Grand Tetons Print
I haven't been at this printing business very long. I generally use variable contrast paper like Ilford MGIV 8x10 RC. The size makes it easy to judge print quality and I use RC because it is cheaper and dries fast. I use an 8x10 printing frame from LPL. I bought most of my darkroom online and spent less than £100 on it including a Meopta Opemus 6 enlarger I picked up to £15.
I am also setup to print 12x16 on a magnetic whiteboard I hang from the cabinets in my darkroom. The enlarger head tilts 90 degrees and I can project 6x6 and 35 mm to that full size either in landscape or portrait form. I use strips of magnetic tape to hold the paper up. It should also handle 16x20 in portrait position.
When moving to Fiber based paper I can use Ilford Cooltone and expect to be very close to a good first print using the RC paper exposure results.
I use split grade printing as I felt it was intuitive when I read about it. Judging from the highlights and shadows the ratio of timings for each filter. In most cases it serves me well and at times now I can go from test strips to a good print the first time. Most of the time it is more like 4-5 prints to get something I am happy with however.
Recently I have printed some landscapes that are either hazy or dusty in the distance. As such the contrast fades in the distance and for me I find this unsatisfactory. I like a high contrast print and the sky gets too light near the horizon as well in these cases. I have noted since taking this hobby up that in the UK, where I live now, there is a stronger appreciation for lower contrast photos that has been remarked upon in a few places. In thinking about this it takes me back to my ideas of landscape and place as formative of ones aesthetic tastes.
I grew up in Northern Arizona, that is nearly as dry a climate as one can find. At 7000ft the air is unusually clear with a piercingly blue sky. Views of up to 100 miles are common owing to the clarity of the atmosphere. The weather, though fully four seasons, has most days with bright sunshine even if the temperature does not seem in synch. This makes for what I think of as normal; high contrast and saturated colors. As a result I find my taste in photographs to follow. That being said having been exposed to a low contrast aesthetic I find myself learning to appreciate the subtleties and I have worked on some prints in this area too.
From the test strip I judged the high contrast filter at 45 seconds to define the shadows well and 11 seconds on the #00 filter to fill the highlights well. Note how quickly the high contrast filter comes up with each stop. It has seemed to me to be a blunt instrument beyond defining the shadows. I made my first print...
This print was very light over all but the foreground shadows looked about right. I then increased the low contrast filter exposure.
This is better with the sky and background coming up more. Still though it needs to be darker. I now decided to increase the low contrast filter another half stop. Now overall the exposure and contrast should be set about right and it is time to take care of the lower contrast on the horizon. This I fixed by burning in the sky and mountains with a #3 filter. I did both these steps at the same time in the next print.
Third Print #5 45 seconds #00 32 seconds #3 burn mountains and sky 22 seconds f11
Much better but the mountains and sky could use more exposure so I upped the burn by half a stop to 32 seconds.
Final Print #5 44 seconds #00 32 seconds #3 burn mountains and sky 32 seconds f11
This technique works really well I think because it raises the contrast as well as the overall darkness that characterises the haze. Increasing the low contrast filter will give more darkness but not improved contrast. A high contrast filter is too harsh and difficult to control in the smoother tones of the sky. This photo was particularly simple owing to the very flat line at the base of the mountains so a simple straight edge of card sufficed. In some cases with canyons where the ridges and rims are at different distances and thus more and less influenced by haze and dust a more complex series of burns are needed to keep an even level of contrast across the image. Again though I find a single moderate to high contrast filter serves to darken these areas and improve the contrast.
Next I wanted a 12x16 inch print. I have found that a simple rule of thumb is to either double the exposures or reduce the aperture by one stop as the areas are roughly 2:1 between 8x10 and 12x16. In this case the 12x16 was exposed at f8 and the exposure and burn times remained the same as the 8x10 case. If the exposure times are shorter (on the order of 8-16 seconds) then I prefer to double the exposure times.
I am also setup to print 12x16 on a magnetic whiteboard I hang from the cabinets in my darkroom. The enlarger head tilts 90 degrees and I can project 6x6 and 35 mm to that full size either in landscape or portrait form. I use strips of magnetic tape to hold the paper up. It should also handle 16x20 in portrait position.
When moving to Fiber based paper I can use Ilford Cooltone and expect to be very close to a good first print using the RC paper exposure results.
I use split grade printing as I felt it was intuitive when I read about it. Judging from the highlights and shadows the ratio of timings for each filter. In most cases it serves me well and at times now I can go from test strips to a good print the first time. Most of the time it is more like 4-5 prints to get something I am happy with however.
Recently I have printed some landscapes that are either hazy or dusty in the distance. As such the contrast fades in the distance and for me I find this unsatisfactory. I like a high contrast print and the sky gets too light near the horizon as well in these cases. I have noted since taking this hobby up that in the UK, where I live now, there is a stronger appreciation for lower contrast photos that has been remarked upon in a few places. In thinking about this it takes me back to my ideas of landscape and place as formative of ones aesthetic tastes.
I grew up in Northern Arizona, that is nearly as dry a climate as one can find. At 7000ft the air is unusually clear with a piercingly blue sky. Views of up to 100 miles are common owing to the clarity of the atmosphere. The weather, though fully four seasons, has most days with bright sunshine even if the temperature does not seem in synch. This makes for what I think of as normal; high contrast and saturated colors. As a result I find my taste in photographs to follow. That being said having been exposed to a low contrast aesthetic I find myself learning to appreciate the subtleties and I have worked on some prints in this area too.
This summer my wife and I traveled to Yellowstone National Park and the Grand Tetons. The Grand Tetons are a very young mountain range thrusting out of the surrounding plains. They really must be seen to appreciate their beauty. They are a bit of a visual cliche on Flickr and other photo sites but still they are a thing to behold.
On the particular day we visited the weather was turning and had become quite close with lots of moisture in the air. Later in the afternoon this would evolve into some thunderstorms. The result of all this humidity was that the distant parts of the mountains and skies were indistinct and washed out. In my mind however they stand out against a strong blue sky. Looking at the scanned negatives however showed this washed out look.
I began the print in my usual way with test strips using the #00 and #5 filters. I used f11 as a starting point. In this case the one strip of paper for filter #00 had been subject to light leaks on both ends that had to be ignored. I don't know how this happened and I think it caused me to underestimate the initial exposures.
On the particular day we visited the weather was turning and had become quite close with lots of moisture in the air. Later in the afternoon this would evolve into some thunderstorms. The result of all this humidity was that the distant parts of the mountains and skies were indistinct and washed out. In my mind however they stand out against a strong blue sky. Looking at the scanned negatives however showed this washed out look.
I began the print in my usual way with test strips using the #00 and #5 filters. I used f11 as a starting point. In this case the one strip of paper for filter #00 had been subject to light leaks on both ends that had to be ignored. I don't know how this happened and I think it caused me to underestimate the initial exposures.
Test strip at f11 in half stop times
From the test strip I judged the high contrast filter at 45 seconds to define the shadows well and 11 seconds on the #00 filter to fill the highlights well. Note how quickly the high contrast filter comes up with each stop. It has seemed to me to be a blunt instrument beyond defining the shadows. I made my first print...
First Print #5 45 seconds #00 11 seconds f11
This print was very light over all but the foreground shadows looked about right. I then increased the low contrast filter exposure.
Second Print #5 45 seconds #00 22 seconds f11
This is better with the sky and background coming up more. Still though it needs to be darker. I now decided to increase the low contrast filter another half stop. Now overall the exposure and contrast should be set about right and it is time to take care of the lower contrast on the horizon. This I fixed by burning in the sky and mountains with a #3 filter. I did both these steps at the same time in the next print.
Third Print #5 45 seconds #00 32 seconds #3 burn mountains and sky 22 seconds f11Much better but the mountains and sky could use more exposure so I upped the burn by half a stop to 32 seconds.
Final Print #5 44 seconds #00 32 seconds #3 burn mountains and sky 32 seconds f11
This technique works really well I think because it raises the contrast as well as the overall darkness that characterises the haze. Increasing the low contrast filter will give more darkness but not improved contrast. A high contrast filter is too harsh and difficult to control in the smoother tones of the sky. This photo was particularly simple owing to the very flat line at the base of the mountains so a simple straight edge of card sufficed. In some cases with canyons where the ridges and rims are at different distances and thus more and less influenced by haze and dust a more complex series of burns are needed to keep an even level of contrast across the image. Again though I find a single moderate to high contrast filter serves to darken these areas and improve the contrast.
Next I wanted a 12x16 inch print. I have found that a simple rule of thumb is to either double the exposures or reduce the aperture by one stop as the areas are roughly 2:1 between 8x10 and 12x16. In this case the 12x16 was exposed at f8 and the exposure and burn times remained the same as the 8x10 case. If the exposure times are shorter (on the order of 8-16 seconds) then I prefer to double the exposure times.
12x16 inch print #5 44 seconds #00 32 seconds #3 burn mountains and sky 32 seconds f8
Comments