Tonality

[MattKing]

The "tonality" in my example came from three things mainly.
1) The direction and character of the light;
2) How the subject looked - the presence of deep shadows and luminous reflections arrayed (fortuitously) in a pleasing manner; and
3) the reflectivity of some of the subject.
It is taken with the camera (Mamiya C330) pointing almost straight down, with me and my tripod hanging over the edge of an elevated wooden walkway. I metered using an incident meter pointing up toward the forest canopy and overcast skies. IIRC, it was T-Max 400 developed in replenished HC-110 1 + 49 (but it might have been Plus-X).
The negative appears quite thin to the naked eye. It prints beautifully. As an aside, I think most beginners seem to want thicker negatives than I prefer. But then, some very experienced photographer friends prefer those thick negatives as well.
This shot is taken on the same roll, from almost the same place, while (obviously) pointing the camera in a different direction. It's subject is another Photrio moderator

The first example image was taken looking over the left side of the walkway, from a location just out of the field of view in the second image.
I share the second image here because it gives an indication of the light.

 

[aparat]

How would everyone translate this technical explanation to a simple process of getting great tonal pictures from shooting the subject stage to the final print or display stage?

That's a great question. I tend to think that tone reproduction analysis is, at least these days, meant to be descriptive, rather than prescriptive. But, back when it was developed, analog photography was beginning to be serious, used not just in art and in preserving family memories, but in science, medicine, business, military, etc. It was believed that, for a more rigorous approach to tonality, esp. print quality, it was necessary to develop a paradigm based on (numerical) data, rather than verbal descriptors. As we can see even in this thread, photographers disagree about the most basic verbal terms, such as "tone," not to mention more subtle ones, like "elegant," "extended," "smooth," etc.

Tone reproduction is meant to be a simple input-output type of a system. It starts with the scene, with all of its surfaces reflecting light differently, which is evaluated with a calibrated exposure meter, which then results in a camera image, added to it is the contribution from lens flare, etc., all the way to the output, i.e., the print. For professional labs, it was essential to use a data-driven approach, esp. for technical photography, reproductions, internegatives, etc. These days, (almost) nobody cares.

 

[Ian Grant]

The "tonality" in my example came from three things mainly.
1) The direction and character of the light;
2) How the subject looked - the presence of deep shadows and luminous reflections arrayed (fortuitously) in a pleasing manner; and
3) the reflectivity of some of the subject.
It is taken with the camera (Mamiya C330) pointing almost straight down, with me and my tripod hanging over the edge of an elevated wooden walkway. I metered using an incident meter pointing up toward the forest canopy and overcast skies. IIRC, it was T-Max 400 developed in replenished HC-110 1 + 49 (but it might have been Plus-X).
The negative appears quite thin to the naked eye. It prints beautifully. As an aside, I think most beginners seem to want thicker negatives than I prefer. But then, some very experienced photographer friends prefer those thick negatives as well.
This shot is taken on the same roll, from almost the same place, while (obviously) pointing the camera in a different direction. It's subject is another Photrio moderator
View attachment 323515
The first example image was taken looking over the left side of the walkway, from a location just out of the field of view in the second image.
I share the second image here because it gives an indication of the light.

Here's an opposite example to yours Matt, it would have been APX25 processed in Rodinal 3:100 or replenished Xtol, it's not using the whole tonal scale but still has good tonality because going back to the Agfa comments it has finely differentiated scale in the grey tone.

Like your image the Aesthetics of the image are contributed by

1) The direction and character of the light;
2) How the subject looked - the absence of deep shadows and bright highlights
3) the reflectivity of some of the subject.

Ultimately craft is the key to get the results you want to achieve. I do think this line from Agfa is the key - A finely differentiated scale in grey tones, the clean tracing of both highlight and shadow lead to an authentic print transmittal.

And matched by Ilford's comment which is really applicable to any film,- PAN F Plus negatives show an outstanding range of tone and detail when the film is carefully exposed and processed.

If the craft is wrong in primarily terms of exposure and development then we can't expect to get high quality results.

Ian

 

[Paul Howell]

You are right, I check Tmax 400 and 100 and Foma but not panF.

 

[FotoD]

it's not using the whole tonal scale but still has good tonality because going back to the Agfa comments it has finely differentiated scale in the grey tone.

Does this mean that a typical lith print has poor tonality? Or does it just have another type of tonality?

 

[Ian Grant]

Does this mean that a typical lith print has poor tonality? Or does it just have another type of tonality?

Just another type of tonality, an altered reality. That said of course there can be poor quality lith prints in terms of technique.

There are many ways of interpreting negatives at the printing (or scanning) stage, the importance of Craft is good technique at the shooting and processing stage allows a negative to be printed different ways.

Ian

 

[Sirius Glass]

Does this mean that a typical lith print has poor tonality? Or does it just have another type of tonality?

Lith printing is its own world. That is a separate discussion.

 

[MattKing]

Just another type of tonality, an altered reality. That said of course there can be poor quality lith prints in terms of technique.

There are many ways of interpreting negatives at the printing (or scanning) stage, the importance of Craft is good technique at the shooting and processing stage allows a negative to be printed different ways.

Ian

And at the risk of adding an additional element of potential uncertainty, having a clear vision about the desired results is a major component of Craft.
For my first example, when I looked down into the leaves, water and mud, it was important to be able to envision a print.
Same applies to the photo of the (now) moderator .

 

[MattKing]

Lith printing is its own world. That is a separate discussion.

Au contraire! The tonality of lith printing is different, but exactly the same issues are involved.
She is not participating much here anymore, and I hope she doesn't mind me referencing her work, but the lith prints that @sly shares with our Darkroom Group have exquisite tonality - some of them were definitely highlights of our Group Show earlier this year.
Tonality choices are made in reference to the presentation medium - that is one of the reasons that it is difficult to describe a "for all purposes step by step approach".

 

[Ian Grant]

And at the risk of adding an additional element of potential uncertainty, having a clear vision about the desired results is a major component of Craft.
For my first example, when I looked down into the leaves, water and mud, it was important to be able to envision a print.
Same applies to the photo of the (now) moderator .

That's an important addition, and apt in my fog shots. It would be easy to say use logical Zone System techniques to expand, to get whiter highlights etc, but that would completely kill the atmosphere.

There are of course many approaches.

Ian

 

[takilmaboxer]

To my eye tonality is a subjective thing that depends in part on how the colors in a scene are transcribed into shades of grey. That's why I prefer old school films to t grain films. The t grain films have a more neutral tonality. But the whole argument is like debating how many angels fit onto the head of a pin. Fun. but pointless.

 

[Ian Grant]

To my eye tonality is a subjective thing that depends in part on how the colors in a scene are transcribed into shades of grey. That's why I prefer old school films to t grain films. The t grain films have a more neutral tonality. But the whole argument is like debating how many angels fit onto the head of a pin. Fun. but pointless.

I shoot both, often side by side, and my final prints match, OK maybe that's partially due to printing controls. And it's not just how colours transcribe it's their density how light or dark they will appear.

How can a T-rain or equivalent film be more neutral, that makes zero sense.

Ian

 

[Chuck_P]

......but that would completely kill the atmosphere.

You mentioned it but maybe its a discussion for another thread. I'm curious why using the words Zone System would kill the atmosphere........in general, I've wondered why on many occasions, those words are such a trigger for some people.

 

[MattKing]

You mentioned it but maybe its a discussion for another thread. I'm curious why using the words Zone System would kill the atmosphere........in general, I've wondered why on many occasions, those words are such a trigger for some people.

Ian wasn't referring to Zone System discussion killing the atmosphere. He was referring to using Zone System expansion to increase the tonal range - darker shadows and brighter highlights and more tonal separation in the mid-tones - to change the result.
That change in result would "kill the atmosphere".

 

[GregY]

To my eye tonality is a subjective thing that depends in part on how the colors in a scene are transcribed into shades of grey. That's why I prefer old school films to t grain films. The t grain films have a more neutral tonality. But the whole argument is like debating how many angels fit onto the head of a pin. Fun. but pointless.

Tonality is something.....there is a definition for it. Tonality is like bread....it exists....and you have the option of subjectively preferring one recipe over another. (T grain films have a different grain structure. I can develop them in Rodinal for example and get a pretty different outcome than processing them in my favourite staining developer). Things are pretty slow in the photo world as yesterday's entire day of posts on tonality show.... Bring on that new Kentmere 120!!!....prints & opinions !!

 

[Chuck_P]

Ian wasn't referring to Zone System discussion killing the atmosphere. He was referring to using Zone System expansion to increase the tonal range - darker shadows and brighter highlights and more tonal separation in the mid-tones - to change the result.
That change in result would "kill the atmosphere".

Ok, I accept that I may have misunderstood.........it simply doesn't read that way to me, my apologies.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

The "tonality" in my example came from three things mainly.
1) The direction and character of the light;
2) How the subject looked - the presence of deep shadows and luminous reflections arrayed (fortuitously) in a pleasing manner; and
3) the reflectivity of some of the subject.
It is taken with the camera (Mamiya C330) pointing almost straight down, with me and my tripod hanging over the edge of an elevated wooden walkway. I metered using an incident meter pointing up toward the forest canopy and overcast skies. IIRC, it was T-Max 400 developed in replenished HC-110 1 + 49 (but it might have been Plus-X).
The negative appears quite thin to the naked eye. It prints beautifully. As an aside, I think most beginners seem to want thicker negatives than I prefer. But then, some very experienced photographer friends prefer those thick negatives as well.
This shot is taken on the same roll, from almost the same place, while (obviously) pointing the camera in a different direction. It's subject is another Photrio moderator
View attachment 323515
The first example image was taken looking over the left side of the walkway, from a location just out of the field of view in the second image.
I share the second image here because it gives an indication of the light.

I forgot my belt that day... Oh and I finally retired that minky old vest!

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Which developer with Tmax film brings out more tonality? D76 or Xtol?

 

[aparat]

Which developer with Tmax film brings out more tonality? D76 or Xtol?

I am not sure if this is generalizable over the entire T-MAX line, but, in my tests, XTOL stock produces curves that are more linear through the mid-range and lower highlights than D76 with the T-MAX P3200, especially with longer developing times (in a typical pushing scenario). These curves, therefore, look smoother, less "lumpy." I guess one could describe such tonality as having more mid-tone separation, with less tonal compression in the highlights. Whether that's a good thing or a bad thing is up to one's individual taste, the subject matter, the print medium, etc. I will be posting more P3200 and XTOL data soon. With shorter developing times, these differences are less pronounced.

 

[aparat]

I forgot my belt that day... Oh and I finally retired that minky old vest!

So it's you in that photograph? It's an awesome capture of that particular moment. It also has a very interesting composition, where it's not clear where the photographer ends and the camera begins, which is a great metaphor for how a lot of photographers feel about their art/craft. The camera becomes an extension of one's eye, so to speak. Really cool.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

I am not sure if this is generalizable over the entire T-MAX line, but, in my tests, XTOL stock produces curves that are more linear through the mid-range and lower highlights than D76 with the T-MAX P3200, especially with longer developing times (in a typical pushing scenario). These curves, therefore, look smoother, less "lumpy." I guess one could describe such tonality as having more mid-tone separation, with less tonal compression in the highlights. Whether that's a good thing or a bad thing is up to one's individual taste, the subject matter, the print medium, etc. I will be posting more P3200 and XTOL data soon. With shorter developing times, these differences are less pronounced.

Do you think those mid-ranges and tonal effects are better using XTOL with Tmax 100 and Tmax 400 also which are what I shoot?

 

[MattKing]

It's an awesome capture of that particular moment.

Gee thanks
And I never knew about the belt!

 

[Craig]

Do you think those mid-ranges and tonal effects are better using XTOL with Tmax 100 and Tmax 400 also which are what I shoot?

From the curves I have seen, Xtol has better speed in the shadows than Tmax developer and gives a more linear response between exposure and the density attained on the film.

I've never done a subjective comparison in the image quality between Xtol and other developers if I had photographed the same scene side by side. However, I have been very pleased with the results from Delta 100 in Xtol.

 

[MattKing]

Which developer with Tmax film brings out more tonality? D76 or Xtol?

Yes
Tonality isn't a thing, which you can achieve a range from small to large. It is a measure of quality, while it is a quality in itself.
Tonality isn't a single type of result, achieved by doing "x", with film "y" developed in developer "z".
There are subjects and lighting conditions that are best dealt with using one combination of film, developer and printing approaches.
Other subjects and lighting conditions are best dealt with using other combinations of film, developer and printing approaches.
In many cases, a number of combinations of film and developer may be used to create negatives that can lead to tonality that pleases, as long as the right approaches to printing are employed.
It is the printing stage that gives you the most flexibility.
If your output is digital, substitute scanning and post processing for the printing controls.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Yes
Tonality isn't a thing, which you can achieve a range from small to large. It is a measure of quality, while it is a quality in itself.
Tonality isn't a single type of result, achieved by doing "x", with film "y" developed in developer "z".
There are subjects and lighting conditions that are best dealt with using one combination of film, developer and printing approaches.
Other subjects and lighting conditions are best dealt with using other combinations of film, developer and printing approaches.
In many cases, a number of combinations of film and developer may be used to create negatives that can lead to tonality that pleases, as long as the right approaches to printing are employed.
It is the printing stage that gives you the most flexibility.
If your output is digital, substitute scanning and post processing for the printing controls.

Assuming that output is digital for post-processing as well, would XTol give a better range for the scanning and editing stages with all other things remaining equal?