how to choose the times for split filter printing
- Thread starter LeicaFoReVer
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 121
- Views 11K
aizan
Veteran
The only time I really use split filter printing is when I’m using an enlarger that doesn’t have a variable contrast head (just a filter drawer), such as the college darkroom standard: an Omega D2 with condenser head. That way I have continuous control of contrast from the beginning. It’s not harder or more time consuming to do, nor does it really make it easier to get better prints than fixed grade printing on a VC head, IMO. It’s really the same workflow as when you’re doing graded printing on a VC head: adjust time to print the highlights, adjust contrast to print the shadows. To me it’s mostly a hardware hack.
Erik van Straten
Veteran
The difference is that you have for one print TWO exposure times, one for filter 00 and the other for filter 5 (Ilford Multigrade system). That is the big difference compared to the other variable contrast printing systems that I know.
In fact you use the two sensitive layers of variable contrast paper independently from each other. The soft layer only responds to the 00 filter and the hard layer only to the 5 filter.
True, you only need a filter drawer on your enlarger (I have a Focomat IIc).
Erik.
Ronald M
Veteran
I used to think this was BS, but now found not true. Sometimes
it is the same. Sometimes a lot burning / dodging is done for you.
For certain prints, 00 and 5 are not enough. If the midtones look lack contrast or density, slip in some exposure with 2 or 3.
The are some vids on U tube from Ilford with detailed instruction.
it is the same. Sometimes a lot burning / dodging is done for you.
For certain prints, 00 and 5 are not enough. If the midtones look lack contrast or density, slip in some exposure with 2 or 3.
The are some vids on U tube from Ilford with detailed instruction.
aizan
Veteran
Yes, the main difference is having two exposures with split filter printing. Aside from that, the steps in the process are basically the same for both methods. Figure out the settings for the highlights in one step, then figure out the settings for shadows in the other. You do two test strips for both methods on an easy print, and you’re looking for the same things in both. They are more alike than different is what I’m saying.
Printing on graded papers is a bigger difference. 😀
Printing on graded papers is a bigger difference. 😀
Erik van Straten
Veteran
I think you do not get it when you say this.
The paper has two sensitive layers, not more. So when you hit them indepently with the filters 00 and 5, there is no need to put in some extra exposure with other filters. In fact you can throw all those "in between" filters away because you can always find the correct exposures for the filters 00 and 5. This takes some time, it is not a job for impatient printers.
Erik.
Erik van Straten
Veteran
Yes, this is about it. Printing on graded papers is much more difficult and costly.
Erik.
Ronald M
Veteran
This is what it is supposed to look like.
Freakscene
Obscure member
This one?
LeicaMP/CookeAmotal50mmf/2/TMY400/IlfordMGFB
Erik.
No, that’s not it. ☹️
I am pretty sure you deleted it from FlickR. But it’s increasingly vague in my head the more I try to remember it - this happens more often as I age . . .
I’ve just been through your whole FlickR and it’s gone. It was posted in this thread:
https://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=168204&highlight=Cooke+amotal
Marty
titrisol
Bottom Feeder
Ralph Lambrecht had very good resources in Way Beyond Monochrome and his website. Nicholas Lindan as wel in his website http://www.darkroomautomation.com/da-main.htm
R.Lambrecht take on split grade printing was that it helps with burning/dodging more than in obtaining a perfect print
While N.Lindan thinks the order of exposures is critical for the test strip, not so much for the final print.
I tried Split Printing, and liked the fact that I could get some nice high tone with the #0 and then give them a contrast boost with the #5. Especially since I didn't have an elarger exposure meter at the time.
From your test strips,
- Make a test sheet/strip using filter 0 and see if the detail in the highlghts is enough (exposure 1) //Seems 5-10s on your strip
- Expose a 2nd test strip with filter 0 per the exposure set above and then with filter 5 make the strips again over the 1st exposure. You will definitely see if there is an improvement here (shadows) and it will be easy to have exposure #2.
I think you can change your steps from 5s to 3s on the 2nd strip
However your picture seems to be suitable for exposure with a #3 filter.
R.Lambrecht take on split grade printing was that it helps with burning/dodging more than in obtaining a perfect print
While N.Lindan thinks the order of exposures is critical for the test strip, not so much for the final print.
I tried Split Printing, and liked the fact that I could get some nice high tone with the #0 and then give them a contrast boost with the #5. Especially since I didn't have an elarger exposure meter at the time.
From your test strips,
- Make a test sheet/strip using filter 0 and see if the detail in the highlghts is enough (exposure 1) //Seems 5-10s on your strip
- Expose a 2nd test strip with filter 0 per the exposure set above and then with filter 5 make the strips again over the 1st exposure. You will definitely see if there is an improvement here (shadows) and it will be easy to have exposure #2.
I think you can change your steps from 5s to 3s on the 2nd strip
However your picture seems to be suitable for exposure with a #3 filter.
relistan
Established
relistan
Established
I have my own (laundry room) darkroom and have done several hundred prints but mostly they are just straight prints. I have done only a couple of fine prints and the best one I ever did was with split grade. I haven't done that in about 5 years and was just getting back into it and reading the advice in this thread. To me the part I remember being magic about split grade was that I could dodge highlights and not affect the shadows noticeably at all.
Thanks to those sharing your experience.
Thanks to those sharing your experience.
Erik van Straten
Veteran
gelatine silver print (elmar-m 50mm) leica m3
Erik.
Erik.
Erik van Straten
Veteran
gelatine silver print (nikkor 50mm f2) nikkormat
Erik.
Erik.
Erik van Straten
Veteran
gelatine silver print (elmar-m) leica m3
Erik.
Erik.
Moto-Uno
Moto-Uno
^ My , but that is one elegant looking lady ! Peter
Erik van Straten
Veteran
gelatine silver print (elmar 35mm) leica II
Erik.
Erik.
Erik van Straten
Veteran
gelatine silver print (summicron 50mm v4) leica m5
Erik.
Erik.
Freakscene
Obscure member
gelatine silver print (elmar 35mm) leica II
Erik.
Beautiful! Is there detail/texture in the swan’s plumage in the negative or has it just been lost in the scan? Tough to maintain.
Marty
Erik van Straten
Veteran
Thank you, Marty, this was taken with an uncoated Elmar 35mm f/3.5 from 1930 with some fog on the glass elements. Recently I've cleaned this lens and it is now WOW! But this shot is against the light, you can see the flare on the dark trees on the right. So the lens was guilty here. Too low contrast to draw white feathers on white feathers.
Erik.
Erik.
Similar threads
- Sticky
