Printing Exposure Control

[Chuck_P]

My thoughts were not to use a #2 filter 'specifically' or to rely on the grades being ANSI.

I just think it would be a good idea to use a filter (or filtration) instead of unfiltered so that you don't have to figure out the next step.

Another thought. It might be good to make first round tests on whole filter number jumps instead of half filters.

Thanks for the clarification.

 

[MattKing]

My thoughts were not to use a #2 filter 'specifically' or to rely on the grades being ANSI.

I just think it would be a good idea to use a filter (or filtration) instead of unfiltered so that you don't have to figure out the next step.

Good point.

I referred to using a #2 filter because most likely that will give contrast that is most similar to the unfiltered exposure, and therefore would fit well with the rest of the suggested procedure I was responding to.

But another filter or filter setting can also be made to work.

 

[markbarendt]

... and know your direction. ...

I must say that this is a challenge, the direction isn't necessarily intuitive. It seems to me to be an art, not a science.

 

[Chuck_P]

I must say that this is a challenge, the direction isn't necessarily intuitive. It seems to me to be an art, not a science.

Ever try approaching it from just one direction, build the contrast from a purposely low level till you reach the preferred level?

 

[markbarendt]

CPorter, I think your tag line says a lot about this.

"I find it always necessary to stress that we cannot equate brilliance with contrast."
---AA (The Print)

".....in printing we are trying to breathe expressive life into the image,.....this raises intangible issues that do not yield to formulas or measurement."
---AA (The Print)

I have tried moving just one direction and it does help in certain situations.

Part of what I'm getting at here is that the brightness where a subject (say a face) looks best, it's placement on the paper curve, can change depending on the contrast and the scene.

With a softer paper grade I find I can print mid tones and shadows darker in general. This is far from a rule though.

 

[Bill Burk]

I must say that this is a challenge, the direction isn't necessarily intuitive. It seems to me to be an art, not a science.

This is where making big jumps provides you with some clarity.

 

[Doremus Scudder]

I never really trust that I've made a print of the "optimum" contrast and exposure until I make ones that I don't like at all extremes (too much/too little contrast and too much/too little exposure). Yes, it's sometimes a waste of a sheet of paper just to make sure I was right (I'm not gonna like this with more contrast, but let's try it anyway...), but sometimes it works out (hey... I kinda like this with really open shadows!).

And, of course, there is an area of acceptability as well: a range of contrast and exposure that I find pleasing, leaning one way or the other depending on mood, what lighting I'm displaying under, etc. Kind of like tempo and dynamic variations in a musical performance: many valid interpretations possible.

Anyway, I find I can save time by making rather large differences in the beginning of the refinement process, so I can get those extremes I don't like out of the way right away, or, conversely, not waste time refining a print in one way when I really like it another. I never jump less than a paper grade, sometimes I jump 2 (or make an analogous change with print developer/brand). The same with exposure. 20% is really not enough of a difference to get to an extreme quickly; I like to start with at least 40% more or less. (As you can gather, I prefer using percentages to f-stop timing or purely arithmetical changes).

Once I've gone to far, it's fairly easy to estimate an intermediate point to start the real refining from.

Best,

Doremus

www.DoremusScudder.com