Interpretations of a negative

[f/stopblues]

Jason, the potholes where you live are very handsome! Ours look like Godzilla had a visit.

Your interpretation fits the subject very well. I'm a fan!

[Iwagoshi]

Contrary, my immediate goal is to try and make a print as good as the scan. I don't mean to mock this thread, because this is a great topic, it's just that I am not (yet) an "accomplished" printer, but would like to participate anyway (...must learn to walk before I can run, and all that.)
First image: the scan, then the print. The print I exposed to get detail in the walkway and dodged the trees by 20%. As noted by dlin, I need to burn the right corner/edge in the next iteration.

Terry

[Erik Petersson]

I only have a scanner, no darkroom available. To be honest, I have never really tried to print for real. Life was easy and I was reasonable happy. Now, this thread is making it tougher.

[Poohblah]

I only have a scanner, no darkroom available. To be honest, I have never really tried to print for real. Life was easy and I was reasonable happy. Now, this thread is making it tougher.

the greatest joy i have found in photography is making my own prints in the darkroom. this is the reason i'm using digital less and less.

[JBrunner]

Jason, the potholes where you live are very handsome! Ours look like Godzilla had a visit.

Your interpretation fits the subject very well. I'm a fan!

Thanks Chris.

[michael9793]

Contrary, my immediate goal is to try and make a print as good as the scan. I don't mean to mock this thread, because this is a great topic, it's just that I am not (yet) an "accomplished" printer, but would like to participate anyway (...must learn to walk before I can run, and all that.)
First image: the scan, then the print. The print I exposed to get detail in the walkway and dodged the trees by 20%. As noted by dlin, I need to burn the right corner/edge in the next iteration.

Terry

I have been printing for 40 years and still have to work hard at getting good prints. spend more time printing instead of playing with the computer and you could make better prints. i don't mean to sound cold, but anyone who tells me that they can't do something so I will take the easy way out makes me sick. you want to be a "accomplished" printer spend 8 hours a week in the darkroom for a couple of months and you'll get it.

[Iwagoshi]

Michael, by "computer" and "the easy way out" I am assuming that you are referring to the use of the scanner. The scanner shows me an unbiased image of my negative, what its supposed to look like. Without it I would be chasing my tail, no way to tell me what I'm doing wrong. Eventually I hope to move beyond this stage, to be able to read and interpret the negative, and print accordingly. But I'm not there, I'm still painting by the numbers. Michael, check out post number 2 of this thread, six months ago I did not even have a scanner.

Taking the easy way out? Not when it has taken up to 15 work prints just to get it to look like the scan, that's at 45-minutes per print.

[JBrunner]

Michael, by "computer" and "the easy way out" I am assuming that you are referring to the use of the scanner. The scanner shows me an unbiased image of my negative, what its supposed to look like. Without it I would be chasing my tail, no way to tell me what I'm doing wrong. Eventually I hope to move beyond this stage, to be able to read and interpret the negative, and print accordingly. But I'm not there, I'm still painting by the numbers. Michael, check out post number 2 of this thread, six months ago I did not even have a scanner.

Taking the easy way out? Not when it has taken up to 15 work prints just to get it to look like the scan, that's at 45-minutes per print.

If you ask me, I say you are doing it the hard way, without realizing it. Your scanner does not show an unbiased image. What your scanner will teach you is to make thin, low contrast negatives, that do not print well, but scan fine. It's great to know that if you are shooting for a scan, but in general, the best negative for a print won't scan well, and vice versa. It sounds like you are working on being a fine printer, and I'm not trying to rain on your parade, just advising in the kindest way that the scanning may well become an impediment to your developing. (hey, I made a pun!) If your goal is print making, you should be exposing and developing your negatives for your paper, not a scanner.

[Iwagoshi]

If you ask me, I say you are doing it the hard way, without realizing it. Your scanner does not show an unbiased image. What your scanner will teach you is to make thin, low contrast negatives, that do not print well, but scan fine. It's great to know that if you are shooting for a scan, but in general, the best negative for a print won't scan well, and vice versa.

Jay, thanks for the words of wisdom, always appreciated. Your views of the thin negatives might be true if I did not contact proof (analog) my negatives. Negatives for enlarging are selected from the proofs not the scans. But I do need to check to see if there is some sort of default exposure compensation setting on the scanner.

Terry

[dlin]

I was on one of my walks through Eagle Creek park with my 6x6 folding camera when I came across this magnificent tree with its swirling array of branches. It was getting late and I didn't have a tripod with me, so I just opened up the lens and tried a rather long exposure handheld. The resulting negative was not really sharp anywhere, but after doing the squint test I thought there was still perhaps something interesting. Squinting removes high frequency information in the image and provides a sense of the broader graphical elements in the image. The print interpretation is based on that impression.

Film: Ilford Delta 400 developed in Pyrocat HD
Paper: Ilford MGWT fiber base
Printing sequence: Main exposure made with a high contrast filter with diffusion (frosted paper overlaid on the paper). Second shorter exposure made without diffusion to solidify the shadow tones. Additional burn exposures with diffusion on either side of the trunk and bottom edge.
Toning sequence: After a thorough wash, the print was toned in thiocarbamide with a presulfiding step.