Anyone use Split-Contrast Printing?

P

Pirate

Guitar playing Fotografer
Local time
9:20 AM
Joined
Sep 27, 2009
Messages
1,864
This is a technique I learned just a few weeks ago, right at the end of my school semester so I only had a day to play with it. It uses the lowest and highest contrast filters one after the other instead of choosing one middle filter. From the print I made (many copies of) it seems to work great by giving you the most detail and most contrast you can get. Two of my instructors say it's the way everything should be printed. Using this method means that you need to make a proper negative though. It has to start there.

So, anyone here use this printing method? I'd be curious to hear opinions / tips / stories... etc.
 
No, I have not. I have been wanting to try when I can set aside some time to do printing. Care to share some of your results?
 
I learned that way and do it all the time. "Way beyond monochrome" has some great info on it if you want to buy a book. :)
 
There is ALWAYS a single filter that will give the same result as split-grade but some people find split-grade easier, so if it works for you, it works for you. It is not one whit inferior, but nor is it one whit better.

I remember a lovely argument between a split-grade devotee and one of Ilford's technical people. Eventually, the printer regretfully accepted that the sensitometric argument was unanswerable, but said, "But that's just for test charts and things, not real pictures." The Ilford guy replied, "The paper is refreshingly ignorant of what you print on it."

Cheers,

R.
 
Last edited:
Steinberg2010 said:
I have used it and it worked well for me. The idea is you nail your highlight and shadow detail separately and the rest just falls into place. However, it should be possible to get the same result using a single filter grade and one exposure.

This thread has some information which may be of use: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=108380

~S
Click to expand...

+1

and +1 with Roger as well

I have done it, but get the exact same results with just nailing the correct contrast and using good dodging and burning techniques, so I no longer do it. I often do split burning and dodging, which adds or takes away contrast from selected areas. Bleaching ontop of that to control local contrast after development is a deadly combination. Try everything and find what works for you.
 
Roger Hicks said:
There is ALWAYS a single filter that will give the same result as split-grade but some people find split-grade easier, so if it works for you, it works for you.
Click to expand...

True, but when using sheet filters and not a VC head the split grade printing can often save a lot of time. I most often use it as a means of pumping up the shadow tones by printing slightly soft then giving a very brief grade 5 exposure. Can certainly save development time when teasing out those deepest blacks.


Roger Hicks said:
The Ilford guy replied, "The paper is refreshingly ignorant of what you print on it."
Click to expand...

:D


jordanstarr said:
I often do split burning and dodging, which adds or takes away contrast from selected areas. Bleaching ontop of that to control local contrast after development is a deadly combination. Try everything and find what works for you.
Click to expand...

Burning with a change of filter can make a huge difference indeed, as does bleach. Or dodging during the main exposure then burning that area back with a different filter. The list of tricks is pretty long as most everything we used to do to graded papers works as well or better on VC ones.
 
"I often do split burning and dodging,"

This is something I've not heard of yet, but it sounds interesting.

After I learned of the process of Split Contrast Printing I only had one day to play with it. My negative was a 4x5 that was slightly under-exposed but still had some beautiful texture. Here's what I did:
My filter pack started with "00" contrast filters and went up in half step increments to a "5". I started with a "0" and made a test strip. I went across the faces of the two models to use their skin tones for my base. I selected the appropriate time of 3 seconds.
I took a second strip and exposed this entire strip for 3 seconds with the "0" filter.
I then changed to the "5" filter and made a full test strip across it. After developing this strip I selected the appropriate time of 5 seconds, again going across the faces.
Now having the times for each filter I made the complete print. First, I expose the paper to the "0" filter for 3 seconds, then change filters to the "5" and expose for another 5 seconds, then develop as normal.

What I got was all the detail I could handle and all the contrast I could get without losing the details. To me, this was a faster development than possibly running multiple test strips to find the right single filter. Now, I also understand that if I were doing this on a more regular basis and had all my shooting and developing workflow down to a science, I would probably know what contrast filter to use without making multiple test strips to get it right. For me though, this was a faster method to get everything I could from the print on one go.

A scan of the print doesn't do much justice to the actual paper in my hands, but here it is anyway:
split_contrast_print_by_dudewithad700-d4l4tb8.jpg
 
this is interesting... I plan to do some dark room printing this year - had my first go at it a few months ago and was amazed...

I think after some more time playing I will give this method a go.
 
There's a nice video on splitgrade printing here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5XgmJk2Fmpw

It's by the british photographer Andrew Sanderson, whom I would consider seriously competent in the darkroom.

Personally, I've tried it, but haven't been convinced that I can't get a close enough print the usual way, i.e. a single grade, or a mixture of say, Grade 3 and Grade 3.5. As mentioned above, a slight Grade 5 exposure could be used to give a slight boost to the blacks.

In the darkroom there are no absolute truths. Use what works for you.
 
A friend of mine showed my split grade and I was sold when he showed me, but I don't think I ever managed to achieve anything more than what I would with normal grade printing. Unless I had to bring out some blacks but still. I only do split grade in different parts of the image (eg when I want to bring out the skies etc).

aaah darkroom printing...
 
I've printed on a split grade processor before and on my own enlarger with grade filter set from 0-5, I found the results ok with both. the split grade processor was easier to use. My experience with printing is limited tho.

one funny thing I experienced was when I was printing with multi grade RC paper, I was carefully setting exposure time and contrast with lots of test strips. then I took just for testing really old ORWO fiber, fixed (normal) grade exposed it for the same time (w/o filter) and the results were much better looking, besides being a bit too warm toned and slightly fogged. I believe fixed graded fiber-based paper is the real thing, but as I said my experience with printing is very limited.
 
I have been using the split grade processor for well over 10 years and hope I never have to go back the old VC filter system. It's a great system if you need to dodge either the soft filter or the hard one. With some experience - i.e. not metering the specular highlights - it will give usually you a workable print the first time and a fine-tuned one the second.
 
Hi,

I always start with a high contrast filter (grade 5) followed by a low contrast one (n0).
Make sure whatever system you choose, you compensate for electricity fluctuations (condenser heads), warm-up and cool-down time (cold light heads), short enlarger exposure times, ...
Your final print will be overexposed by as much as +15% when compared to your selected test strip time, but that is for a differen thread.

Regards,
Robert
 
I don't use it for the main exposure, but often will burn skies and highlights with a Zero filter to give some extra density.
 
Pirate said:
This is a technique I learned just a few weeks ago, right at the end of my school semester so I only had a day to play with it. It uses the lowest and highest contrast filters one after the other instead of choosing one middle filter. From the print I made (many copies of) it seems to work great by giving you the most detail and most contrast you can get. Two of my instructors say it's the way everything should be printed. Using this method means that you need to make a proper negative though. It has to start there.

So, anyone here use this printing method? I'd be curious to hear opinions / tips / stories... etc.
Click to expand...


It's apparently either not that well-known or not that cared-for, because nobody I knew during the time I used to print my own had ever heard of this. I read about it as a "oh-by-the-way" footnote in a book, and decided to try it (I found the filters by chance at a store which doesn't sell much anything non-digital anymore) and I liked it. Certainly adds time, but makes you be even more aware of the film and on-lens filter choices you make while shooting. And it certainly makes burning in a not-so-frustrating task in difficult shots.
 
I used it and found it an easy technique for placing as much detail where you wanted it and then nailing the blacks to the wall. My enlarger had a green tube and a blue tube and the green (soft) exposure was typically a lot longer than the blue (hard). You could then have more time at your optimum aperture for burning and dodging before laying down the blacks and key-lines. I kept thinking of printing as a kind of darkroom shadow-dance where the paper recorded the results of all this arm-waiving and mask-shaking. I have no doubt that Roger is correct from a sensitometric (sp?) perspective, but making prints was always a little like cooking and there is more than one way to skin a bechamel (or mangle a metaphor).
 
Steinberg2010 said:
I have used it and it worked well for me. The idea is you nail your highlight and shadow detail separately and the rest just falls into place. However, it should be possible to get the same result using a single filter grade and one exposure.

This thread has some information which may be of use: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=108380

~S
Click to expand...

I participated in the linked thread and I still don't understand how can the same result be achieved with only one exposure.

If the negative has high contrast, either way you go with a filter, in one exposure you will either burn out the shadow details trying to get something on the highlight, or get a flat grey print with no satisfying black.

I'm not a traditional darkroom practitioner and are self-taught all the way, so my methods may be unusual, but I have some negatives that won't be able to be printed without multiple exposure using different filter "grades."

So split-filter or split-grade printing is an important tool to have in my darkroom techniques.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom