I have found that BPF 200 has a very limited ability to build density range (it shoulders rather abruptly). This is further complicated when the film is not accurately rated.
Originally Posted by Bruce (Camclicker)
From your description it seems to me that your negatives do not have enough contrast, or you are giving too much soft filtration exposure. The highlights are more affected by the soft exposure than the grade 5. When I teach split filter printing the first prints made by students are usually muddy and the reason is almost always too much soft exposure.
I have little experience with staining developers but I have made the odd print from students negatives when doing workshops and recall that I used grade 5 only with a little post flash to deal with the highlights. I'll be in a better position to make more meaningful comments in the next few weeks as I'm currently working with Prescysol and intend to get into split filter printing with it.
Your description makes sense to me , here are some thoughts.
I have always considered white light on the chromega to represent grade 1 1/2. as well I use condensor enlarger for split printing and I have used the 00 and 5 method for years.. Lately I have switched to another method for split printing and this is how it goes if I was using the same enlarger you use.
1. I first find a good balance and density for a print with drydown taken into account.
2. Lets say it is 80mag 10 secs,
3. I then flatten the scene and lighten slightly 70mag 9 sec( 10 magenta is 10densitys therefore I would compensate for this ) 70mag 8 seconds.
4. Now I would put in maximum contrast 180mag and give a slight exposure(process the print and determing if the overall contrast is good) This blast mainly affects the blacks
If you are still with me I have used the lower contrast to bring in the upper midtones and highlights nicely without burning and used the blast to increase the blacks.
Now I would consider the overall print and use the 180mag and 80yellow to change local contrast with burns in conjuncton with dodges.
so I use two filters to determine a good overall balance (drydown considered) and I use the two extreme filters to enhance the look of the print
Bruce I know if you give this a try it will work, takes a bit of practice but now this is my prefered method of split printing..
One middle filter for the main exposure and the two extreme filters for effect.
hope it works for you
Originally Posted by Bob Carnie
Your approach makes sense to me and I had thought along these lines but never pursued it.
Your point #3 is confusing to me though. Do you mean magenta to flatten the scene or did you mean Yellow? I don't understand how 70 mag @ 7 sec on top of 80 mag @ 10 seconds would flatten it? Then followed by a blast of 180? I'm understanding you to say you are using 3 magenta filters, I don't think I am right.
I think this is what confuses me more: "Now I would consider the overall print and use the 180mag and 80yellow to change local contrast with burns in conjunction with dodges."
I don't mean to sound challenging but I would like to understand what you are doing because I like the idea of dealing individually with mid tone and soft/highlights and hard/shadows.
your comments do not sound challanging /
Point #3 is as follows: The first goal I have is to determine a good starting density and contrast. ie 80 magenta 10 seconds.
Through trial and error I have found that if I use this pack and then start using the other two filters my print always is too contrasty and dark when dry therefore at this stage I back off the contrast slightly-less magenta and back off the density.( the extra exposures I give bring back the original contrast and density I was looking for in the first steps.
You know when you make prints for sepia toning , you would make the prints slightly darker for the effect of the bleach and tone!! same kind of thinking.
Now that I have a print that has the contrast and density that I like , I then start looking at the image for areas I would locally try to improve.
Some times I will use a dodging tool with grade 5 cut out shape to locally dodge and increase contrast in areas that I feel is important to the image.
As well I will burn in areas with either the 5 or 00 filter areas that I think are needing improvement.
So : dodging with a filter selective shawdow areas can locally change the look of the print
As well burning in with a filter selective areas can improve the look
There fore at my enlarging table I always have three filters .
initial exposure filter - lets say grade 2
additional exposure filters - Grade 5 and Grade 00
as well and assortment of dodging wires with diffusion, graded filters , for different local area changes.
Bruce , remember I am using a condensor enlarger -omega to do this so changing these filters on the fly is quite easy.
I understand using the Chromega would be more challanging but not impossible as I have done it on the two different enlargers.
A small magnalight would be useful for you to quickly adjust the filter settings as well I use glass carriers for all my work. I cannot think how you would be able to do this method with out the negative flat between glass.
I hope my description clarifys my previous posts
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Bruce: If you are rating HP5+ at 125, 200, or even 250 and developing for 12-13 minutes at 70 degrees F, your (fb+f) density may be such that you need to significantly increase your enlarger exposure. I find that my HP5+ rated at 250 and developed in PMK for 13 minutes at 70 dgereed F required doubkle the enlarger exposure, as compared with HP5+ at the same rating but developed in Rodinal 1:25.
Densitomere readings tell me that (fb+f) with Rodinal 1:25 is around 0.15 whereas (fb+f) with PMK is above 0.3 !
PMK's stain acts as a contrast-reducing agent when the negative is printed on VC paper. In effect, the yellow/greenish stain acts as yellow filtration. The stain is greater in the highlights. If you are split-filter printing with PMK-developed negatives, you may want to use a lower yellow filtration for your 'soft' exposure - use 50Y instead of 170Y.
Originally Posted by JackRosa
I'm using BPF 200 @ 125 and I think here-in lies the problem. I'm going to re shoot today at 200 per Donald Millers finding, process at 'normal' (12 min @ 20c) and print following Bob Carnies' lines of reasoning.
Thanks to everyone who replied.