I have been under a misapprehension. I thought you were arguing that, even without dodging and burning, a split-grade print was superior to a print made with a single filtered exposure. My apologies.
Single grade FB papers
-
A
- Thread starter Melvin J Bramley
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
Want to Buy Konica FT-1 battery door
- Started by photogear
-
Want to Buy WTB: Apo digitar 43mm XL lens
- Started by HakuZLQ
-
For Sale FS: Speed Graphic Model FP 4x5 Camera
- Started by B.S.Kumar
-
For Sale Canon EOS-1 with 50mm f/1.8 STM lens
- Started by SocalAstro
-
For Sale Mamiya M645 1000s film camera w/ 35mm Wide Angle Lens
- Started by SocalAstro
Forum statistics
I have been under a misapprehension. I thought you were arguing that, even without dodging and burning, a split-grade print was superior to a print made with a single filtered exposure. My apologies.
It is! I'll consider grade 2 special case because it is achievable without filtration, but I think a split grade is superior to a single grade exposure. No apology necessary, I wasn't clear.
Someone who tired it and gets it, unlike those who based on nothing claim that is cannot work and would never be useful.
One great advantage of variable contrast paper is the ability to burn in portions of the print using different contrast settings!!
Taken from an article in Darkroom Techniques January/February 1990 whilst discussing the Minolta 45A light source.
Ansel Adams used a 45A and credited it with increasing his print output!
Sorry; just stoking the fire.
Taken from an article in Darkroom Techniques January/February 1990 whilst discussing the Minolta 45A light source.
Ansel Adams used a 45A and credited it with increasing his print output!
Sorry; just stoking the fire.
Alright, that clears it up. I don't agree that conventional printing would necessarily involve a broad spectrum exposure; I think in many people's practice, that's not what it is. It's not in mine, and never has been, since I've always used either dichroic filters or LEDs for filtering. I'm not aware of anyone using an adjustable-broad-spectrum light source for B&W printing. It's an interesting angle - although I remain extremely skeptical it makes any difference at all, notwithstanding what Matt said. It's still just the same two or three emulsions and they don't care if their exposure comes from one wavelength or a slightly different one still within the spectral sensitivity range.
Last edited:
-
- snusmumriken
- Deleted
- Reason: Posted prematurely!
Just to be clear, that’s not my position. I do use split-grade technique on occasion for difficult prints that require a lot of dodging or burning. In the process of learning, I satisfied myself that I could make a basic split-grade print that was indistinguishable from a single-grade print.
Clearly a lot of people find it so. In most cases I find it easy enough to arrive at a very acceptable print without split-grade. Similarly, I don’t feel a need for f-stop timing.
Ah, but there’s the rub. I may wallow in the sheer beauty of a nice silver gelatine print, but I always wonder whether I could do better. Hence my interest in @Craig’s assertion that a split-grade print is intrinsically better than a single-grade print of the same contrast. Always open to being persuaded if it isn’t just a question of preference.
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2012
- Messages
- 3,362
- Format
- 35mm RF
I was acquaintances with Gene Nocon when I was young. Of course we had a lot of discussions about printing. He wanted to get to the simplest result in the quickest time. He used to say he could have the print in three sheets of paper. He used mostly graded papers too from what I remember. If that is your goal, then it is a perfect way for you to print whether it is on graded or VC papers.
Yes, wondering will get you chasing your tail, but what you learn in the process will make you a better printer. Like I wrote earlier in this thread, I've gone down the rabbit hole more than once with equipment and methods. I learned along the way and I became a better printer I'd like to think.
No, a split grade print isn't intrinsically better. In the example Craig showed it is obvious that the contrast and exposure are different so there is no direct comparison that can be made or any conclusions that can be drawn. The obvious difference is the result of a logical fallacy on his part. Doremus already touched on that.
Split printing is faster overall, usually. If one starts with a grade and it is wrong then one starts chasing one's tail with grades and exposures, especially if the experience level isn't that high. With split printing two test strips is usually all that is needed to get started.
Any way you get to a print that you like is a good way. One can be wrong about facts, but opinions are a different thing altogether. In the end, if one likes one's prints, then that is all that matters.
The extreme filters, #00 and #5 are sharp-cut filters. The #00 filter basically passes no blue and the #5 filter passes no green. Use them for split-grade printing to eliminate any possible effect from intermediate wavelengths.
Note that the intermediate filters (and any filtration from a dichroic head that is not maximum yellow or magenta) all pass a mix of blue and green light as well as wavelengths between the two extremes (e.g., blue-green wavelengths, etc.).
Note, the red light that these filters pass, which makes the high-contrast filters look magenta instead of blue and the low contrast filters look yellow instead of green, has no effect on the paper since the paper is not sensitive to longer wavelengths. It's just there to help you see the image better.
Doremus
Last edited:
Dichroic filtration, when not set on maximum density, passes a broad spectrum of light. Only at the extremes do you get (relatively) sharp-cut filtration from a dichroic head.
LED heads that use white LEDs and filtration are the same. LED heads that use blue and green LEDs that emit only narrow spectra in their respective colors are sharp-cut (as is using #47 and #58 filters).
Only the extreme filters in a set of Multigrade or VC filters are sharp-cut. The intermediate filters all pass broader spectra with a #2 filter passing approximately equal amounts of blue and green and all the wavelengths between the two extremes.
So, lots of "conventional printing" involves using a broad spectrum to make the exposure.
Doremus
Last edited:
To clarify, when I wrote that bit, I was thinking not just of the color heads I've used but also/mostly the 500H system I used for a few years. Dichroic filters in principle are quite sharp cutoff as you remarked earlier. That of course still allows additional broad spectrum light to be blended into the mix.
