[pure-silver] Re: Under exposed frame
- From: DarkroomMagic <info@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: PureSilverNew <pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2005 19:57:34 +0100
I stand corrected.
First, there is indeed an increase in contrast. For example, a normal
exposure and a development of 16 min in Agfa APX100 in Rodinal 1+50 creates
an average gradient of 0.62. An overexposure of two stops at the same
development creates an avgGrad of 0.66. Another two stops of exposure, and
the avgGrad drops to 0.58.
Cutting off the toe is why shadow separation improves with overexposure.
Regards
Ralph W. Lambrecht
On 1/3/05 6:56 PM, "Rob Champagne" <app@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> This is not necessarily true since one or 2 stops over exposure on a film with
> a long straight line curve (like most modern films) is enough to take the
> image off the toe of the film without putting it on the shoulder. Therefore in
> an image using zone system 0 thru 10 zones you actually get increased contrast
> range in the negative. Yes if you get onto the shoulder of the film then
> contrast will start to go down but not until you have gone far enough to
> negate the gain from coming off the toe.
> Then you have some films which have upswept curves such as plus x or acros
> in hc110 where over exposure will increase contrast range of your subject in
> the negative.
>
>
>
> At 03/01/2005 18:06 +0100, you wrote:
>> Overexposure does not create higher contrast. If overdone, it actually does
>> the opposite.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards
>>
>>
>>
>> Ralph W. Lambrecht
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 1/3/05 1:50 AM, "Rob Champagne" <app@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> Playing around with the image in photoshop shows full textural detail
>>> throughout the image. I think he meant it is overexposed and such the
>>> negative
>>> is very high contrast.
>>> Selective pre flashing should bring the highlight detail in withou
>>> overexposing the shadows.
>>>
>>> rob c
>>>
>>>
>>> At 02/01/2005 21:51 +0100, you wrote:
>>>> Justin
>>>>
>>>> Nice image, worth a try!
>>>>
>>>> Underexposed negatives have too small of a density range and need harder
>>>> than normal paper. Overdeveloped negatives have too much and need softer
>>>> than normal paper. Underexposed AND overdeveloped negatives are the hardest
>>>> to print, because they have no shadow detail but a huge contrast.
>>>>
>>>> From what you tell us, it might just be just underexposed having trouble
>>>> with the shadows. In that case, I would start with a fairly hard grade and
>>>> test-strip until the highlights have the right exposure, ignoring the
>>>> shadows at first. Then adjust the contrast to get the shadows right, while
>>>> keeping highlight exposure on track.
>>>>
>>>> If you've done that, and your hardest grade was not enough to get the
>>>> shadows dark enough, then do what Ryuji suggested, and up the exposure with
>>>> your hardest grade until the shadows improve and bleach the (now too dark)
>>>> highlights with farmers reducer. This technique simple gives the paper
>>>> contrast an additional boost. Otherwise, always expose for the highlights
>>>> and control shadows with paper contrast.
>>>>
>>>> Final shadow improvement can be made through selenium toning, but don't
>>>> expect too much from that.
>>>>
>>>> Before I forget, I also recommend to burn-in the front carpet. Tell us how
>>>> it went through another post.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ralph W. Lambrecht
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 1/2/05 4:11 PM, "Justin F. Knotzke" <jknotzke@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I have the following frame which I would like to print but can't:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.shampoo.ca/pics/xmas-day-2004.jpg
>>>>>
>>>>> I can scan it and with some tuning in photoshop can get what you
>>>>> see above. But attempting to wet print it is nearly impossible. It's
>>>>> simply too dark. I didn't have enough light and I didn't want to use a
>>>>> flash so I underexposed and hoped for the best..
>>>>>
>>>>> Can someone send me some tips on how I can coax this image out onto
>>>>> paper? Every attempt I have made so far yields either too dark an image
>>>>> or a greyish image with no real blacks.
>>>>>
>>>>> How should I go about trying to print this ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>
>>>>> J
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ===========================================================================
>>>> ==
>>>> ================================
>>>> 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.
>>>
>>> ============================================================================
>>> ==
>>> ===============================
>>> 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.
>>
>> =============================================================================
>> ================================
>> 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.
>
> ==============================================================================
> ===============================
> 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.
=============================================================================================================
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:
