Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,933   Posts: 1,585,565   Online: 756
      
Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 61
  1. #11
    jd callow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Milan
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,002
    Images
    117
    Quote Originally Posted by pelerin View Post
    One useful method for holding detail without printing down the shadows is flashing the print. The flash can be combined with selective filtration to mitigate the cast. Because the the flash affects the print proportionally by density and does not require careful local application (as e.g., required by burning) it is a particularly useful tool where density boundaries are intermixed. As there are many effective ways to implement flashing I won't append a dissertation on my pet method. However, as those who know me will attest, I would be happy to share if you are interested.


    Celac
    I think many of us would enjoy reading the dissertation. If no there in this trhread maybe you could start a new thread on yout flashing style.

    *

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    343
    Quote Originally Posted by jd callow View Post
    I think many of us would enjoy reading the dissertation. If no there in this trhread maybe you could start a new thread on yout flashing style.
    Ok,
    I will write up something. I think topics like this would be great for a wiki. (or a collaborative document built through something like google docs)
    Celac

  3. #13
    David H. Bebbington's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    East Kent, United Kingdom
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,364
    Images
    36
    Quote Originally Posted by pelerin View Post
    Hi,
    I would second the points about the color temperature of the scene illumination and fluorescing brighteners causing havoc with whites. One quick way to mitigate the CT problem before you get to the darkroom is adding some filtration to your fill flash. Adding UV filtration may help to mitigate the optical brightener problem.

    However, as it is unlikely that you can "return to the scene of the crime," I would suggest another possible approach. One useful method for holding detail without printing down the shadows is flashing the print. The flash can be combined with selective filtration to mitigate the cast. Because the the flash affects the print proportionally by density and does not require careful local application (as e.g., required by burning) it is a particularly useful tool where density boundaries are intermixed. As there are many effective ways to implement flashing I won't append a dissertation on my pet method. However, as those who know me will attest, I would be happy to share if you are interested.

    Finally, I assume you have thoroughly tested for safelight fog, but do remember that it can contribute a pesky cyan cast in the highlights. Different papers can have varying fog thresholds (and different mal-reactions with the same chemistry) and you did note in one of your posts that you had switched recently.
    Best.

    Celac
    I recognize that a flashing exposure will help to get tone (if not detail) into a print from an overexposed neg, but I don't understand how flashing helps get rid of a cast. I really would think it's a heck of a lot easier to burn in the affected areas, using an increased effective cyan exposure (i.e. reducing magenta and yellow), particularly as with color neg film you would have to make a flashing exposure through a piece of processed blank film to retain the orange mask.

    Regards,

    David

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    123
    Matt, I still would like to hear from you about the affect of more cyan/less magenta & Yellow filtration. Some of the other posters seem to be making a meal of this. I may be wrong but I would have thought it nothing more than a filtration problem. White is very sensitive, just like grey and to remove a light cyan cast in your whites will not in my experience leave a red cast over the whole picture. The use of warm up filters for negative film is pointless, automatic machine prints would filter it out and pro printers or we ourselves can warm the scene with filtration when printing. In fact so many scenes look better when given a false cast. Warming has a well known look and is appreciated by many, however, a cool look can add mood and or sophistication to a mundane shot; it's subjective; this is an analogue forum yes!
    Finally Matt, how are you getting on with the kodak endura paper? I have a mind to change, Fuji seems difficult to balance and PE said that he thought Kodak behaved more like the Konica paper that I used to Love.
    I have tried Endura but only in satin finish which I hate, I think this rather poisoned my attitude to it.
    I use Fuji superia and pro 400H film both of which print well with Kodak paper I think. I am thinking of dumping Fuji all together and going to Kodak for the film also. Wouldn't dump velvia and provia though.

  5. #15
    Matt5791's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    England, Birmingham
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    998
    Images
    17
    Thanks very much everyone for the help.

    Mick - this particular shot could easily have been affected by blue sky light - mid summer and cloudless day. So I may weel consider a slight warming filter in such circumstances in the future.

    All in all I think that I will have a crack at varying my filtration for the buring in and basically experiment a little.

    Richard - In my next session I am going to have a play with this negative more extensively. As regards the Kodak paper, I've only used the Endura a little so far, but I can see myself sticking with it. I have been using the Lustre surface.

    Next year I am going to be going for my BIPP (British Institute of Professional Photographers) qualification, which will give me more credibility as regards my wedding clients - you have to submit a panel of work for scrutiny by the judges and I want to be printing all the images myself. I think that, from my limited experience, the kodak paper has an edge, but I can't quite put my finger on why at present......maybe it is just the very high quality feel of the packaging and the way they have a piece of card on the top and bottom of the pile of paper when you get into the bag!

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Klosterneuburg, Austria
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    97
    Quote Originally Posted by TheFlyingCamera View Post
    Heinz-while that may be true, that's not the appropriate solution for this forum. Better on the www.hybridphoto.com site.
    Pardon me, but splashing and playing around with inappropriate means, i. e. chemicals and above all photographic print paper with exaggerated contrast inherently limits the true capabilities of analog silver halide information recording.

    It takes me only a few moments to adjust all the parameters to obtain a better result than a halfway-acceptable darkroom print.

    I am a chemist. I understand the reactions in processing and prefer to avoid its limitations.

  7. #17
    Nicholas Lindan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Cleveland, Ohio USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,381
    Images
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt5791 View Post
    when burning in ... the print ... develop[s] a Cyan cast ...
    The color shift may be due to the difference in exposure time between the print as a whole and the burned-in section.

    If this is the cause you may try opening the lens up when burning so as to minimize the burn time. Stopping the lens down, or using the head's ND, and lengthening the overall time so the burn time can be even shorter wrt the overal time might be required.

    Then there is dialing in more cyan when burning the dress (assuming color neg).
    DARKROOM AUTOMATION
    f-Stop Timers - Enlarging Meters
    http://www.darkroomautomation.com/da-main.htm

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Cleveland, OH
    Posts
    378
    Or, you could dial out yellow and magenta to avoid a needless lengthening of the exposure time :rolleyes:

  9. #19
    TheFlyingCamera's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Washington DC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    8,517
    Blog Entries
    51
    Images
    437
    Quote Originally Posted by Heinz_Anderle View Post
    Pardon me, but splashing and playing around with inappropriate means, i. e. chemicals and above all photographic print paper with exaggerated contrast inherently limits the true capabilities of analog silver halide information recording.

    It takes me only a few moments to adjust all the parameters to obtain a better result than a halfway-acceptable darkroom print.

    I am a chemist. I understand the reactions in processing and prefer to avoid its limitations.
    Hans- you are missing the point. I am not arguing with you about the relative merits of scanning and printing via inkjet. I am saying that APUG is not the place to discuss them. If you want to continue participation in THIS thread on THIS site, please confine your commentary to positive commentary on how to deal with the OP's issue in the context of an analog, chemical-based solution. If you want to discuss digital solutions, please do so, on www.hybridphoto.com .

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Cleveland, OH
    Posts
    378
    Quote Originally Posted by TheFlyingCamera View Post
    Hans- you are missing the point. I am not arguing with you about the relative merits of scanning and printing via inkjet. I am saying that APUG is not the place to discuss them. If you want to continue participation in THIS thread on THIS site, please confine your commentary to positive commentary on how to deal with the OP's issue in the context of an analog, chemical-based solution. If you want to discuss digital solutions, please do so, on www.hybridphoto.com .
    Well, since this thread is HERE, it is silly having to go elsewhere to post about how scanning and outputting may be the only way to solve this problem. While I appreciate this forum's attempts to ban "well you should just do it digitally" posts like the ones that get bandied about by all the assholes on Photo.net, you are taking things way to far, in my opinion, attempting to effectively sensor all conversation relative to digital print manipulation. I mean, you can only stick your head so far into the sand. Now again, let me emphasize that I shoot 100% film, and analog-optically print every negative I possibly can. But, like it or not, this stuff digital is prevalent in about 95% of labs now. I'm sitting in the last commercial lab in the greater Clveland area that still offers it as I type this, but they frankly hate when I bring them printing that I want done this way. Analog printing is most definitley harder, and cannot always afford the same degree of control. Now, in the past, and maybe in some custom custom labs out there today, you can hire a master printer at over $50 an hour to make you custom prints. With the exception of these highly-skilled artists, I would recommend that the average printer stay away from making anything other than straight analog-optical prints. I'd say it's fair to say that it would take at least two or three YEARS to fully master color printing. I spent six months of intensive practice and I still couldn't get the hang of color dodging and burning, or even get to the point where I could match colors in people's skin from print to print, when I was doing weddings by hand. Unless you have a video analyser, color is ten times as hard as B&W. I got so good at B&W at one point that I could eyeball a negative and be within a half stop of the proper exposure, the first time. LIke I say, that sort of control would take years, and a good knowledge of logarithmic mathematics to match in color. You are workign against three distinct color curves and their respective reciprocity failures, maximum gamut, base fog, color shifts, paper time reciprocity, and a whole host of other issues like light bounce, paper fogging, fringing and fuzziness due to using a non-optimal F/stop on your enlarger lens to make dodging and burning more feasible, as well as filter pack corrective time compensation. And each change you make you have to go back and determine the reciprocity for that particular area you are dodging or burning.

    Now, having said that I firmly believe that there are many advantages to analog optical printing in color, which is why I still use it. However, dodging and burning color paper are borderline futile sometimes. YOu could maybe get it right after burning through 200 sheets of the stuff, but there are instances where the level of correction required just is not attainable with analog optical methods.

    Of course, without scans and samples, there is no way on Earth any of us can tell. I'd suggest the original poster include a negative scan and a scan of the prints so we can actually see what is going on; otherwise this post is pretty pointless. It is difficult to give advice without ascertaining the degree of dodging/burning & color shift that he is encountering.
    Last edited by FilmIs4Ever; 11-28-2007 at 04:24 PM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: Expansion & Clarification

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin