[pure-silver] Re: Under exposed frame
- From: "Rob Champagne" <app@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2005 00:50:50 +0000
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.
Other related posts:
