secrets of dynamic range

[brianentz]

This subject has probably been done already quite a bit, but I just thought I'd ask: Do you have any special film / developer combo for achieving great dynamic range?

 

[andrew.roos]

I get about 10 stops in the straight line section of the HD curve with Delta 100 in ID-11.

That's not really a special combo for DR - just my regular film and developer. I would probably try DD-X if I needed to eke out a bit more DR but haven't tried this yet.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk

 

[AgX]

Terminology:

The dynamic range of a film is the density range the film can yield at maximum or does yield in a certan image.

The exposure range is the luminance range the film can relate into different densities.

 

[c6h6o3]

This subject has probably been done already quite a bit, but I just thought I'd ask: Do you have any special film / developer combo for achieving great dynamic range?

What do mean by "great"? Do you mean a lot of range, as in a long scale?

 

[ic-racer]

This subject has probably been done already quite a bit, but I just thought I'd ask: Do you have any special film / developer combo for achieving great dynamic range?

My personal film tests indicate most USA and UK manufactured films have a dynamic range that exceeds the range of values on the film plane of any of my cameras (not taking into account specular reflections and light sources in a scene).

 

[Rudeofus]

There are no secrets, in fact there was a (there was a url link here which no longer exists) quite recently. Note, that you also have great dynamic range with normal development, but the results will be difficult to print optically.

 

[snapguy]

Pan-x

Panatomic-X and the real Rodinol.

 

[markbarendt]

Actually with negatives, the practical limiting factor of dynamic range is the paper you choose print on, not the film or developer.

Negative film itself normally covers a much wider range than the paper can print.

White is limited by the "base color" of the paper. Black is limited by just how black the silver in the paper can get. Typically a high-gloss RC paper has the largest difference between black and white.

Bright lighting where the print will hang may allow you to print a bit darker, get a bit more range.

 

[andrew.roos]

Actually with negatives, the practical limiting factor of dynamic range is the paper you choose print on, not the film or developer.

Negative film itself normally covers a much wider range than the paper can print.

However since one can adjust the tonal range of the print by dodging, burning and selecting the appropriate paper contrast grade and negative development time, one may still require that the film have a significantly wider exposure range than the 6 stops or so of the print.



Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk

 

[markbarendt]

However since one can adjust the tonal range of the print by dodging, burning and selecting the appropriate paper contrast grade and negative development time, one may still require that the film have a significantly wider exposure range than the 6 stops or so of the print.

No disagreement here. I think we are both talking about the same idea. Most film/developer combos already cover more range than the paper and, as you indicate, we can get at that detail in various ways.

What I am trying to get the OP to see is that it can't be simplified to just a film/developer question, the paper is an integral part of what has to be considered, as is camera exposure, what contrast rate might be preferred in the print......

The OP is going to need to figure out how to define what he wants better to get a reasonable answer. Snappier? More range of the scene on the paper? ....

 

[Alan Klein]

What effect does the limited 6 stops of paper have on getting good tonal variations from white to black considering film itself has twice as many stops? In other words, why would one film be better than the other since all have more than 6 stops?

 

[markbarendt]

In other words, why would one film be better than the other since all have more than 6 stops?

That is a much better question, in fact one of the best questions I've heard regarding film/developer choices.

And this is complicated because with a little practice most all the films available can be adjusted to get very, very, very similar contrast rates across a given 6 stop range.

Whats really left?

 

[Alan Johnson]

If one can get say 15 stops on film it could be compressed to 6 stops on paper with good local contrast , by dodging and burning (I think).
The attached was on TMY in one of the developer types indicated in Michael's thread,so far I have only done it electronically but it may be possible on silver gelatin paper.

 

[ROL]

This subject has probably been done already quite a bit, but I just thought I'd ask: Do you have any special film / developer combo for achieving great dynamic range?

That's nonsensical myth promulgated by tech heads. The "secret" to achieving great dynamic range, however that may be defined, begins with shooting (i.e., exposing your negative to) good light. And that's not much of a secret. Try reading The Negative by Adams instead of polling photo forums. Any film/developer combination will give you good results given that simple preamble.

 

[Bob Carnie]

plus 1

without a handle of lighting you are nowhere.

That's nonsensical myth promulgated by tech heads. The "secret" to achieving great dynamic range, however that may be defined, begins with shooting (i.e., exposing your negative to) good light. And that's not much of a secret. Try reading The Negative by Adams instead of polling photo forums. Any film/developer combination will give you good results given that simple preamble.

 

[Bill Burk]

I have to agree with ROL and Bob Carnie,

The secret is to learn about "The Negative" - I say that in quotes because there are many ways to learn black and white exposure and development, and all roads that begin with the fundamentals (expose for the shadows and develop for the highlights) lead to an understanding.

I have to qualify this. Some roads don't lead to that understanding (e.g., roads which pursue how to push film, like pushing 400 speed film to 6400). I wish fewer people would follow that road. But those who do, I wish well because the results from following that path can be remarkable.

I also believe that Lighting is important, though I have a lot to learn there...

 

[fretlessdavis]

plus 1

without a handle of lighting you are nowhere.

Yup. Black and White film when exposed correctly, and developed correctly, will have enough DR, and be within contrast adjustments, dodging, and burning, to put that information on photo paper.

There is no secret except experience, trial, error, and knowledge. Any film in any developer, once you learn how they interact, will give you all the DR you need, and will let you control contrast through each step (exposing, developing, printing) to put however much or little DR you want into your finished print.

 

[markbarendt]

If one can get say 15 stops on film it could be compressed to 6 stops on paper with good local contrast , by dodging and burning (I think).
The attached was on TMY in one of the developer types indicated in Michael's thread,so far I have only done it electronically but it may be possible on silver gelatin paper.

Surely it can be done.

The developer Michael describes is an interesting choice for scenes like your example where you want to shoe horn 15-stops from the scene into 6-stops on paper.

It may not be such an interesting choice for a portrait though.

 

[Alan Johnson]

This subject has probably been done already quite a bit, but I just thought I'd ask: Do you have any special film / developer combo for achieving great dynamic range?

It's a valid question, here's what Adams noted,"The Negative" p83:
" In addition to expansion and contraction, other modifications of development procedure can sometimes be helpful in controlling image contrast and tonal values. A compensating developer........allows full exposure of a contrasty subject, while preserving separation in high values."
So it is in full agreement with Adams that there should be ongoing work on compensating developers, unless one believes that everything that can be done has already been found in the past.

 

[Oscar Carlsson]

It's a valid question, here's what Adams noted,"The Negative" p83:
" In addition to expansion and contraction, other modifications of development procedure can sometimes be helpful in controlling image contrast and tonal values. A compensating developer........allows full exposure of a contrasty subject, while preserving separation in high values."
So it is in full agreement with Adams that there should be ongoing work on compensating developers, unless one believes that everything that can be done has already been found in the past.

However, there's nothing magical with a compensating developer, and it has other side effects as well. But I encourage everyone to test it themselves, I've been very curious on the HC110 1:30 (from stock, not concentrate) and semistand technique Adams mentions.

 

[Maris]

Given appropriate exposure and development virtually any film is able to record brightness ranges up to 15 stops and beyond. And it is possible to place the row of negative densities you get into a orderly row of tones on photographic paper.

But so what.

There are very few (any?) photographically worthwhile 15 stop scenes actually out there. Ok, by pointing a spot-meter through windows opening into unlit rooms and then pointing at specular highlights (miniature light sources in effect) it's possible to find enormous brightness ranges. This however is not what we see. The eye-mind-brain system looking at the whole scene instinctively dumps all the dark tones into black and all the bright tones into white. The visually engaging and information rich part of the wide luminance scene is the 7 or 8 stops in the middle. Capturing and presenting these luminances in an appealing way is something a well calibrated photographic process has always been able to do. Everyone who can record a bride's white gown in sunlight next to the groom's dark suit in the shade knows this to be true.

 

[Bill Burk]

I'd like to know more brianentz, what you mean by dynamic range or what you know of it already.

My gut feeling is that you might be pushing your film, and are dissatisfied with the results. The secret to solving problems that pushing film causes, if the look does not have enough "dynamic range" for your taste... Is to properly expose and develop the film.

If you shoot 400 speed film at 1600, then you plunge a third of the light range (of an average subject) onto the area of underexposure where the film has no response at all (it stays clear on the negative). The negative you get by underexposing film that way only records image information from the upper two-thirds of your original subjects' range of light. Overdeveloping the film (push processing) makes that two-thirds exposure range fill up the density range on the negative... Giving you a negative that can make a full range print, but from only two-thirds of the original subject. You have discarded a third of the original image.

The talk of compensating developers is related to dynamic range in the sense of an original subject with a wide range of light - like photographing the interior of a cave looking out onto a sunlit beach and wanting to see details in both the cave and the beach.