Contrast ... Good or bad

[JohnP]

Hello,

I'm confused by comments I have read regarding contrast.

Somebody wrote that such and such a lens was "too contrasty".

I thought it would be good if a lens could show contrast... different shades, hues.

When is contrast good? When is it bad? When is there too much or too little contrast?

Thanks,

John

 

[waileong]

Thers's nothing good or bad, it's just a lens characteristic. Some scenes are easier to capture with low contrast lenses, others are not.

Choice of film, developer and dev time affect contrast more than the lens.

However, if your lens is contrasty, you can play with the above, and with the paper grade at the printing stage, to control contrast.

 

[cmogi10]

Contrast is good.
More contrast is better.

 

[swoop]

Contrast is good.
More contrast is better.

I bet you loved your etch-a-sketch.

I've never been one for too much contrast. A moderate amount is good enough for me. I like my photos to look natural.

But contrast can be controlled all sorts of ways. From the film you choose, to the lens, to the developer, to the enlarging, to the paper. There's all sorts of ways.

 

[Doug]

In lenses, one that produces more contrast captures more information. But when the image media (slide film, digital chip) doesn't have sufficient dynamic range to save desired detail in shadow areas as well as highlights, then we complain the lens is too contrasty. 😀

 

[Turtle]

a lot depends on what medium you use. If you shoot digital, too contrasty a lens is a problem in bright light as you can exceed the dynamic range of the camera. Big problem. This can be an issue when using contrasty slide films in bright light. Some claim that this is an issue in monchrom too, but I just dont see it. I use amongst the most contrasty lenses about, Zeiss ZMs (as well as Leica) and have noooooo problem whatsoever. I have lots of shadow detail and ltso of highlight detail. Lens contrast is easily deal with in monochrome processing and is therefore a non-issue. The only problem would come when using ZM lenses on the same roll of film as some old vintage glass, but to be honest, if you are happy to print in the low grades with th Zeiss and high grades with the old glass, the problem is gone! Monchrome users who have problems usually do not process and print themselves.

 

[lZr]

Usually for our work we use the available lenses and media for the scene we want to reproduce. The contrast can be changed to the level you like. The contrast is human eye and personal taste perceptive. Some like it bold and others weeker, but it should be in tune with the scene captured. Also, the subject can ask to be more contrasty, up to the level when some details are extinct (for instance, night shots). The contrast is very sensitive issue and if used right can deliver astonishing results. Portraits are usually less contrasty then street shots.

So, I think it is far better to use low contrast lenses, and level the contrast while printing or preparing the image for digital prints

 

[Teus]

there is lens contrast, brightness range and film contrast. generally, you should go with a high-contrast lens.

you should choose your film and developer then, according to the light you're working under. For hard light (bright sunlight), use a film/developer combination that is low to mid contrast (according to taste). High contrast film will have its dynamic range exceeded (too much blacks and darks without detail).
For slightly and moderately overcast weather, your film/dev can be a bit more contrasty. For very flat light, use a contrasty combination: I find that there is not enough separation if you use a low-mid contrast developer. You get muddy grays, and editing the curves/levels won't fix it for 100%. Pushing the ISO and using a yellow-red filter helps. Fog is also very lowcontrast, a red filters cuts away a part of the fog (if thats what you desire) and increases contrast

Flat light especially requires a high-contrast lens. Under hard light (bright sun, contrasty concert lighting) your lens can be a bit less contrasty.

 

[Roberto]

Contrast is good.
More contrast is better.

Unless you are shooting in a sunny summer day at noon.. I believe.. 😀
R.

 

[Roberto]

I see some difference..

I see some difference..

The two images attached have been taken using same film (Foma 100) and same camera (Bessa R)
The difference is that for one I used a Jupiter 8 (less contrast) and for the other a CV 35/f2.5 (more contrast)

Can you tell? Or is it only in my mind? 😀
R.

 

[cmogi10]

Unless you are shooting in a sunny summer day at noon.. I believe.. 😀
R.

PSH!

No way

 

[Sparrow]

The two images attached have been taken using same film (Foma 100) and same camera (Bessa R)
The difference is that for one I used a Jupiter 8 (less contrast) and for the other a CV 35/f2.5 (more contrast)

Can you tell? Or is it only in my mind? 😀
R.

if they were taken in the same light then the one on the right is the Skopar

 

[Roberto]

if they were taken in the same light then the one on the right is the Skopar

You win! 😀

 

[former member]

It can be bad if it "clips" the image- lost shadow detail or blown highlights. This is more of a problem with digital than film. In harsh lighting conditions, like direct sun, a lower-contrast lens will often "smooth" out the conditions. When you print or scan, you can always increase contrast. If the portions of the highlights saturates or shadowed areas are "just black", you cannot recover the lost details.

 

[Vics]

When, after forty years with Nikon, Minolta, Pentax etc, I finally found myself with a Leica and a Collapsible Summicron (a low contrast lens, according to Erwin Puts) I learned that "Low contrast" is not a pejorative term. My experience has been that when I shoot with a lens that delivers high contrast, I get a negative with less information to work with. A lower contrast neg gives me a lot more to work with by adjusting the contrast of the paper's filter(s). Now I'm just talking about black & white. Once shadow detail is lost by the lens or highlights are blosn out, one can't get them back in the printing process.
Or am I mis-understanding the proposition?
Vic

 

[Turtle]

When, after forty years with Nikon, Minolta, Pentax etc, I finally found myself with a Leica and a Collapsible Summicron (a low contrast lens, according to Erwin Puts) I learned that "Low contrast" is not a pejorative term. My experience has been that when I shoot with a lens that delivers high contrast, I get a negative with less information to work with. A lower contrast neg gives me a lot more to work with by adjusting the contrast of the paper's filter(s). Now I'm just talking about black & white. Once shadow detail is lost by the lens or highlights are blosn out, one can't get them back in the printing process.
Or am I mis-understanding the proposition?
Vic

Partly I believe. With monochrome, there is never a time when this problem should occur. If you have a high contrast lens and are getting undersirable blank shadows and hot highlights, you ought to reduce film speed and development. This will boost shdow detail and reduce the nrightness of highlights. Its the converse with a very low contrast lens, raising film speed is the same as placing lowering your shadow values. This is therefore linked in with the sone system as it is all 'the same thing'.

So, if you have negs that are a touch short on shadow detail when shooting at EI100, try shooting at 50-64 and reducing development by 25%. This will make your negs no less manageable than when shooting with a lower contrast lens at EI100 and that 25% more development.

I have a super low contrast enlarger (10x8 colour head) and find that even with ZM lenses I develop for roughly normal times (often a touch more, say 10%) as well as using a drop in film speed with std developers such as D76, exposing at 250-320 with TriX (depending on light) or 64 with APX100 for example. with Xtol/FX39 I am normally shooting at box speed. If I expose at box speed with d76 and manufacturers times when using my ZM lenses I get poor shadows and dull highlights requiring G3.5-4. If I do this when using some of my other lenses I get mud on paper!

With control over D&P you can get high contrast lenses producing stunning prints with lots of shadow detail and beautiful highlights. Means during flat lighting when you want a kick, you are at least starting with as contrastry 'potential nnegative' as possible.