contrast and weak mid-tones. Practice, practice, practice.

Color filters are great, but when you darken one color (the opposite color of the filter color on the color wheel), you will at the same time lighten anything that is of the same color as the filter. Very few colors in a scene are NOT altered when using color filters.

Neutral density - will not change the end results at all with respect to contrast. It just enables you to make longer exposures, or use wider apertures with the same exposure time. It's a good tool, but it doesn't solve the problem at hand.

Back to basics. Learn how to properly control exposure and development. After that part is bullet proof, start looking at filters and such. I found that I got the best results from Foma 400 when I shot it at EI 160 as metered with an incident meter. The Foma 200 I usually shoot at 80 or 100. Developing times will be shorter than usual.

 

[peter k.]

All of this is great advice.

Some of the Foma films develop very quickly, and they react fast to development changes.
***> yes, that's for sure

single biggest control a darkroom worker has is how long we develop our film for. Too much time will yield excessive contrast and sometimes blocked highlights. Too little time will yield poor contrast and weak mid-tones. Practice, practice, practice.
***> well got burned out trying with the 3x4 and 4x5 LF, with different lenses, in case it was just the lens and then needed a break and picked up the MF and color for a while.. really like the film and it has a look I like.. so were going to try again.

Color filters are great, but when you darken one color (the opposite color of the filter color on the color wheel), you will at the same time lighten anything that is of the same color as the filter. Very few colors in a scene are NOT altered when using color filters.
***>I use filters when needed but the shots I'm having trouble with, those with sky in it, are the ones I'm trying to get the developing down for, and do not need the filters usually for these large area shots

Neutral density - will not change the end results at all with respect to contrast. It just enables you to make longer exposures, or use wider apertures with the same exposure time. It's a good tool, but it doesn't solve the problem at hand.
***> ah... yes that makes sense... I use mine for 35color side film, and thought it might do the trick possibly for for this, but I can understand that it would not solve the problem..

I found that I got the best results from Foma 400 when I shot it at EI 160 as metered with an incident meter. The Foma 200 I usually shoot at 80 or 100. Developing times will be shorter than usual.

Using Hc-110 undulation H.. from 8 min to 11 with different agitation modes.. tried semi stand... ect.. on and on.. metering with incident meter... but gonna try again @ 400 .. ur 160 and practice some more :munch:

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

but gonna try again @ 400 .. ur 160 and practice some more :munch:

That's usually how it works. Try bracketing your exposures at normal contrast lighting​, 160, 200, 250, 320, 400. Develop normal.

Print and pick the one that gives you the best shadow detail (note, the one YOU like, not what the textbook says, unless you strive for technically perfect negs).

Then shoot a few sheets at the speed you liked and now vary the developing time. See which gives you the best contrast.

Repeat for low contrast and high contrast lighting. Eventually you have a plan for most lighting scenarios.

 

[ME Super]

Yellow, red or orange filters will darken a blue sky and lighten colors that are similar to them when used in B&W photography. They won't do anything for a cloudy gray sky. A graduated ND filter will darken part of the frame, fooling your meter into giving the rest of the frame more exposure, if you're using an in-camera meter. So in a way, graduated ND filters, properly used, open up shadows too.

 

[ic-racer]

so suddenly got a thought of using a neutral density filter for the sky, and wondered if any use it for B&W.
Thanks 4 ur replies..

I think that burning and dodging while printing offers more control than graded ND filters. However, using both techniques together sometimes works well.

 

[shutterfinger]

I'm starting to wonder if you are trying to compensate for metering technique with film speed, development, filters.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

How many of you use a neutral density filter with B&W?
~~~~~~
Background: Gotten so frustrated in trying different development procedures in shooting Arista EDU 400 @ 200 (aka Foma) with a Pacemaker 4x5, in trying to 'control' this high contrasty films 'burnout' of sky, that I have actually quit shooting for a while. Love the film.. but... .. so suddenly got a thought of using a neutral density filter for the sky, and wondered if any use it for B&W.
Thanks 4 ur replies..

a graduate ND filter alone or in combinaton with a contrast filter will work and help a lotbut, you might be photographing on the wrong day if the Zone System cannot help you to manage the contrast.:confused:

 

[PittP]

Peter, haven't tried the Foma 400/200 - though 400/200 ASA films should not be too contrasty.
I sometimes share your problem that the sky should be downscaled a bit, notably for slides: I then use a 1 or 2 stop neutral grey / clear square Cockin (a split filter w/ gradual or sharp edge, the latter will also be gradual on film though the effect is slightly more pronounced); with a staight horizon try a gradual orange filter: makes great clouds without affecting the vegetation etc. too much. I suppose Ralph refers to Tiffen's Ultracontrast Filter: a very useful tool (#3 is most universal) in a complex setting and if you like the slight "glamour" effects. In landscapes I prefer the split grey (or orange)/clear filter.
Keep us updated on your results.
Best! Pitt

 

[peter k.]

I'm starting to wonder if you are trying to compensate for metering technique with film speed, development, filters.

Well Charles, ya got a good point!
Why, because, ... please , all do not faint, .. my meter is a Weston Ranger 9, (converted to modern batt) that I can use an incident cup on. In defense, I'm a CMC (classic manual camera) kind of guy. So... using this type of meter, with the older equipment, for me goes hand in hand. Yet, it is not so easy on landscape shots, for exposing for the shadows with this type of meter. This may well be the reason I'm, getting these failures, with the sky highlights, using this film, and its characteristics! It may well be trying to 'train' me, in better metering.

Being and old 'art, and retarded, decided today would be film day, instead of wood stove wall backing honey due!
Freedom, is just another word for nothing left to lose.. think I'll try some of the suggestions suggested, and pick on de ole 3x4 anniversary speed, which has been languishing for some attention, and shoot some practice B&W.
Yahooo...

 

[BrianShaw]

Peter... Ranger 9 is quite modern compared to what I often use -- a Weston III! When I started running into that issue I started using a Luna Pro with the 7.5/15 degree attachment. That helped to get better highlight and lowlight readings. Then in a fit of "trying to keep up with the Joneses" I bought a 1 degree spot meter - L-558. For me that was a waste of money except that I occassionally use the other features such as meter reading averaging and flash meetering. One or hte other would have made the difference for me. Both is just unnecessary redundancy.

 

[shutterfinger]

I started LF photography with a Luna Pro F, added the 7.5/15 ° attachment, bought an Ultra Spot, sold the Luna pro and spot attachment and never looked back.

I had to look up the Ranger 9, nice meter. It has an 18° angle of view. Maybe make a 18° wedge to put next to the sensor so that you get a better idea of the area being read. Its really not amazing what a .5° shift in metering position can do for the reading.