Author Topic: Split contrast printing  (Read 14688 times)

Jeff Warden

  • Sheet Film
  • ****
  • Posts: 742
    • flickr
Split contrast printing
« on: January 14, 2012, 03:35:00 AM »
Hi all,

for the past few days I have been experimenting with split contrast printing.  I have enjoyed the process of learning how to do it, so this post is for those who haven't tried it but have an interest.



I'll be walking you through the numbered prints above.  I'm loosely following the technique outlined in the book 'Way Beyond Monochrome' by Ralph Lambrecht.  I'm a beginner so if you see any errors please let me know.

The idea of split contrast printing is to forget about contrast, and just print highlights (with a low contrast filter) and blacks (with a high contrast filter) with separate exposures on the same page.  The midtones are supposed to take care of themselves, mostly.  There are advantages and disadvantages to this process, but the first advantage is that you quickly get to a 'working print'. I think split contrast printing might be faster than single contrast for me.



Check the image above.  The first step is to find white while using the lowest contrast filter possible, the 00 filter.  (Filters go from 00 to 5 in ten steps).  You can see on the first test strip 3 seconds is too bright and 6 seconds is too dark, so I made another test strip using only 4 and 5 seconds.  I decided on 5.  Printing the entire image like this (which I wouldn't normally do but did today so you could see it) would result in image 1 below, which has nice lighter values but no dark ones:



The next step is to establish blacks.  The process is the same as establishing white, except you're using the highest contrast filter, #5.  The test strips below show that process:



I didn't label those, but I think you've got the idea.  The best black also happens at 5 seconds, and if we were to print the entire image that way (which we wouldn't) it would look like image #2, below.  Notice there is no sky at all:




Now that we know where black and white are, all we need to do is expose one paper twice; one five second exposure at 00, and one five second exposure at 5.  The pleasing result is below:



Now we have a working print that goes all the way from black to white, and has all the values between.  It's the starting point for dodging and burning.  So let's get on with ruining the thing.  :-)

The cool part about split contrast printing comes when you want to dodge and burn, because you have multiple opportunities to do it, during or after the high and low contrast initial exposures.  You can softly dodge the barn during the 00 exposure for instance, to add some brightness to the highlights of the wood without affecting the shadows.  If you were exposing the image only once (say, with a #3 contrast filter) and dodged the barn both the highlights and shadows would lighten.

For me, that's a real benefit of split contrast printing.

Now a personal preference - I like 'straight prints', so I like print #3.  Normally I would just stop there, but for sake of experimentation I decided to burn some depth into the water and sky.  The water was pretty straightforward, a simple six second burn using the 5 filter:



The sky was trickier.  Recall from image #2 that the 5 filter has no effect on the sky whatsoever.  I decided to try a burn test strip at 00, but the results weren't quite right, so I tried again using a #3 filter and liked that more.  They look almost identical here but in person there is a difference.




So, let's put it all together.  To make the "final image", we:

expose 5 sec at contrast 00
expose 5 sec at contrast 5
burn water 6 sec at contrast 5
burn sky 8 sec at contrast 3  

That gives us image #4 below:




I vaguely recall a quote from Ansel Adams where he said he didn't know if he had gone too far until he actually did it, or something like that, and I think this print goes too far.  I do like the added depth in the water, but the sky just looks 'burned in' to me, which of course it is.

So I backed up one step, grabbed the working print from before and just selenium toned it (which adds some depth to the dark values without affecting the light).  It doesn't have the same pop as image #4, but I sure like it more as a straight print.  It looks like the scene I remember:



So this is the one I'll keep.  

That's it in a nutshell.  I hope you enjoyed it!

Jeff





« Last Edit: January 14, 2012, 03:43:18 AM by J_Warden »

LT

  • Global Moderator
  • Self-Coat
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,030
Re: Split contrast printing
« Reply #1 on: January 14, 2012, 08:54:47 AM »
Nice description of the process Jeff and it is interesting to hear your thoughts on it.

I do all my printing with a grade 0 and 5 split grade sequence. I find it the most logical way to interpret and manipulate tones in a print. It also gives the potential for finer contrast differences beyond the 1/2 grade restrictions imposed by the manufacturers.
L.

LT

  • Global Moderator
  • Self-Coat
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,030
Re: Split contrast printing
« Reply #2 on: January 14, 2012, 11:40:52 AM »
... I agree that it a a quicker way of getting to an acceptable print too.  I've been using the technique almost exclusively for about 5 years now.  I do a simple test strip to get the most important highlight grade 0 exposure. then do a full size print on that grade 0 exposure and a grade 5 test strip over the top on the same print.  This generally gives me the grade 5 exposure and any burns/ dodges I need - all the info I need to make a final print in fact. So in reality, I'm getting a fine print in 2  and 1/3 sheets.

Another thing I find split grade really helpful for is in toning.  I am able to make adjustments to exposure to compensate for toner activity separately in the highlights and shadows.  So If I am only wanting to thiocarb tone the highlights, I'd only add extra printing time to the highlight exposure so make up for density loss when bleaching. If I gave a general overall increase in exposure, it would give too much density to the shadows and risk losing detail.

It gives so much control to printing I think. As evidenced in your example pics - (I prefer the over printed one actually - very nice!)
« Last Edit: January 14, 2012, 11:42:35 AM by leon taylor »
L.

Jeff Warden

  • Sheet Film
  • ****
  • Posts: 742
    • flickr
Re: Split contrast printing
« Reply #3 on: January 14, 2012, 04:07:51 PM »
Thanks Leon.  It's good to hear you've been using this technique for so long and have been satisfied with it.  I've been thinking about this approach a lot for the past few days because it seems more flexible and intuitive than the single contrast method that is generally taught to beginners.  The single contrast method (at least the way I've been doing it) involves more guesswork and paper.  It makes me wonder why the split contrast method isn't the one that is taught first, but no matter.

I like your idea of a small 00 test strip and then a full sheet for the 5 test strip.  As you saw I've been using only the small ones but your way will give more information on the second strip.  I'll give it a try.  Thanks for the tip.

As for the burning of this image, well it's always a struggle for me.  The temptation is there to increase contrast and punch and guide the viewer's eye, but over time I tend to tire of my prints that are done in this way and when I look at them I just see the enhancements instead of the image, if you follow.  I admire the work of Robert Adams, who has a matter-of-fact style of processing that still manages to keep my interest over time.  His images could be heavily adjusted in the darkroom, but if they are it sure doesn't show: they look refined without looking 'processed'.  I'd like to be able to do that one day.

Cheers, and thanks for sharing your thoughts.

Jeff

jojonas~

  • Self-Coat
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,928
  • back at 63° 49′ 32″ N
    • jojonas @ flickr
Re: Split contrast printing
« Reply #4 on: January 16, 2012, 02:39:03 PM »
thanks for posting this! a real thorough guide with good pictures so it's easy to see what it is you're reading about.

I've been thinking about getting into printing more and hed my eyes set on http://www.theonlinedarkroom.com/p/how-to-make-print.html as a starting guide. but this might actually be better. doesn't look any bit harder and gives more control of the end result :)
I'll save dodging and burning for the experiments a while though ;)
/jonas

Jeff Warden

  • Sheet Film
  • ****
  • Posts: 742
    • flickr
Re: Split contrast printing
« Reply #5 on: January 16, 2012, 06:28:05 PM »

I'll save dodging and burning for the experiments a while though ;)

It's my pleasure.  I would second the notion of skipping the dodging and burning until you can make a good 'straight print'.  It won't take long for you to get there whether you use split contrast or single.  They both work after all, but until I see a good reason not to use the split contrast method I will continue using it.

Cheers,

Jeff

mickld

  • 120
  • **
  • Posts: 163
Re: Split contrast printing
« Reply #6 on: January 25, 2012, 12:52:17 AM »
I missed this article - just spotted it now. A tricky topic well described. And very generous of you to provide the test strips to illustrate your technique. Makes it much easier to follow along. This is basically the same technique I use as well, and really like it.

I picked it up from this article, which you might find of interest. Like Leon, he recommends determining the 0 filter time first, then exposing the second test paper to the 0 filter before starting the 5 filter strips. That way you determine your blacks while seeing how the 0 filter affects the blacks at the same time.

I am, however, a complete novice  ::)

http://www.lesmcleanphotography.com/articles.php?page=full&article=21

Jeff Warden

  • Sheet Film
  • ****
  • Posts: 742
    • flickr
Re: Split contrast printing
« Reply #7 on: January 25, 2012, 01:25:56 AM »

I picked it up from this article, which you might find of interest. Like Leon, he recommends determining the 0 filter time first, then exposing the second test paper to the 0 filter before starting the 5 filter strips. That way you determine your blacks while seeing how the 0 filter affects the blacks at the same time.


Thanks, and yes you and Leon are exactly right about exposing the 0 first before doing the 5.  I have used that technique on several other prints since I made this article and it's definitely better and faster too.  It provides more information than I was getting with my old approach.

Cheers,

Jeff

LT

  • Global Moderator
  • Self-Coat
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,030
Re: Split contrast printing
« Reply #8 on: January 25, 2012, 08:13:51 AM »
Technically, it doesn't really matter which way around you expose - you can use hard or soft contrast first as you like. It just makes more sense to me to get the highlights first then look at the rest of the print ... Provided you are confident in the general exposure and development of the negative.

A well exposed and developed neg should allow you to use the soft and hard exposures without affecting one another.  To be honest, I don't even look at the shadow tones when testing for the soft exposure.  All I am looking for is the first hint of tone (photographic white as opposed to paper white) in the most important highlight.  The rest is unimportant. The hard contrast similarly should only really concentrate on the most important shadow that you want detail to show in.  But I also look throughout the final range at this point to make the creative rather than technical decisions - dodge, burn, etc.  I rarely use the soft exposure for these manipulations ... mostly the grade 5.


If you are unsure due to a very contrasty or very low contrast neg, then as you say, a soft exposure first will give a clue as to where to start with the hard contrast test strip.
L.

CarlRadford

  • Sheet Film
  • ****
  • Posts: 588
    • Carls Gallery
Re: Split contrast printing
« Reply #9 on: January 25, 2012, 01:28:18 PM »
Andrew Sanderson has a great Youtube video that covers this subject too - I cant access youtube at work but a serch on his name will reveal all.

LT

  • Global Moderator
  • Self-Coat
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,030
Re: Split contrast printing
« Reply #10 on: January 25, 2012, 02:42:50 PM »
L.

mickld

  • 120
  • **
  • Posts: 163
Re: Split contrast printing
« Reply #11 on: January 25, 2012, 04:58:09 PM »
>Technically, it doesn't really matter which way around you expose - you can use hard or soft contrast first as you like.
I'm probably thinking about this the wrong way, but I use the #0 filter first because although I'm only trying to judge the highlights, it seems to affect the shadow areas to quite a degree. The images 1 & 2 above demonstrate what I mean - the 0 filter has quite an affect on the midtones & shadows before any #5 filter is used. So to know how much #5 filter is required to properly expose the shadows, it seems sensible to me to factor in the effect the #0 filter has already had on the shadows. So I use #0 first.

If I'm wrong, and it actually doesn't matter, I can happily carry on doing what I'm doing regardless :-)

In addition to 'normal' dodging & burning, the 'Way Beyond Monochrome' book gives a few examples of using the hard 5 filter to selectively boost the local contrast of high detail areas, thereby boosting the perceived sharpness of the detailed areas. It's not something I've tried yet but looks well worth experimenting with. That's what I like about this technique. As well as giving a simple, structured approach to dialling in the correct overall exposure, it promises a lot of local control when tweaking areas of the image.

mickld

  • 120
  • **
  • Posts: 163
Re: Split contrast printing
« Reply #12 on: January 25, 2012, 05:00:49 PM »
>If you are unsure due to a very contrasty or very low contrast neg
Of course, this may be the issue! I do like to dabble with stand development. And Holgas.

Andrej K

  • Sheet Film
  • ****
  • Posts: 489
    • Andrej Kutarna Photography
Re: Split contrast printing
« Reply #13 on: June 19, 2012, 12:51:03 PM »
Hello,
here is a long time reader of this forum and a filmwaster and paperwaster... This thread set me to try the split grade printing which was almost unknown to me before - I have been trying it with not that bad results - I like these new prints more than my older prints printed using "normal" methods..
However, I have a question to ask - in the example in the beginning of this thread as well as in several other how-to articles and videos on the web the exposure times of 00 and 5 are quite similar  5 seconds or so.

In my case, I very often get totally different times - like 4-6 seconds with grade 0 and 20-30 seconds with grade 5. Am I doing something wrong? Or does it "only" mean that my negative development sucks? Or is it characteristic of the paper I am using - the "local" Fomabrom variant?? (When I tried the Fomatone, the difference was even bigger).

Thank you in advance for any tips...
I'll try to scan some of the prints and put them on my flickr tonight.
Website of sorts, as well as ipernity thing.

LT

  • Global Moderator
  • Self-Coat
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,030
Re: Split contrast printing
« Reply #14 on: June 19, 2012, 01:36:32 PM »
Andrej - sounds like your negative contrast is out a bit - what grade would you usually go to when printing?

Fomabrom variant is a great paper, and responds similarly to ilford MG1V ... the fomatone is a much slower paper.

It doesnt mean you are doing anything wrong though.  You might just like a more punchy print, or your enlarger lamp colour might lead to a slightly compromised grade 5, or lots of other reasons.  If you are happy with the prints, then stick with it :)

I have to say I can't remember ever having a neg that prints at 5 seconds on each filter .... usually about 1.9 on 00 and 3.5 on 5 ... but some are vastly different depending on the subject tonal range and personal choice when printing.

L.

Andrej K

  • Sheet Film
  • ****
  • Posts: 489
    • Andrej Kutarna Photography
Re: Split contrast printing
« Reply #15 on: June 19, 2012, 01:44:41 PM »
Leon, thank you for answer.
I am not worrying - I quite like my prints - or better to say - I like where I am going with my printing now - there is still far far to go untill they are "really" good. But I enjoy myself and that is important :) Only that I was curious about it..

Before trying this, I've been printing on fixed grade fomabrom N, which means normal and should be somewhere around grade 2... I'll try to add some contrast  when developing the next batch of rolls..
Website of sorts, as well as ipernity thing.