Yes. Many don't realize that most dichroic heads work by simply moving the dichroic filters into and out of the light path. When the filter is only partially engaged, only partial filtering takes place. At 25M, only a tiny bit of the magenta filter is in the light path. The rest is unfiltered tungsten light from the enlarger bulb. Ditto for any other intermediate setting.
Best,
Doremus
Exactly; it becomes obvious whenever you open up one of those heads. In that sense the Ilford 500 system is radically different from color heads since there's no unfiltered light in the projection beam. Anyway, we digress, I suppose.
Isn't that what these fora are for?
I received an email from Magnum this morning notifying me of a new series of analog prints they are offering. Check out the extent of the dodging and burning on those prints. Is that typical of what you do? Is there some characteristic or defect in films and papers that necessitates such elaborate hand waving? Or is it all artistic interpretation? Also, I didn't notice any notations on split grade printing, or the use of multiple contrast filters.
www.magnumphotos.com
Darkroom Prints
Magnum Darkroom Prints reveal an analog history — how depth and layers are accentuated through the printing process and how the subject is brought to life. Featuring the marks and inscriptions by Magnum master printer Pablo Inirio, seen below, or in some cases the photographer themself, these...
www.magnumphotos.com
Pretty typical of what I need to do a lot of times. Notice that there's a lot of edge and corner burning; basically dealing with fall-off. And, often a too-contrasty negative and a lot of dodging and burning makes a better print than one "tailored" for the paper contrast. Mid-tones get a lot more separation and the important extremes get dodged or burned.I received an email from Magnum this morning notifying me of a new series of analog prints they are offering. Check out the extent of the dodging and burning on those prints. Is that typical of what you do? Is there some characteristic or defect in films and papers that necessitates such elaborate hand waving? Or is it all artistic interpretation? Also, I didn't notice any notations on split grade printing, or the use of multiple contrast filters.
Darkroom Prints
Magnum Darkroom Prints reveal an analog history — how depth and layers are accentuated through the printing process and how the subject is brought to life. Featuring the marks and inscriptions by Magnum master printer Pablo Inirio, seen below, or in some cases the photographer themself, these...
That said, I'm sure they chose the most complicated examples.
With split-grade techniques, things only become more complicated
Now we have to decide what filtration to dodge and burn with.Best,
Doremus
@Doremus Scudder That has all been very educational and helpful, thanks.
@faberryman Those Magnum print schemes scare the hell out of me. I have never got even close to that level of complexity. I love to see a stunning exhibition print by someone of that calibre, and it’s good to know that great pictures will be seen at their absolute best somewhere. But I can’t help thinking of the varied ways - many of them shoddy - in which Magnum images have been/are reproduced. In those instances, the content wins through despite the worst that publishers, bloggers, social media etc can do.
@faberryman Those Magnum print schemes scare the hell out of me. I have never got even close to that level of complexity. I love to see a stunning exhibition print by someone of that calibre, and it’s good to know that great pictures will be seen at their absolute best somewhere. But I can’t help thinking of the varied ways - many of them shoddy - in which Magnum images have been/are reproduced. In those instances, the content wins through despite the worst that publishers, bloggers, social media etc can do.
Some of my prints have a lot of dodging and burning, maybe not quite as elaborate. I suspect those prints shown predate multi-grade papers.I received an email from Magnum this morning notifying me of a new series of analog prints they are offering. Check out the extent of the dodging and burning on those prints. Is that typical of what you do? Is there some characteristic or defect in films and papers that necessitates such elaborate hand waving? Or is it all artistic interpretation? Also, I didn't notice any notations on split grade printing, or the use of multiple contrast filters.
Darkroom Prints
Magnum Darkroom Prints reveal an analog history — how depth and layers are accentuated through the printing process and how the subject is brought to life. Featuring the marks and inscriptions by Magnum master printer Pablo Inirio, seen below, or in some cases the photographer themself, these...
Are they actually produced in a darkroom on photo paper exposed under an enlarger? I ask because when I clicked on the details it says they are:
- Archival Pigment Print
- Printed on Hahnemuhle Fine Art Baryta paper
At that price, they are inkjet prints "they are a testimony.....to the magic of the darkroom"..... (doesn't say they are darkroom prints)
Why would they be darkroom prints? They are reproductions of marked up prints, there would have to be a color shot made and printed for them to be. A scan and inkjet print is more efficient and probably more accurate.
I doubt Magnum is selling any newly made silver gelatin prints, except maybe for special commissions. In an interview from about 7 years ago, Magnum's printer, Pablo Inirio, said he was "freelancing". As for the dodging and burning charted on the work prints, he said, "I have my notes and I follow them as much as I can, but it changes from day to day; I can do it one way one day, and the next day, for some reason, totally different." Interview here.
Maybe because the description begins "Magnum Darkroom Prints..." I guess the capitalization was the giveaway they weren't really darkroom prints.
Anybody think the burn and dodge notations on the prints look like the same handwriting? Did someone with good handwriting just copy them over from the originals? Or did a contemporary printer mark down his burn and dodge notes for these old negatives? And who would pay $250 for one of these prints? More if you choose one of the framing options. Is there anything people won't buy?
Last edited:
Interesting, thanks. Inirio's notes on the James Dean photo are just as complicated as those shown earlier (also by him? - yes I thought the style was the same). So I'm not clear whether they were for silver-gel printing or for inkjet?
Inirio was the darkroom printer, so his work prints are just or his enlargement of those negatives, using whatever paper he usually uses, whatever developer he usually uses (Dektol, it seems).
Far as I can tell, these Magum Darkroom Prints are scans/photos of Inirio's actual work prints he marked up to keep a record of how to enlarge those particular negatives. So it's his handwriting.
As for why someone would buy one? Who on earth knows. People are impressed by the marks and how the "straight" print looks so much worse than the one they know.
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |