Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,911   Posts: 1,584,676   Online: 817
      
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 20
  1. #1
    dustym's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Essex, just outside London
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    165
    Images
    9

    The Zone system & alternative processes

    I have read quite a bit on other sites about negative density for alternative process. Does anybody have any insight on zone placement to achieve the higher contrast negative in order to only produce negatives for say Van dyke
    rather than employing inter positive or print through methods.
    Where would you place darkest shadow shadows in the zone to achieve high contrast negatives or do you just over develop say 75 % from a normal scene reading

    rgds
    Dusty
    The camera cannot lie, but it cannot help being selective.

  2. #2
    Ole
    Ole is offline
    Ole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Bergen, Norway
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    9,282
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    31
    You don't want more density in the shadows, just a lot more difference between shadows and highlights.

    So I expose normally, and develop more (or use a staining developer).
    -- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
    Norway

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    6,242
    As Ole said, you don't want more density. You do want more density range. Where conventional silver may require a 1.00 or 1.10 density range, you will want to be up into a density range of 1.65 and higher (depending on process). This is accomplished by developing longer along with proper exposure.

    In fact the common Zone System practice of placing exposures on Zone III or even IV may be counterproductive since films, by and large, have a maximum attainable density range. These elevated exposures intrude into the attainable density range. Furthermore, not all films can attain the required density range.
    Art is a step from what is obvious and well-known toward what is arcane and concealed.

    Visit my website at http://www.donaldmillerphotography.com

  4. #4
    dustym's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Essex, just outside London
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    165
    Images
    9

    Excellent

    Quote Originally Posted by Donald Miller View Post
    As Ole said, you don't want more density. You do want more density range. Where conventional silver may require a 1.00 or 1.10 density range, you will want to be up into a density range of 1.65 and higher (depending on process). This is accomplished by developing longer along with proper exposure.

    In fact the common Zone System practice of placing exposures on Zone III or even IV may be counterproductive since films, by and large, have a maximum attainable density range. These elevated exposures intrude into the attainable density range. Furthermore, not all films can attain the required density range.
    Thanks chaps

    rgds
    The camera cannot lie, but it cannot help being selective.

  5. #5
    noseoil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Tucson
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,898
    Images
    17
    Use efke 25. tim

  6. #6
    ann
    ann is offline

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,883
    Images
    26
    i used a N+1 as a guide line for processing some negatives .

    In fact i ran a series of test, from N-1 to N+2 and N+1 is working out vetry nicely .
    http://www.aclancyphotography.com

  7. #7
    Ole
    Ole is offline
    Ole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Bergen, Norway
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    9,282
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    31
    I'm almost sorry to say that APX100 is possibly the best film I've ever tried for getting those ultra-long density scales for the low contrast processes.

    Fortunately FP4+ is also great - as is EFKE PL25.
    -- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
    Norway

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    6,242
    Tmax 100 and 400 will both give the density ranges that you need...but be advised that Tmax 100 is useless for processes that are exposed with UV because it effectively shields UV in it's base. Beyond that Efke PL 100 will provide densities of adequate scale and I have heard that Efke 25 will too.

    Ilford FP4 and HP 5 are both acknowledged to provide the scale required. Bergger BPF 200 will not provide the density range required...especially when one is needing expansion of a flat scene.

    The most reliable way to determine the development time as it applies to the density range is by testing with a transmission densitometer...especially when one becomes involved with some of the more costly processes.
    Art is a step from what is obvious and well-known toward what is arcane and concealed.

    Visit my website at http://www.donaldmillerphotography.com

  9. #9
    donbga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Shooter
    Large Format Pan
    Posts
    2,084
    Quote Originally Posted by dustym View Post
    I have read quite a bit on other sites about negative density for alternative process. Does anybody have any insight on zone placement to achieve the higher contrast negative in order to only produce negatives for say Van dyke
    rather than employing inter positive or print through methods.
    Where would you place darkest shadow shadows in the zone to achieve high contrast negatives or do you just over develop say 75 % from a normal scene reading

    rgds
    Dusty
    You may want to start out increasing your film development time by 40 to 60% more than what you use for silver gelatin, VDB requires a contrastier negative than say palladium.

    You may also find that you do need to increase exposure a bit if you do not have adequate or pleasing shadow detail in your prints. Try 1/3 to 1/2 stop more exposure if you think you need better shadow details in your VDB prints.

    Unfortunately people are often advised to make large exposure increases for alt prints which is usually not necessary.

    Each alt process has it's own characteristic printing curve so some testing of one kind or another will be called for.

    Good luck,
    Don Bryant

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Greenville, SC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    4,813
    Images
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by donbga View Post
    You may want to start out increasing your film development time by 40 to 60% more than what you use for silver gelatin, VDB requires a contrastier negative than say palladium.

    You may also find that you do need to increase exposure a bit if you do not have adequate or pleasing shadow detail in your prints. Try 1/3 to 1/2 stop more exposure if you think you need better shadow details in your VDB prints.

    Unfortunately people are often advised to make large exposure increases for alt prints which is usually not necessary.

    Each alt process has it's own characteristic printing curve so some testing of one kind or another will be called for.

    Good luck,
    As Don suggests, if you do not have adequate exposure to get good shadow detail in your prints you need to expose more.

    However, my experience is that it is more common to over-expose than under-expose when exposing and printing for alternative processes. The fact that you need a much higher contrast negative (requiring longer development time) can increase effective film speed by as much as a full stop. When I plan to develop negatives to a DR of 1.8 or higher I always use a meter reading that is 1.5X the nominal film speed. Although I use an incident meter and take my readings in the shadow I think it might be about equivalent to placing your shadow values on about Zone II. Remember, the additional time in the developer is going to increase shadow density.

    If you place your shadows on Zone III, or Lord forbid, Zone IV, this will have negative consequences for shadow separation, especially with print out processes that are self-masking, such as Ware-Malde POP palladium, Ziatype, VDB, albumen and salted paper.

    Sandy King

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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