[pure-silver] Re: Multigrade without filter?
- From: "BOB KISS" <bobkiss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 10:13:04 -0400
DEAR ALAN,
Remember the old adage for film, "Expose for the shadows and
develop for the highlights"? Well, when printing with VC I expose for the
highlights and change the contrast to put the shadows where I want them.
Yes, one needs to re test every time you change filtration to hit your
highlights again but this is a quick, paper efficient, way to hit a good
rough print which uses as much of the density range of the negative as you
want. Then you can change exposure and contrast, dodge and burn for
creative or emotional effect. You could do it the reverse (expose for
shadow, etc.) but I feel it is harder. IMO working out from a mid tone
exposure to highlights and shadows is the most difficult and least
efficient, paper wise. But, hey, whatever works for you!
CHEERS!
BOB
_____
From: pure-silver-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:pure-silver-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of EJ Neilsen
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 10:03 AM
To: pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [pure-silver] Re: Multigrade without filter?
Alan, Yes to the 2+ grade filter and FASTER than non filter. The exact grade
would depend on many variables of your enlarger. I use a 2X for general
rule of thumb. These are the types of problem sets I don't see a need to
work too hard on. With the highs and lows moving in the gray landscape, one
still needs to make adjustments on a more intuitive basis later so I don't
see the need for precision there.
Eric Neilsen Photography
4101 Commerce Street
Suite 9
Dallas, TX 75226
http://e.neilsen.home.att.net
http://ericneilsenphotography.com
Skype ejprinter
_____
From: pure-silver-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:pure-silver-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of ATIPPETT@xxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2007 5:49 PM
To: pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [pure-silver] Multigrade without filter?
I though that I had read using no filters with Ilford Multigrade IV papers
was equivalent to using the #3 filter. Should this be the case what would
be the difference in the f stop? Should this not be the case what would the
resulting print compare to 2-4?
Alan Tippett
_____
See what's new at AOL.com <http://www.aol.com?NCID=AOLCMP00300000001170>
and Make AOL Your
<http://www.aol.com/mksplash.adp?NCID=AOLCMP00300000001169> Homepage.
__________ NOD32 2632 (20071101) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com
Other related posts:
