Printing a misty image

I have several images of a misty day that I am wanting to print in the darkroom soon. I have not printed in 24 years (since college!) so I am hoping that I am not being too ambitious with this project.
What are some tips for printing these well? Or should I not worry about it?

I scanned them in today on the Fuji Frontier and it is easy to enhance the scans in lightroom. I just wonder what I should consider in the darkroom?
Maybe I should wait until a second session to print these misty images? I am excited to get back into the darkroom and want to use my time efficiently.

Thank you for any thoughts, tips and opinions on the mater!

Are we talking color or B&W?

I think for misty images the main advice I'd want to share is to ignore any advice or workflow that suggests dialing in contrast so you get a full tonal scale ranging from paper white to pure black. In misty scenes, there's often no black, so resist any urge to seek for it in the print. I would make a couple of test strips or prints at various contrast grades so you get some visual feedback on what's possible with the negatives.

In a way, it helps that you've done the digital editing already so you probably have an idea of where you want to go with these images. But I find that the digital domain often leads me in different directions than the darkroom does, and trying to replicate a digital edit in the darkroom can be (1) frustrating and (2) may not even be the optimal solution, in hindsight.

pamphoto said:

Maybe I should wait until a second session to print these misty images?

Click to expand...

If you're getting back on the horse after a long time, it may make sense to start with some more usual negatives. But hey...it doesn't matter how you get there, as long as you get where you want!

Just take it as it comes and try to get close to what you have in mind; anything goes.

Thank you @koraks
It's black and white printing.
I think I'll take the negatives just in case i feel up to trying. I'll keep your tips in mind! Thank you for the notes on contrast, because that's the first thing I wanted to do was increase contrast. I'm hoping a real print of the negatives will read more closely to what it was like that morning.

I'm expecting to use a couple of them for a book I'm working on covering the location. So bring a good print to use is a goal. The fuji scans are too grainy (film is HP5+)
The main issue is, the darkroom is an hour away from me, so it's not somewhere I will get to as often as I'd like.

Thank you again!!

koraks said:

I think for misty images the main advice I'd want to share is to ignore any advice or workflow that suggests dialing in contrast so you get a full tonal scale ranging from paper white to pure black. In misty scenes, there's often no black, so resist any urge to seek for it in the print. I would make a couple of test strips or prints at various contrast grades so you get some visual feedback on what's possible with the negatives.

In a way, it helps that you've done the digital editing already so you probably have an idea of where you want to go with these images. But I find that the digital domain often leads me in different directions than the darkroom does, and trying to replicate a digital edit in the darkroom can be (1) frustrating and (2) may not even be the optimal solution, in hindsight.

Click to expand...

I've shot a lot of images in mist and quite heavy fog. I totally agree about the contrast, don't increase negative contrast with development and the same when printing.






Both taken in quite heavy sea mist or fog, the films sees more than we do.


Ian

Do a test strip to determine the exposure across the very lightest highlights. Use that exposure fir further test strips at different contrast grades until you get a result that looks about right across all the image tones. Make a full print of the best combination. Then tone (if you intend to) and dry, so that you can reappraise after dry-down. You will very likely find that your favourite pick before drying is no longer satisfactory. It’s normal to need to juggle exposure and contrast grade a little bit more. I find it’s easy to lose sight of the mood you were trying to create, but pinning prints on the wall and trying to catch them by surprise the next day is useful!

Thank you @Ian Grant
Those are beautiful!
Here's a sample of what I'm talking about. This is a fuji scan without further edits:

koraks said:

I think for misty images the main advice I'd want to share is to ignore any advice or workflow that suggests dialing in contrast so you get a full tonal scale ranging from paper white to pure black. In misty scenes, there's often no black, so resist any urge to seek for it in the print. I would make a couple of test strips or prints at various contrast grades so you get some visual feedback on what's possible with the negatives.

Click to expand...

This advice mirrors what I experienced recently working with a soft focus lens that has parallels to a misty effect. We may be used to in our standard workflow expanding the range of values from black to white but the approach doesn't necessarily work in all contexts.

In fact I have a contact who almost never has a pure black value in any of their images and their work is quite interesting and powerful to me.

Thank you @snusmumriken
I'll keep this in mind. I might have to do test prints one session and then try for the real prints at the next. I'll be sure to take good notes so I'll remeber what I did.

