[pure-silver] Re: NOW: Exposing paper was Re: POP with paper negs?
- From: "Claudio Bonavolta" <claudio@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 00:25:37 +0100
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Swinnard" <davidswinnard@xxxxxxx>
To: <pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2004 10:45 PM
Subject: [pure-silver] NOW: Exposing paper was Re: POP with paper negs?
> Like Ole, I too was originally taught to expose paper for the shadows
> (having inspected the negatives first for "detail" so as not to attempt =
> to
> try print it where it didn't exist) and then control the rendition of =
> the
> highlight tones with the paper grade (then VC filters). Later, on upon
> reading and talking to others, I did it the way Ralph discusses, =
> now...<- I
> had a wordy section in here about what it is I do now, but I guess it =
> comes
> down to the collected experience of (decades) in the darkroom and what
> "works" for me. ->
>
> I'm curious to know what others take on this is (the exposing/contrast
> issue, not my inability to succinctly express myself), and more
> particularly, why.
>
> Dave
> (I think, I think, so maybe I am? But don't quote me on that.)
Exposing for the highlights and choosing contrast for the shadows is very
common.
A good reason is: eyes are very good in discerning changes in light greys but
are pretty weak to do
the same for deep shadows.
This is certainly not the only method, here are some others (certainly not an
exhaustive list !):
- make test strips, and select exposure/contrast on a trial/error loop.
Certainly the most widely
used method :-)
- the "ISO method" around density 0.6. If you use classic Multigrade filters
like the Ilford, you
should be able to switch grades and keep the same exposure (double it for
higher-contrast grades)
and the previous 0.60 density areas will keep that density while shadows and
highlights both vary.
- pose for the minimum exposure that gives true black, then adapt contrast for
highlights. This
method is useful with darkroom meters: like eyes, they work better with more
light (shadows are
clear on the neg) than few (measure error on high negative densities is bigger).
The Ilford Multigrade 500 normal use works that way.
I've also seen people not using darkroom meters and still preferring this
approach.
- if you're doing mostly portrait, you can pose and select contrast for skin
tones (depending of the
skin tone, density may vary), dodge and burn the rest (a slightly shifted ISO
method)
- in fact, you can select whatever reference density you want and adapt the
rest to it. Meters can
usually be set to a specific density and indicate the exposure to obtain such
density.
- some prefer split-filtering, two exposures using separately the harder and
softer filters.
- some french guys promoted the "Stop system" through a book. A pretty empty
concept based on
working with stops (a good thing but certainly not new) and the comparison with
a serie of other
prints over/under exposed by stops (I doubt this is a very new concept too).
Well, two ideas, an
appealing name, a website (http://www.stop-system.com), some magic powder, a
book and you're in
business ...
There is room to add many others, mine for instance ...
Some more comments:
- The choice of the method is strongly dependent of the tools
(graded/multigrade paper,
multigrade/color head, darkroom meter or test strips, ...) you use.
- It's not written on stone that you must use one method and only one.
- The important thing is to use the method(s) you understand and feel, whatever
the method(s)
is(are).
- These methods are just here to obtain the straight print, the funny things
come after ...
Regards,
Claudio Bonavolta
http://www.bonavolta.ch
=============================================================================================================
To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your
account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,)
and unsubscribe from there.
Other related posts:
