split grade printing

Bob Carnie · May 11, 2005

Bob
You are right , I do give the exposure*flash* with the negative in . sorry if it was not clear.
when printing with three filters.
I try to pick a middle filter that is slightly lower *contrast* than what I would normally use for one filter printing. As well my main exposure is a bit on the light side as opposed with the density I would select for a one filter print.
As well if the negative is very flat I will pick an filter that is slightly contrastier than what I would use with one filter printing and again make the density slightly lighter.
When I then hit the second filter exposure * whether it be 00 or 5* I know my density will come into place , with dry down in consideration.
IMHO this is the best way to split print as you can control the midtones, shawdows and highlights to a very exacting way.

gareth harper · May 11, 2005

"As I understand a split print is when you use 2 or more filters to achieve a image that you are happy with therefore once again I disagree."

That's just what you do with multigrade paper anyway.

When printers talk about 'split grade printing', they mean the main exposure is made with the 00 and 5 filters, subsequent burning cam be with any grade.

Paper flashing, as I understand it, is exposing the paper to a contolled amount of light (with no negative in the way), to help control contrast. I've also heard it said that if the paper has had a little pre-light it is more lightly to respond to further light (it needs a little kick to get going). I should add that while I'm competent at split grade printing, I'm far from an expert on paper flashing.

Bulent Ozgoren · May 12, 2005

Donald Miller said:
Since Les is on his way to the US, I will answer from my experience. I develop my negatives for enlargement on silver to a density range of 1.35. These will then also work for contact printing on Grade three Azo if I choose. My enlarger is a Durst 138S with condensors.

I have found, in my experience, that Ansel Adams targeted densities no longer apply in my practice.

Density range (DR) of 1.35: Is this Zone VIII density minus Zone III density? Furthermore I develop my negatives in Pyrocat-HD and measure densities from the green and blue channels and take the average densities as follows:
(2xGreen+1xBlue)/3
I have tested negatives for a DR of 1.35 with this method and the prints are harsh (too contrasty).

Donald Miller · May 12, 2005

Bulent Ozgoren said:
Density range (DR) of 1.35: Is this Zone VIII density minus Zone III density? Furthermore I develop my negatives in Pyrocat-HD and measure densities from the green and blue channels and take the average densities as follows:
(2xGreen+1xBlue)/3
I have tested negatives for a DR of 1.35 with this method and the prints are harsh (too contrasty).

No.... density range as it is normally meant is the high value density minus the low value density (not minus FB+fog). I measure my densities using the blue channel only.

It appears that, from what you have stated, that you are using Zone sytem procedures...I no longer use the Zone system preferring BTZS to that earlier system.

Bulent Ozgoren · May 13, 2005

Donald Miller said:
No.... density range as it is normally meant is the high value density minus the low value density (not minus FB+fog). I measure my densities using the blue channel only.

It appears that, from what you have stated, that you are using Zone sytem procedures...I no longer use the Zone system preferring BTZS to that earlier system.

According to Dick Arentz (BTZS practioneer), in his Platinum & Palladium printing book, 1st edition page 19.
Quote"
In calculating negative values with a transmission densitometer, both the useful highlight (Zone VIII) and the usuful shadow densities (Zone III) are measured. After simple substraction, the difference is determined, which represents all the intermediate values. This is the Density Range of the negative.
"Unquote

Donald Miller · May 13, 2005

Bulent Ozgoren said:
According to Dick Arentz (BTZS practioneer), in his Platinum & Palladium printing book, 1st edition page 19.
Quote"
In calculating negative values with a transmission densitometer, both the useful highlight (Zone VIII) and the usuful shadow densities (Zone III) are measured. After simple substraction, the difference is determined, which represents all the intermediate values. This is the Density Range of the negative.
"Unquote

While Dick Arentz may claim to be a BTZS practitioner, it is unusual for BTZS to claim any specific zones and strive for zone placements as in the Zone system...In fact that was one of the things that I found difficult to accept at first. I don't dispute what Dick said.

I would choose instead to restate what Dick said in this way... The negative density range is obtained by measuring the negatives lowest information bearing density and the negatives highest density and subtracting the low density measurement from the high density measurement. This will give one the negative density range.

In my practice of BTZS I don't meter with a spot meter (even though I own one) I use incident measurements to establish the SBR of the scene. Therefore I don't get involved with Zone III or Zone IV placements any longer. This practice is more in keeping with BTZS as I understand it.

I reported the procedures that I use. If your results indicate otherwise then you should use what you find to be suitable to produce the results that you want.

Maine-iac · May 19, 2005

omalley said:
Who of you uses this (I've also read it called 'multicontrast printing' or multigrade filtration') technique? Do you use it consistently, or do you find that you use it sometimes, other times getting better results with graded paper? I just started using split grade printing last year, and have been overwhelmingly satisfied with the results.
I'd also like to know among those of you who use it, which is the more popular method: printing in the higher tones first, then exposing for the lower tones or printing for shadow detail first, then working on the higher tones. I have only used the first method, as it seems more effective to me.

I've done split-grade printing exclusively for over 20 years. I have a colorhead on my Beseler, and I give each print two exposures, one at full magenta and one at full yellow (it doesn't matter in which order).

I arrive at the basic time for each of the two exposures by doing a test print of each filtration in three-second increments. I look for the best highlight in the yellow test print and the best shadow in the magenta one. E.g. 9 sec. at full yellow and 10 sec. at full magenta.

Then I make a work print combining the two times. I may have to juggle them a bit, e.g., decrease or increase one or the other, but usually, the first work print is very close. This then, for a relatively "normal" negative (whatever that is) becomes my standard for that particular paper. I don't have to go through the whole test strip routine for each negative. I simply start with my standard time, and that gets me within easy speaking distance.

Burning in or dodging is done, either with both filters or with only one color, depending on what I'm trying to do. To increase or decrease density, but not change contrast, burn or dodge with both filters proportionately. To change contrast, but not density, increase or decrease one or the other, but not both. You can do this selectively in some areas of the print as well as globally.

I'm almost embarrassed to admit that this method makes obtaining good prints quickly almost too easy. Occasionally, a negative will fool me and I have to work really hard and use multiple sheets of paper to obtain what I'm after, but not often.

I like the look of a split-filter print better; I think it enhances local contrast, i.e., the contrast within a particular tone, particularly the midtones so that the overall effect is that the tones "sparkle" or have more life.

Larry

Leon · May 19, 2005

I'm a split grader too, but only in certain situations. If I have a neg that I am not sure about the contrast on (ie which grade to choose) I'll start from a a split grade perspective. If the neg looks ok to me, I'll try single grade first, just because I use filters in a drawer rather than a dial in controller, so it's a pain to have to keep swapping filters for every print.

FrankB · May 19, 2005

I'm another split-grade victim of Les's!

When printing I will first try a single exposure but if I have any trouble in nailing down the right contrast setting I'll go straight to split-grading, sometimes in combination with flashing.

The ability to sort out the tonal values of the highlights and shadows separately allows for much easier fine adjustment of each than otherwise.

Leolo · May 19, 2005

Grainier Prints with Split Printing?

An instructor at a printing workshop told me that split printing resulted in a grainier print due to the use of the number 5 filter. I have not yet done some testing to see if it's true. Have some of you ever heard this before?

titrisol · May 19, 2005

Never heard that one before, mine look normal

Leolo said:
An instructor at a printing workshop told me that split printing resulted in a grainier print due to the use of the number 5 filter. I have not yet done some testing to see if it's true. Have some of you ever heard this before?

j_landecker · May 19, 2005

Leolo said:
An instructor at a printing workshop told me that split printing resulted in a grainier print due to the use of the number 5 filter. I have not yet done some testing to see if it's true. Have some of you ever heard this before?

My understanding is that when you expose the paper in a single exposure you are partly exposing each of the high-contrast and low-contrast emulsions in a certain proportion depending on the filter used. Split-grade printing simply exposes each emulsion separately with the same overall result, but with the added advantage of being able to control the dodging during the separate exposures to control local contrast better. Unlike burning, dodging for contrast control can only be done during the separate exposures (since it is subtractive). If you were doing a single grade 3 exposure and wanted part of the print to be exposed only at grade 5, you would have to completely mask that area during the grade 3 exposure and then expose it at grade 5 while completely masking the rest of the print - difficult to do well at the best of times. Split-grade printing makes this much easier by allowing you to dodge the area completely (or partially depending on the contrast you want) during the low contrast exposure. Burning, which is an additive process, can be done equally well with single-exposure techniques. The best explanation I've seen of this technique is in the book "Way Beyond Monochrome", which backs up the artistic result with a technical explanation about what's going on when you print split-grade.

Jim

Leolo · May 21, 2005

J., explained like that it makes a lot of sense. Thanks.

baronfoxx · May 21, 2005

splitgrade printing

Fotohuis said:
I am using the split grade technique in combination with the Heiland split grade controller which makes the practical use and time consuming test strips superfluous.

This system can be mounted on over 32 types of different enlargers.

Till now the best B&W printing system I have ever used.
Personal adaptations can be easily integrated.

Highly recommended. Prices from Eur. 824,-

Robert

I agree entirely with your comments, I have used the Heiland for two years now and it is a superb piece of gear. I use it permanantly on my Leica V35 enlarger and have found no faults with the system.
you can also use the same control module with up to three seperate enlargers, I have just had a Durst L1200 head converted by Heiland and it works just as good as the V35 using the same control modules.
In manual mode the grade is adjustable in one tenth of grade steps and the density (exposure) in one tenth of a "F" stop steps. what more can you ask for. upgrades to the module are avaiable on line direct from Heiland

Paul Howell · May 23, 2005

Has anyone tried split grade printing in conjunction with the Emmermann process? I first read about split grade printing in an introduction to enlarging text by Lester Bogen in the mid 1970, and I have some hand written notes which I must have taken at some sort of workshop but for the life of me I can't recall attending much less the details. I have a test print made on fiber based Polycontrast, but I don't know if I printed the low contrast during the first exposure and the high contact exposure in the second exposure or the other way around. Any thoughts?

arigram · May 30, 2005

I use a variation of the technique I call Multigrade printing.
That is, I don't just use 5 and 0, I use all filters, usually two but some times I might use three or four different ones locally or generally.
Sometimes I want detailed and soft highlights, sometimes I want them paper white and harsh, same with the darks. And pretty often I make several different choices depending on the negative, as I have not yet limited myself into one subject matter such as only landscapes or only portraits.

I believe also that multiple grades in paper is the biggest invention ever in modern photography. A single grade of paper cannot contain all the detail stored in the negative, atleast not in my technique. Maybe the ones who use the Zone System and contact print in Azo has achieved this.
But I very often use multiple grades to darken my shadows and increase contrast while giving detail to the lighter parts. Often also, I "dig out" detail but using a different grade.
And that latter is also a very importand advantage of analog photography in contrast with digital that has not been talked about.
When you click a digital photograph, with an image processing program you can only subtract detail not add. "Burning in" does not give you detail from a highlight, just makes the area darker. A negative thought that contains much more information than a paper, will bring out detail.

gareth harper · May 30, 2005

"I use a variation of the technique I call Multigrade printing."

What you describe is what multi-grade paper is for. You start with one grade for the general exposure, then move on to others for different parts of the print. Or sometimes the general exposure is even with two different grades with a good bit of dodging involved, then finnishing off with different grade.
That's part and parcel of what multi-grade is about. Not just having one paper that does it all, but can be several different papers at once.

'Split grade printing' is where the main exposure is done using the 00 and 5 filters, then burning in, if required, at whatever grade you fancy.

Maine-iac · Jun 2, 2005

Leolo said:
An instructor at a printing workshop told me that split printing resulted in a grainier print due to the use of the number 5 filter. I have not yet done some testing to see if it's true. Have some of you ever heard this before?

Not true! Grain is not affected by filtration.

Larry

Donald Miller · Jun 2, 2005

Leolo said:
An instructor at a printing workshop told me that split printing resulted in a grainier print due to the use of the number 5 filter. I have not yet done some testing to see if it's true. Have some of you ever heard this before?

While filtration may not materially alter the negative grain, I could see where the use of a number 5 filter as a portion of the exposure could produce the appearance of more noticeable grain in a print with certain negatives at certain degrees of enlargement. The reason being that the areas of the negative that lie between the individual grains would represent low density regions and the number five filter would tend to increase the contrast between these adjacent regions more then a single contrast filtration.

Les McLean · Jun 2, 2005

Leolo said:
An instructor at a printing workshop told me that split printing resulted in a grainier print due to the use of the number 5 filter. I have not yet done some testing to see if it's true. Have some of you ever heard this before?

I agree with Donald Miller. A print made using a no 5 filter only will show more grain than a print made from the same negative using a no 2 filter, therefore it is likely that there will be an increase in grain in certain areas of a split filtered print dependant on the overall tonality and contrast of the negative being printed.

Having said that I have used this method of split filter printing for the past 13 years and have never been unhappy about the level of grain in the final print.

mvjim · Jun 2, 2005

I know this will sound like like hearsay to many out there but every time split grade printing or some similar process is mentioned it brings out the zealot believers out of the wood work with stories of near miraculous results.
A few things should be mentioned though about split filtering. First it is not for everyone or for every negative for that matter. It really depends on what you are looking for as a final result and the condition of your negatives to begin with. (as several have mentioned their negatives tend to be high in contrast) These are ideal negative types for this technique.
Also - David Vestal ran an article several years ago where he tested the split grade techniques against using a single grade and found that split grade printing produced little difference in overall tonal value vs printing the negative on the "correct" grade. And as a result did not allow the printer to learn how to read a negative properly.
Finally - when using two filters you are mixing grain size, (read less accutance). As most know a 0 grade will show little or no grain and a 5 grade will show significant grain increase.
But as they say - to each his own.

Nick Zentena · Jun 2, 2005

mvjim said:
A few things should be mentioned though about split filtering. First it is not for everyone or for every negative for that matter. It really depends on what you are looking for as a final result and the condition of your negatives to begin with. (as several have mentioned their negatives tend to be high in contrast) These are ideal negative types for this technique.
Also - David Vestal ran an article several years ago where he tested the split grade techniques against using a single grade and found that split grade printing produced little difference in overall tonal value vs printing the negative on the "correct" grade. And as a result did not allow the printer to learn how to read a negative properly.
Finally - when using two filters you are mixing grain size, (read less accutance). As most know a 0 grade will show little or no grain and a 5 grade will show significant grain increase.
But as they say - to each his own.

If the final print is "little" different then why isn't it for every negative? Wasn't spilt filtering the orginal way to handle VC paper? Single filters coming later. If you're using a single gel filter set then you're combining filters. The filter speed matching may actually mean you're using three filters in one. So I'm not sure about your grain point. BTW didn't you say Vestal found "little" difference? If using two filter steps led to higher grain and lower grain [which is the logical end of your claim] then shouldn't Vestal have found that difference?

gareth harper · Jun 2, 2005

"And as a result did not allow the printer to learn how to read a negative properly."
Strange. When I started printing a few years ago I quickly turned to split-grade printing as I was having great difficulty in selecting the correct grade, or understanding how to do this. As a self-taught printer this technique really helped me understand contrast and eventually how to read a neg.
Once I was more confident I turned back to using a single grade for the main exposure.
And yes you can do it with any neg.
I still use the technique now and again.

moose10101 · Jun 2, 2005

mvjim said:
And as a result did not allow the printer to learn how to read a negative properly.

I would think the relative exposure length of the #0 filter vs. the #5 would provide some feedback on the equivalent single filter.

gareth harper · Jun 2, 2005

I would think the relative exposure length of the #0 filter vs. the #5 would provide some feedback on the equivalent single filter.

You got it. You soon get the idea of grades and contrast from split grade printing. Plus if you remember the old pure white to deep black standard you soon start hammering out punchy prints.

It's best for a novice to waste a bit of paper doing this. I used to do the 5 filter first with a test strip. Once I had the time that just gave me a full black roughly where I wanted it, I then went for a full sheet for the 00 test run on top of the 5 time. Basically it's hitting you with a lot options at once.

As a novice I found if I could get the first step about right with the 5 filter, the full sheet 00 test print on top of 5 time put the answers right in front of me. Before that I was fumbling about with different single grades and not really quite getting the idea.

Of course you can do the 00 first if you like, just I always like to do the 5 first.

Split grade printing is often touted as an advanced tool, but it's a very revealing tool for beginners, at least it was for this one.

split grade printing

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency