Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,299   Posts: 1,535,792   Online: 675
      
Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    42

    printing an underexposed image....help

    I took an image about a week ago that I want to print as a challenge. It is underexposed a couple of stops. Not a great image, but I want the challenge for learning more.
    I shot it with TMax 100 in the middle of a partly cloudy day...still strong light. There are two young men working. Both are shirtless and one is dark haired with tanned skin and the other very light hair with lighter skin. The trees in the background are very dark and the grass around their feet is light. Because it is underexposed, it seems impossible to get these tonal varieties to print. When I give it less exposure everything turns out washed out and chalky. Of course the features are going to be a bear to dodge and burn. How would you proceed?
    My enlarger has a very strong lamp, so exposure is at about f-11 for 15 seconds with 3.5 on the magenta filter for contrast.

  2. #2
    marco.taje's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Gallarate, Italy
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    118
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    34
    I'm a very humble printer, but what I've learned -from others and from my experience- is that there is no way to get a "tonally pleasing" print from an underexposed neg. If the negative has wide areas with very low -or virtually null- density, there is no way you can get tones in there. You can just make it a bit brighter than black.
    My experience tells me that, in such cases, the best strategy is to live with the black areas. Don't be tempted to lower the contrast to bring those tones back in, it will not work. Just leave them be and adjust your exposure and contrast for the readable densities: depending on the composition, you may as well obtain a communicating print.

    My two pennies.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Nova Scotia, Canada. Ex-California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    346
    Quote Originally Posted by fralexis View Post
    When I give it less exposure everything turns out washed out and chalky. Of course the features are going to be a bear to dodge and burn. How would you proceed? My enlarger has a very strong lamp, so exposure is at about f-11 for 15 seconds with 3.5 on the magenta filter for contrast.
    You need to try your maximum contrast, like 5.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    florida
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,164
    Images
    2
    Why not make several test prints each with a different contrast filter. From those you may find that printing different parts of the image through different filters may work or you might find that a totally different look will be effective. I think that although the negative is two stops under exposed with a little work you should be able to make a respectable print. It may not be what you originally perceived but if it is a strong composition you can find some combination that works.

    http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

  5. #5
    Mainecoonmaniac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,966
    Images
    6
    Sorry to hear about your under exposed neg. If the image is important to you, you might want to spend time printing it. I've also heard that some photographers in the past have use selenium toners to intensify thin negatives. There are also some very toxic intensifiers that might help. Here's a link:

    http://photo.net/black-and-white-pho...+%26+Reduction

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    42
    Thanks for all your great suggestions. I took the contrast up a lot, did some dodging and burning and it came out just alright...nothing great, but then again it wasn't a great shot and underexposed. I even did a selenium toner and that was interesting. I just need to make sure all my negatives are perfect

  7. #7
    Katie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Texas, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    739
    Images
    89
    I, too, just printed a way underexposed (and expired to boot) negative. It came out overall very dark - which honestly I like. I think I am going to try to bleach some lighter areas in and then selenium tone it. It could be my new "style"...

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    43
    There are tricks you can use to get better results from a thin negative, depending on what equipment you have access to. Obviously, go to a higher grade paper (grade 4-5). A condenser head will produce a little more contrast (1/2 grade or so) than a diffusion, cold light, or color head. A point source head will give even better contrast. My best luck with very thin negatives has been to use a point source head and graded paper. Finally, your paper developer concentration will have a big effect. I normally use Dektol, either diluted 1:1 or 1:2. If you use straight undiluted Dektol (varying your exposure time accordingly) you will get a more contrasty print.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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