Low contrast range, no really dark blacks...essential to preserve

Start with contrast setting 2, make a test strip print. ESSENTIAL time and temperature and freshness of developer is very important. At room temperature 68-72°F with Dektol, Ilford RC paper develop 2 minutes with continuous gentle agitation

Keep development time and temperature the same, start a notebook and record your observations.

Nice picture, you do have some blacks in there. Use glossy paper.

If you happen to be using split-grade printing techniques, misty or other low contrast subjects are probably best served by reversing the "normal" testing order - dial in the higher contrast first, and then refine the lower contrast.

pamphoto said:

Thank you @Ian Grant
Those are beautiful!
Here's a sample of what I'm talking about. This is a fuji scan without further edits:

Click to expand...

Reminds me of Sangamo Weston adverts from the late 1960s.

In some ways the 2 images I posted are the exact opposite, the first is a 10x8 negative, the 2nd 5x4. But then there's more than one approach, it's just finding the right balance.

Ian

You guys should be posting more photos on here (that's a compliment!)

pamphoto said:

I'm expecting to use a couple of them for a book I'm working on covering the location

Click to expand...

That shot is beautiful, looks just my kind of location. Makes me want to get my canoe on the water.

koraks said:

You guys should be posting more photos on here (that's a compliment!)

Click to expand...

Thank you!

snusmumriken said:

That shot is beautiful, looks just my kind of location. Makes me want to get my canoe on the water.

Click to expand...

Thank you. We kayak there often, except lately the water has been super shallow. That's why there are all those black weeds in the foreground.

wiltw said:

Low contrast range, no really dark blacks...essential to preserve

Click to expand...

It depends on general mist, or parts of the image. No need to drop the contrast too much....the scene is already low contrast. In the end it's like photographing snow....there is an entire range of lighting possible in the scene.

pamphoto said:

Thank you @Ian Grant
Those are beautiful!
Here's a sample of what I'm talking about. This is a fuji scan without further edits:

Click to expand...

I am kind of surprised that this is seen as a low contrast image. It has white up in the sky and it has black in the weeds and plenty of midrange tones. I think choosing a paper that will distinguish all those midrange tones is the difficult part, but there are more than six tones (zones) here.

cowanw said:

I am kind of surprised that this is seen as a low contrast image. It has white up in the sky and it has black in the weeds and plenty of midrange tones. I think choosing a paper that will distinguish all those midrange tones is the difficult part, but there are more than six tones (zones) here.

Click to expand...

C, not much choice anymore....it's pretty much either Ilford or Foma.

cowanw said:

It has white up in the sky and it has black in the weeds

Click to expand...

No, this rendition of the scene has that contrast range. Ultimately it's an arbitrary choice how the image is projected onto the tonal range of the output medium. What I said earlier is that there might be a tendency to decide by default that the image needs to occupy the entire tonal range, but for misty scenes like this one, I personally don't think it necessarily works well to have heavy tones dominate the scene. E.g., it might just as well be interpreted along these lines:

There's no objective truth here; it's a matter of preference and interpretation. And the tonal scale of the output image (print or digital file) is not in some way embedded in the negative. It never is!

cowanw said:

there are more than six tones (zones) here.

Click to expand...

In the specific interpretation you were shown in post #6, there might be. But that's not objective, universal truth.

Printing isn't a positivist activity. It's constructivist by default. Otherwise we wouldn't have to worry about different papers, grades, developers etc. We would have just one system with a hardcoded transfer function between luminous range of the original scene to density or tonal range in the output.

cowanw said:

I think choosing a paper that will distinguish all those midrange tones is the difficult part

Click to expand...

What problem do you foresee? I frankly don't recognize it as I'm not aware of a paper presently being produced that has a flat part in the midtones at a normal contrast (i.e. somewhere between grades 1 and 5). Hence, all papers will show differentiation between tones in the middle of the range in response to variation in densities in the negative.

GregY said:

C, not much choice anymore....it's pretty much either Ilford or Foma.

Click to expand...

There's also Berrger paper, depending on availability.

Getting the midtones the way you want them comes down to contrast filter choice and possibly needing to burn in the upper half of the image (depending on what the negative is like). I know I'd be obsessed with trying to get that reflection of the mist in the water (missing from @koraks' version).


(crop from Pam's post)