how to choose the times for split filter printing

retinax said:
Of course, I haven't written anything contrary to that. Doesn't matter, what I mean is the method Mike Rosenlof explained.
Click to expand...

Yes I understood you retinax as Mike said the same. it doesn't bother to do a third strip to see the combination. I would still expose low contrast for reference. So thank you for your suggestion. I can try this for challenging shots.
 
Split grade print, just made.


49381307791_0e8a235171_b.jpg
 
Hope to hear more on this , haven't been all that happy with the numerous times I've tried split contrast printing . Tended to fall back on the method that "Marty" suggested . But "Eriks" prints always drag me back to trying split grade again . I guess it's my Scottish heritage that gets to me, so much wasted paper.
Peter
 
This thread is making my head hurt. You guys are waaaay overcomplicating a simple thing.

1- Do the 00 first. Pick the time that gives you the highlights you want.

2- Expose your next test strip with that time and the 00 filter then without moving the paper switch to the 5 filter and do your test strip on that same paper. Pick your exposure to get the shadows where you want them.

Easy Peasy. That is about all you need to know so you can stop reading here if it suits you.

Occasionally if you are doing larger prints or using grainy film, the 5 exposure can degrade the highlights. This is because you are actually enlarging the space between the grains. If you notice that happening, back off your 00 exposure a little.

Starting with the 5 exposure is a mistake because the 00 will also add density in the shadows.

Varable contrast papers typically have three layers that vary in speed and frequency sensitivity. The "soft" layers are slower layers and green sensitive. The "hard" layer is faster and blue sensitive. Some papers have a bump in the middle because of this which is why some old schoolers don't like Variable Contrast papers.

And yes, prints done with a single filter and prints done by split printing are basically the same if they are unmanipulated. Split printing gets you where you want to go a lot faster though. People that only use one filter are trying to hit a moving target since they are dealing with time and contrast together and changing one changes the other.

That is about as super simple as I can make it. Hope that helps you. :)
 
PRJ said:
And yes, prints done with a single filter and prints done by split printing are basically the same if they are unmanipulated. Split printing gets you where you want to go a lot faster though. People that only use one filter are trying to hit a moving target since they are dealing with time and contrast together and changing one changes the other.
Click to expand...

I am not arguing with this for you. And Erik's prints look great, I just don't see anything in them that comes from split grade printing.

Modern papers don't need different exposures with different contrast grades, in my experience. But it also depends on the light source and the paper.

In years of darkroom printing, including 10+ years working professionally printing other people's photos, having to stop, change filter and re-expose would have cost me way more time than exposing once. I really don't see how it would be faster.

Marty
 
Freakscene said:
I am not arguing with this for you. And Erik's prints look great, I just don't see anything in them that comes from split grade printing.

Modern papers don't need different exposures with different contrast grades, in my experience. But it also depends on the light source and the paper.

In years of darkroom printing, including 10+ years working professionally printing other people's photos, having to stop, change filter and re-expose would have cost me way more time than exposing once. I really don't see how it would be faster.

Marty
Click to expand...
Split grading is for me like stand development with rodinal. It gives a control on highlights and shadows in difficult shots with a lot of highlights for example. If your workflow is already working for you and you are fast with it, it is fine. As I said for me single filter was hit or miss and discouraging. Now looks like split grading is a faster and better way for me. Changing filter and re-exposing isn't that hard if you get your first print bang on with that method as a beginner(I talk for myself) That is my opinion. I of course still need to practice.

Not shaking the enlarger is the trick part. Now I am also a bit confused about doing the test strips separately or one combined. I was doing separately.
 
PRJ said:
This thread is making my head hurt. You guys are waaaay overcomplicating a simple thing.

1- Do the 00 first. Pick the time that gives you the highlights you want.

2- Expose your next test strip with that time and the 00 filter then without moving the paper switch to the 5 filter and do your test strip on that same paper. Pick your exposure to get the shadows where you want them.

Easy Peasy. That is about all you need to know so you can stop reading here if it suits you.

Occasionally if you are doing larger prints or using grainy film, the 5 exposure can degrade the highlights. This is because you are actually enlarging the space between the grains. If you notice that happening, back off your 00 exposure a little.

Starting with the 5 exposure is a mistake because the 00 will also add density in the shadows.

Varable contrast papers typically have three layers that vary in speed and frequency sensitivity. The "soft" layers are slower layers and green sensitive. The "hard" layer is faster and blue sensitive. Some papers have a bump in the middle because of this which is why some old schoolers don't like Variable Contrast papers.

And yes, prints done with a single filter and prints done by split printing are basically the same if they are unmanipulated. Split printing gets you where you want to go a lot faster though. People that only use one filter are trying to hit a moving target since they are dealing with time and contrast together and changing one changes the other.

That is about as super simple as I can make it. Hope that helps you. :)
Click to expand...
There is a lot of discussion about this but I can tell my opinion. I don't say it is true yours is wrong. I just feel like it isn't the same. Because you expose for highlights and shadows separately and give time preferentially to develop to get more details on each while preserving mid tones. I don't think with single filter you would get details in highlights in a shot with a lot of highlights and shadows for example (without burning). I feel like split filter is like stand development with rodinal.
 
I must try split grade printing again.

When I got back into the darkroom after a decades hiatus I bought an RH Designs Analyser Pro. This radically changed how quickly I could produce a good print without the need for test strips. In an attempt to trial split grade printing I've used highlight and shadow measurements to give the split filter times. I'd understood that a combination of Grades 1.5 and 4.5 was the way to go.

The results seemed pretty much identical to those found using normal method of using the Analyser Pro. I'll give it a go again using 00 and 5.
 
LeicaFoReVer said:
Yes that is what I did and it turned out great. I dont have a pro eye so the way my son looked didn't bother me so no dodging done. I will post the result after takin a better photo as mobile phone isn't ideal for this actually I need to scan it. Don't remember about the high contrast strip. It is possible.

I chose the exposure with a bit of luck. Could you please explain how you chose so maybe I can learn something.
Click to expand...
I picked the low contrast time by looking at hilights in particular, the bright bit on the hoodie in the 15 sec band and the back of his neck in the 20 sec band. Also while looking at the low contrast strip, I feel like blacks under his chin, and pupils are pretty close, so I'm thinking not a lot of high contrast exposure is going to be needed.

So then looking at the high contrast strip, 5 sec adds practically nothing, and 15 is way too much. So 10 is possible, but thinking back to the last sentence of the previous paragraph, I thought I would dial it back closer to, but a bit more than 5.

Basically, low contrast and find an exposure that gets your hilights the way you want them, then add the high contrast to "burn" down the shadows to where you want them. Your correct high contrast exposure will add nothing to the hilights as you can see in even the 25 sec band in the high contrast strip.
 
mike rosenlof said:
I picked the low contrast time by looking at hilights in particular, the bright bit on the hoodie in the 15 sec band and the back of his neck in the 20 sec band. Also while looking at the low contrast strip, I feel like blacks under his chin, and pupils are pretty close, so I'm thinking not a lot of high contrast exposure is going to be needed.

So then looking at the high contrast strip, 5 sec adds practically nothing, and 15 is way too much. So 10 is possible, but thinking back to the last sentence of the previous paragraph, I thought I would dial it back closer to, but a bit more than 5.

Basically, low contrast and find an exposure that gets your hilights the way you want them, then add the high contrast to "burn" down the shadows to where you want them. Your correct high contrast exposure will add nothing to the hilights as you can see in even the 25 sec band in the high contrast strip.
Click to expand...
Thank you Mike!
 
Freakscene said:
And Erik's prints look great, I just don't see anything in them that comes from split grade printing.
Click to expand...

I take that as a compliment. For years I did not know how Cartier-Bresson's pictures were printed. I did not even know that something like split printing existed. But I wondered how HCB's prints where made. They have at the same time A. beautifully light gray highlights (solid tonal highlights) and B. deep velvetly black tones (for example in bowler hats or in shiny leather). I could not achieve that on single grade paper. Finally I found out that the prints of Cartier-Bresson were achieved by split grade printing (was told me by a printer who worked for many years in professional darkrooms in Paris). I tried do do it myself and hopla, I got it, pretty easy in fact.

Erik.
 
I have the opinion that printing a negative is not making a painting. You only have to print the negative as perfect as possible.

If you feel the need for burning and dodging in split grade printing, do it only during the exposure with the 00-filter. The exposure with the 5-filter is much to short for that. The exposure with the 5-filter is only a flash afterwards that takes care of the darkest parts of the picture.

I almost never use burning and dodging.

Erik.
 
PRJ said:
This thread is making my head hurt. You guys are waaaay overcomplicating a simple thing.

1- Do the 00 first. Pick the time that gives you the highlights you want.

2- Expose your next test strip with that time and the 00 filter then without moving the paper switch to the 5 filter and do your test strip on that same paper. Pick your exposure to get the shadows where you want them.

Easy Peasy. That is about all you need to know so you can stop reading here if it suits you.
Click to expand...

Sounds way better than spending 1K USD on some gizmo and another 1K USD on Focomat. :)
 
Erik van Straten said:
I have the opinion that printing a negative is not making a painting. You only have to print the negative as perfect as possible.

If you feel the need for burning and dodging in split grade printing, do it only during the exposure with the 00-filter. The exposure with the 5-filter is much to short for that. The exposure with the 5-filter is only a flash afterwards that takes care of the darkest parts of the picture.

I almost never use burning and dodging.

Erik.
Click to expand...
Hi Erik,

I salute your dedication to the split filter method and your honest messages. I too realized that split grading decreases the need for dodging and burning. So that is your experience too? I have even searched for that in google but couldn't find but now after reading your comment, I feel confirmed myself. So thank you!!

Thank you for your long and explanatory instructions but I really want to hear your opinions on how to choose the right exposure for each filter like Mike mentioned above. Do you agree on what he said?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom