Local Color Dodging, what filters to use ?

Discussion in 'Color: Film, Paper, and Chemistry' started by lhalcong, Apr 24, 2013.

  1. lhalcong

    lhalcong Member

    Messages:
    239
    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2012
    Location:
    Miami, Flori
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Hi,

    Let's say I print a portrait and skin tone is good, however there seem to be a magenta cast in the hair. I am being told that this is not all that uncommon, and local dodging is required. Are Color Compensating Filters (CC) used for this under the lens. ? as opposed to use CP filters or Dichroic Head (which is the two things I have). if so, should I buy MAGENTA, YELLOW and CYAN, / RED, BLUE and GREEN or all of them.
    any additional recommendations to improve these situations.

    thanks,

    PS: I have Beseler CII-XL dichroic and another condenser head (with drawer). I print with Kodak RA-4 room temp. just in case this information is needed. The paper that gave me this issue was Fuji Crystal Type PIII which I happen to like the look of it.
     
  2. DREW WILEY

    DREW WILEY Member

    Messages:
    4,906
    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    Yes, but the specifics would take a bit of experimentation and practice. Remember that in this case
    your dodging will not only affect local color, but will equate to density dodging a the same time, and somewhat lighten the parts of the image you are tinkering with.
     
  3. Bob Carnie

    Bob Carnie Subscriber

    Messages:
    5,481
    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2004
    Location:
    Toronto-Onta
    Shooter:
    Med. Format RF
    Local dodging with filters is a practice many have used.

    If you are getting a magenta cast in hair when everything else is correct your process is off.
    Contrary to what you are being told this is not what one would expect with correctly exposed film and process colour negative.

    If this is isolated case then don't sweat it too much and try dodging out the unwanted colour, if this is happening to all your film, you should revisit how things are being done.

    good luck
     
  4. DREW WILEY

    DREW WILEY Member

    Messages:
    4,906
    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    Could be the original lighting. Some hair dyes do pretty strange things under artificial light.
     
  5. lhalcong

    lhalcong Member

    Messages:
    239
    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2012
    Location:
    Miami, Flori
    Shooter:
    35mm
    ok , so CC gelatin filters are the right type for this ? and my other question was, should I buy all of the ones I listed above ? or just MAGENTA, YELLOW and CYAN ? or just RED, BLUE, GREEN will suffice ?

    Do you guys ever do local dodging ? or rarely. ?
     
  6. Mainecoonmaniac

    Mainecoonmaniac Subscriber

    Messages:
    4,001
    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2009
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    If it's a magenta cast, use a magenta filter. You'll have to experiment with the filter strength. You can do it the cheaters way by scanning the neg, correct the cast in photoshop and do a digital print.
     
  7. OzJohn

    OzJohn Member

    Messages:
    166
    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Shooter:
    35mm
    The "cheaters way" is is the only way I can do it today but if I were still printing darkroom colour it would remain my preference.

    Unless a magenta light source was used somewhere in the scene it is odds-on to be a neg development problem. I used to use this technique a lot to get some of the excessive red out of certain peoples' faces and up to modest print sizes eg 11x14 you can get away with using clean, unscratched CP filter material if you have any and don't want to buy CC but a catch with CP is that it only comes in the complimentary colours - you have to use two to make red green and blue. The issue of density modification mentioned by another poster is a very real one that will possibly spoil your first few attempts. OzJohn
     
  8. polyglot

    polyglot Member

    Messages:
    3,472
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    Location:
    South Austra
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I think you've probably got under-exposed film. Film can get nasty casts in shadows where it drops off the toes of the different dyes differently, especially where the light is not white. Or if this is not right on the edge of blackness, your C41 process is out of control.

    As to your question, why not just use the filters in the enlarger? Obviously (?) you're using a colour enlarger.

    As to the colour to use, this is (unless I'm mistaken) counter-intuitive. If you were burning the hair down, you'd use a magenta filter to take out the magenta cast, but you're dodging. That means you need to use a more-magenta filter for the main exposure (including the hair) and then a more-green filter for everything but the hair to bring the skintones back to neutral. Look at it backwards: dodging the hair is the same as burning the face and background. So you pick a base exposure to get the hair right, then burn in the face and background with a greener filter to take out the green cast you introduced in the main exposure. Hope that makes some sense...
     
  9. lhalcong

    lhalcong Member

    Messages:
    239
    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2012
    Location:
    Miami, Flori
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Polyglot, it is interesting that you said on the edge of blackness. This happens to be a portrait of a dark hair on pure black backdrop. I bounced some light off white ceiling from my flash to throw some separation light on her hair. Assuming that the cast was created during exposure or during film processing, how can I learn to detect this cast on film before printing.... my eyes dont have that level of expertise. and how to avoid next time. ??

    So having said this, yes your burning/dodging explanation makes sense, I just need to practice it. and lots of paper may go to waste in the process...
     
  10. DREW WILEY

    DREW WILEY Member

    Messages:
    4,906
    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    I know how to do it, and have demonstrated that experimentally. But I never need to do it, so it's a tool I never actually use. But if I did, I would not be using gels within the lightpath. I'd simply use an
    opaque burn card with a cutout and temporarily reset the colorhead to the appropriate values.
     
  11. lhalcong

    lhalcong Member

    Messages:
    239
    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2012
    Location:
    Miami, Flori
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Drew, that's a pretty cool idea. In my limited experience, I would have never thought of that... thx
     
  12. frotog

    frotog Member

    Messages:
    749
    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2007
    Location:
    third stone
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    Cool idea but not practical especially if you value fine color correction. An accomplished color printer will oftentimes tweak the balance a 1/4 cc or even less. Once moved, attempting to reset the dials will leave you with a ever so slightly different color pack. This is only really an issue if the printer is trying to achieve consistent color throughout a group of images.

    You're much better off dodging with cc filters. If you reduce the exposure then simply burn it back in with a filter over a burn card.
     
  13. markbarendt

    markbarendt Subscriber

    Messages:
    7,605
    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Beaverton, OR
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I agree.

    Unless there is mixed lighting it has been my experience that when I have a color cast anywhere it is actually everywhere. In those cases I've normally misjudged and once i got the correction right, what I thought was fine was obviously off too.
     
  14. DREW WILEY

    DREW WILEY Member

    Messages:
    4,906
    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    Frotog - cc filters aren't even mfg to those tolerances. You're dreaming. You'd be far outside the range of a what a good colorhead can do anyway. A push of a button and I can go between presets. Plus you'd be putting something in the lightpath not really designed for over-the-lens use. Lighting gels are not made to the same standards as optical gels, which would cost a small fortune in anything large enough to burn with, and would still degrade the image slightly.
     
  15. frotog

    frotog Member

    Messages:
    749
    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2007
    Location:
    third stone
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    Presets? Are you using a computer controlled closed loop head? Regardless, you've completely misunderstood my point.The mfg. tolerances of dichroic filters has no bearing on my comment. Traditional color heads have analogue controls DREW. That means stepless control in dialing in the color pack. There are no definitive, calibrated increments.
     
  16. DREW WILEY

    DREW WILEY Member

    Messages:
    4,906
    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    OK, so the light beam goes thru about one inch or so of graduated overlapping subtractive filters with a
    range of maybe 175 cc's. No gearing or dial on conventional equip is going to give incremental control
    on such a small surface as you imagine, but you should be able to dial it in with less than a 5cc error. With a very sophiticated feedback colorhead like I use, one can sustain control within about 1cc. Gels (at least the ones I've measured on a densitometer) are often plus/minus around 4 cc's or worse. The pale ones tend to be far worse. But I have no trouble switching filtration even on my old Chromega additive colorhead in the dark, like for split printing. Keypads are nicer, but still no big deal. I've done a few experimental color prints this way, but if I really had to correct a print I'd resort to selective pan film masking of the neg, but that's another story. And the Fauxtoshop crowd have their own way of doing it, but most of them probably don't even notice green faces.
     
  17. frotog

    frotog Member

    Messages:
    749
    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2007
    Location:
    third stone
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    Keep practicing your color printing DREW and maybe someday this will make more sense. Best of luck.
     
  18. lhalcong

    lhalcong Member

    Messages:
    239
    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2012
    Location:
    Miami, Flori
    Shooter:
    35mm
    The only way to settle this is that I send the original negative to each of you , and see who returns the best print... just kidding. The real beauty of this is that I think you are both right.

    I take out of this that there is many different procedures and lots of different equipment that I don't have. I agree with putting filters under the lens in the lightpath may cause image degradation (particularly with used ones in eBay) nor can I invest the money in sophisticated tools so I have to do with regular enlarger. So I will probably try both approaches somehow with the tools I have and see which one works best for me.

    Thanks guys.
     
  19. DREW WILEY

    DREW WILEY Member

    Messages:
    4,906
    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    I'll sell you one of my enlargers if you want to try my method, Frotog ... that would at least buy me a
    modest vacation cabin or new car, and I'd still have several enlargers left over. You're utterly out of you're league with that comment ...