tblanston said:
Edit: Btw, statements about being able to achieve an identical exposure (to a split filter contrast exposure) by fine tweaking a single exposure with a single filtration is bogus.
No, they're not, because...
tblanston said:
The reason is because with split filters you can control properties of your exposure locally. Local to particular ranges of tonality that is...
...there is no such thing as "local tonality", unless you are referring to "local" as a spatial property.
The math is actually very easy. Variocontrast paper uses two emulsions, a "soft" one sensitive to green and a "hard" one sensitive to blue. The amount of light they're getting is proportional to the exposure time and inversely proportional to (well, dependent on) the amount of filtration. Two variables. When doing split-grade printing, you expose the two separately and leave the filtration variable fixed. When doing conventional printing using filters, you expose the two at the same time, leaving the time variable fixed.
So let's say you are making a splitgrade exposure where the "green" layer gets N units of green light and the "blue" layer gets M units of blue light. (We can assume that they get green and blue light, instead of yellowish and magentaish light, because of the way subtractive colour mixing works.) As we have seen, the difference between splitgrade and ordinary printing is that in splitgrade printing you control the amount of light via the exposure time and leave the filtration fixed, while in ordinary printing you use a fixed exposure time and control the respective amounts of light through filtration. So if you want to achieve the same results as in the M/N case above, all you need to do is to select a filter (or dial in a filter value) where the ratio of green to blue is N:M, resulting in different light intensities, and print the whole thing at once, using the same exposure time for the two emulsions. Because of the different filtration values, both emulsions get exactly the units of light (in terms of intensity x time) as in the splitgrade case. You have just made a conventional print with the same gradation.
Now in reality most of us use a colour head for splitgrade printing. The most extreme intensities of green and blue light, which we use for splitgrade printing, are those when the yellow and magenta dials are set to the max. These filter values control the most extreme gradations we can get at all, splitgrade or otherwise. Let's say that the maximum gradation reachable using splitgrade printing on your colour head is 5 or so. You reach this by dialing in the most extreme value of magenta, exposing for a given amount of time, and not giving it any yellow at all. Bingo, technically just didn't do a splitgrade print at all, but a single exposure for a gradation of 5. So if your colour head or filter set doesn't allow you to reach 00 or 5, you won't get them using splitgrade printing either. The most extreme values for high and low contrast attainable using splitgrade printing are exactly the same you get using single exposure prints,
because the splitgrade prints you have to do to get this are single exposure prints using maximum filtration. This being so, all the intermediate N:M ratios on the gradation scale are reachable by selecting appropriate values of yellow and magenta. Therefore,
every gradation that is reachable by splitgrade printing on a colour head can be achieved conventionally by dialling in appropriate filter values and exposing both emulsions at the same time. In other words,
no, you don't get access to any extra tonal range of your paper (with filters or a colour head anyway, a blue LED head is a different story), and
all the intermediate gradations and all the range of contrast between these extremes can be accomplished by conventional printing, too.
Splitgrade printing does have an advantage when you want to burn and dodge the two emulsions separately. This can't be achieved at all with conventional filtration (well it can, if you dodge with a filter instead of a black mask, or if you burn with a maximum filter setting, but that's a major hassle). However, few of us actually need to do this. On the other hand, the main disadvantage of splitgrade printing is that with many enlargers you run the risk of moving the enlarger head a little bit when changing filter values, resulting in an uneven and unsharp exposure.
tblanston said:
If, however your split-filter exposure is 2 exposures of the same value (in seconds.. ie. 15s at 0 and 15s at 5.0) then, yes, it is probably quite possible to achieve that with a single exposure with a single filtration.
This is a very boring special case, because normally what you are describing is a gradation of 2 (more or less, depending on the paper), and in order to get this, you don't have to filter at all, just leave all the filters at zero.
EDIT: A very good introduction to splitgrade printing is
http://www.darkroomagic.com/Book/BasicSplitGradePrinting.pdf (it's a book chapter). He, too, says on page 82 (p. 6 in the PDF) that "some quite distinguished photographers have made claims that the print quality obtainable with this system are [sic] unique and cannot be accomplished with any single exposure system. In retrospect, much of this is human nature and enthusiasm and otherwise due to the fact that the comparisons made between prints were not of the exact same effective contrast and exposure. So far, there has been no evidence that demonstrates a difference between a Split-Grade exposure and a single exposure print at the same ISO print contrast."
Philipp