But what if you are using a colour head enlarger, or a condenser, or diffuser with multigrade paper?
I wonder if those of you using blue/green filters know if there is a significant difference in exposure times vs yellow/magenta? I have been using yellow/magenta for many years now, all my exposure records are for that combination and I am considering an LED head that uses blue/green light.
I wonder if those of you using blue/green filters know if there is a significant difference in exposure times vs yellow/magenta? I have been using yellow/magenta for many years now, all my exposure records are for that combination and I am considering an LED head that uses blue/green light.
Here is my method. I take a reading with a calibrated Ilford exposure meter which will give me the same time overall - with minor aperture adjustment. I then look at the negative and guess the time split between grade 00 and grade five. Make a print ( double the time for grade five) then assess it. Sometimes right first time, majority require a second tweaked print, sometimes with dodging and/ or burning to taste.
Here is my method. I take a reading with a calibrated Ilford exposure meter which will give me the same time overall - with minor aperture adjustment. I then look at the negative and guess the time split between grade 00 and grade five. Make a print ( double the time for grade five) then assess it. Sometimes right first time, majority require a second tweaked print, sometimes with dodging and/ or burning to taste.
Also I thought this was really interesting, look how the grade 2 print rides on top of the grade 0 curve then as grade 5 crosses, it switches over and rides on top of that. It's kind of like your green sensitive emulsion is in control of the highlights and the blue sensitive is in control of the shadows. Seems to me like this isn't ideal since your contrast index is always going to have this curve to it. Not sure if the classic graded papers had this characteristic but seems to me like potential reason someone might prefer them. At least if that had more linear responses for each grade
View attachment 315334
This may be obvious to other folks but I was short of surprised to see that there was no difference between split grade or intermediate filters, at least for the base exposure (dodging/burning is a different story).
Not sure if the classic graded papers had this characteristic but seems to me like potential reason someone might prefer them.
Thanks yeah I forgot to mention this was all on Ilford MGRC Deluxe Glossy (aka Gen 5). Actually I have wondered why the filters are warm tones, but the contrast head projects distinctly purple/green light. I might have to grab a set of those filters and do this again to see if there's a difference...Would this still be true if you were using yellow through magenta filters? I don't think you mentioned which paper you used here, but officially the difference between the three emulsion layers in Ilford MG is indeed how sensitive they are to green light; they are all sensitive to blue (source here). Yet the filters for Ilford MG are yellow-ish through to magenta-ish. Why?
(Strange that in the source linked above, the 3 under-lens filters pictured are all the same colour!)
Actually this data came from my Epson V700, I scanned the step wedge prints and pulled the pixel values from the raw tif and did log(216/pixel) to get the density. So the x axis is pixels and that's why you can see the steps of the step wedge. Its a Stouffer T2115 so every two steps is a full stop of additional exposure, or alternatively, every 6 steps is roughly +1 relative log exposure which is the units you usually see on these chartsThanks for posting these graphs. Although the underlying facts are familiar, it's still interesting to see. I presume the units are milliseconds on the horizontal axis? How have you measured density?
Actually I have wondered why the filters are warm tones, but the contrast head projects distinctly purple/green light.
Yet the filters for Ilford MG are yellow-ish through to magenta-ish. Why?
Yellow = minus blue, so passes blue + green (and red).
All the graphs are nice and really won't help much when printing, since you print negatives of actual scenes and not step wedges. Now go make some prints.
All the graphs are nice and really won't help much when printing
OK. Lead me through how you would use this information to make a split-grade print.This sentiment shows up over and over and over again in these types of threads. I totally disagree that they aren't helpful. Because understanding the medium means being able to more fully express creative vision without fumbling around wishing you could just get your visualization on the paper.
No one is saying this is what photographic materials are FOR. But when you have a question eating away at you, you can either throw up your and say it's unknowable magic. Or you can figure it out and understand it.
Edit: And on top of all that, I'm one of the weirdos that really enjoys the time spent on projects like this, I get a lot of satisfaction from it and I definitely don't consider it wasted time. The opportunity to do this kind of stuff is part of the draw to analog photography for me and I suspect many others.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?