Tonality

aparat · Dec 7, 2022

Alan Edward Klein said:
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?

I honestly do not know. The final result is such a subjective thing that I would never try to make a qualitative statement about that. In the end, it's about picking all the ingredients and making a tasty meal out of them, to use an unoriginal analogy. Film testing is very limited in its scope and offers only one view of the data, so to speak.

Sirius Glass · Dec 7, 2022

Alan Edward Klein said:
Which developer with Tmax film brings out more tonality? D76 or Xtol?

Here is Kodak's comparison chart

Ian Grant · Dec 8, 2022

Alan Edward Klein said:
Which developer with Tmax film brings out more tonality? D76 or Xtol?

MattKing said:
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".

A factor not mentioned which has an impact is grain, so when you look at Kodak;s chart that Sirius Glass has posted about you can see that Xtol gives better results in terms of improved shadow details, finer grain and slightly better sharpness, compared to D76.

So if you look again at Agfa's comments it is implicit that improving grain (finer) as well as better sharpness and shadow details will impact the tonal quality of the print (or scan).

All Agfapan Professional films are panchromatic BW negative films. Their quality characteristics have been geared to the requirements of professional use. Each single product possesses an excellent performance ratio between image quality (sharpness/fine grain) and speed. The straight, long drawn out gradation curves guarantee an abundant transmittal of the richness in the tonal quality of the print. A finely differentiated scale in grey tones, the clean tracing of both highlight and shadow lead to an authentic print transmittal.

But going back to Matt's x, y, & z, where x is the choice of film, y development, and z choice of developer, two other factors are missing v choice of film format, and w exposure technique. Craft brings these 5 factors together and making the right choices. This was something Peter Goldfield stressed in his 1978 Goldfinger Craftbook for Creative Photography.

Ian

takilmaboxer · Dec 8, 2022

Ian Grant said:
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

A perfectly neutral response would mean that the density produced on the negative would be solely a function of the absolute reflectance of the target. For example, and 18% gray card and a bright blue card with 18% reflectance would produce the same density on the negative. But in fact, silver based films are much more sensitive to blue light than to green or red light, so in this case the blue card would produce more density than the gray card. Tmax films are produced with a substantially reduced response to blue light, which Kodak refers to as a "more natural rendering". To my eye this translates into a different "tonality", as the same landscape photographed with orthochromatic and Tmax film will produce obviosly different toanlity. But it seems that most respondents to this thread see tonality more strictly as variations in shades of gray in the print. Subjective!

koraks · Dec 8, 2022

takilmaboxer said:
For example, and 18% gray card and a bright blue card with 18% reflectance would produce the same density on the negative.

If you think about that some more, this turns out not to be as straightforward as you think it is.
What is 18% overall reflectance compared to 18% blue reflectance? Which part of the blue spectrum? How do you weigh the different wavelengths? How does that relate to human perceived brightness?
It seems such an innocuous statement, but it very quickly gets very complicated.

Vaughn · Dec 8, 2022

Ian Grant said:
...

So if you look again at Agfa's comments it is implicit that improving grain (finer) as well as better sharpness and shadow details will impact the tonal quality of the print (or scan).

... Each single product possesses an excellent performance ratio between image quality (sharpness/fine grain) and speed. ...

In other words; you can't have the best of both (image quality or speed) and our compromises are excellent.

albireo · Dec 9, 2022

Vaughn said:
In other words; you can't have the best of both (image quality or speed)

I'd disagree. The way I see it, tonality has nothing to do with grain, and a lot to do with macroscopic separation of greys.

I have pictures taken with 35mm Kentmere 400 film that have better 'tonality' than pictures taken with Tmax 100 on a 6x9 Fuji GW690 rangefinder.

Ian Grant · Dec 9, 2022

Vaughn said:
In other words; you can't have the best of both (image quality or speed) and our compromises are excellent.

I think you could say that for Ilford, Foma, and Kodak's range of films as well, although only Ilford now offers a slow film Pan F. Part of craft is choosing the best compromise, and getting the vest from it.

albireo said:
I'd disagree. The way I see it, tonality has nothing to do with grain, and a lot to do with macroscopic separation of greys.

I have pictures taken with 35mm Kentmere 400 film that have better 'tonality' than pictures taken with Tmax 100 on a 6x9 Fuji GW690 rangefinder.

Yes it is possible to get excellent results, in terms of tonal range, from fast films, I do with HP5 LF and Delta 400(& previously Tmax with MF. So in your case you need to ask yourself why you aren't getting similar tonality with Tmax 100 with your Fuji GW690 MF camera.

Ian

albireo · Dec 9, 2022

Ian Grant said:
Yes it is possible to get excellent results, in terms of tonal range, from fast films, I do with HP5 LF and Delta 400(& previously Tmax with MF. So in your case you need to ask yourself why you aren't getting similar tonality with Tmax 100 with your Fuji GW690 MF camera.

Apologies - I didn't say I am not, in general. I said that it I sometimes don't. The reason is, in my view, that tonality has also to do with light conditions in the scene and filters.

Chuck_P · Dec 9, 2022

I was watching this video of a John Sexton interview where he provided an interesting quote from AA on the subject of tonality. I thought it was appropriate:

"Dodging and burning are steps to take care of mistakes God made when establishing tonal relationships."

This sentiment describes, imo, just how difficult and complex the subject of tonality can be and how even the masters of the craft can struggle with achieving the tonal relationships they desire for the final print. As much as we all love what a film curve can tell us, tonality, imo, encompasses a fair degree more than just the characteristics of a film. Take that quote as you will but this is not meant to spark a debate about there being a God (I could just see it happening, lol ). But the greater point after all, is that even God has a hard time with tonality.

aparat · Dec 9, 2022

koraks said:
If you think about that some more, this turns out not to be as straightforward as you think it is.
What is 18% overall reflectance compared to 18% blue reflectance? Which part of the blue spectrum? How do you weigh the different wavelengths? How does that relate to human perceived brightness?
It seems such an innocuous statement, but it very quickly gets very complicated.

I agree. It gets very complicated if one is limited only to linguistic descriptions of tonality. For the sake of simplicity, though, it is not outlandish to assume that all elements of the scene and the optical system involved are both visually and photographically non-selective. Still, to avoid such complications and inaccuracies, tone reproduction analysis and the associated concept of tonality can be very helpful.

I suppose this figure from from Jones (1921, yes, it's not a typo) explains it better than I ever could:

MattKing · Dec 9, 2022

aparat said:
I suppose this figure from from Jones (1921, yes, it's not a typo) explains it better than I ever could:

I think I know what I'd like on my next T-shirt ...

aparat · Dec 9, 2022

MattKing said:
I think I know what I'd like on my next T-shirt ...

Great idea! I think this graphic is absolute genius.

Tonality

aparat

Sirius Glass

Ian Grant

takilmaboxer

koraks

Moderator

Vaughn

albireo

Ian Grant

albireo

Chuck_P

aparat

MattKing

Moderator

aparat

Tonality

Moderator

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency