View Full Version : Split Grade Printing Question
brian steinberger
31-Oct-2006, 23:01
When split grade printing, if you want to do a general edge burn how do you do so? I understand doging and burning for both highlight and shadow exposures, but for a general edge burn can I give equal amounts of exposure for each, such as 2 sec. of grade 0 and 2 sec. of grade 5? Thanks
Brian
Brian Ellis
1-Nov-2006, 12:15
I'm assuming that by "split grade printing" you mean the system whereby you make one exposure at a low contrast and another at a high contrast (as opposed to the way some people use the term, which is making a single exposure at a single contrast and then burning with a different contrast). I never thought much of the first way of prining (i.e. making two separate exposures at two different contrasts) so I have no experience with it. But FWIW and since no one else has responded to your question, I think I'd probably choose a low contrast filter for the edge burn. That would tend to darken the highlights and mid-tones a little but leave the shadows relatively unaffected, which seems more consistent with the goal of an edge burn than doing the opposite (i.e. using a high contrast filter which would darken the shadows even more but leave the highlights and mid-tones relatively unaffected).
Kirk Gittings
1-Nov-2006, 12:54
I don't think there is any hard and fast rule. It depends on what is at the edges. For instance a light grey sky will not burn much with a 5 filter but the darker ground would. I think as a common practice I would firat follow Brian's advice and be subtle.
I don't want to get into the splt grade printing argument but if all you are doing is burning in the edge, then one exposure at one grade will do it. i.e. there is no need to use two exposures at 2 different grades if they were both going to expose the same area of the print.
What grade you use is entirely upto you and will depend on the subject matter around the edges of the print. You make it look how you want it to look by choosing the appropriate grade.
In Les McClean's workshop on split-grade printing I think (and I might be recalling this wrong) that all burning in was done on Grade 0 unless there was some reason you needed the hardness of grade 5. In general if you start with 0, then do 5 you should be at the right grade and then just burn with the 0. Of course, if you need the burn area to change grade do so, but I think using 0 works best.
Maybe Lee remembers exactly.
Thanks,
Will
Donald Qualls
2-Nov-2006, 15:01
The few times I've done a burn with split filter printing, I've burned with the filter that was printing that area -- if it was light to begin with, like a sky, I burned with the yellow filter; if dark (as in darkening a distracting shadow texture), I burned with the blue.
Of course, one of the things I like with split grade printing is the greatly reduced *need* for burning and dodging... ;)
brian steinberger
2-Nov-2006, 17:27
Of course, one of the things I like with split grade printing is the greatly reduced *need* for burning and dodging...
Donald,
How is the need to dodge and burn reduced. the problem areas would still be there they would just need to be dodged during each tones exposure... ex: a shadow would be dodged during the grade 5 exposure.
Is there something I'm missing. That's what I thought...
Brian
Kirk Gittings
2-Nov-2006, 18:25
I am long time practitioner of split filtering. I never found that it reduced burning and dodging but simply made them much more effective and flexible, sometimes allowing me to print images that simply would not work on a straight graded paper.
Brian Ellis
2-Nov-2006, 19:27
Of course, one of the things I like with split grade printing is the greatly reduced *need* for burning and dodging...
Donald,
How is the need to dodge and burn reduced. the problem areas would still be there they would just need to be dodged during each tones exposure... ex: a shadow would be dodged during the grade 5 exposure.
Is there something I'm missing. That's what I thought...
Brian
I don't think you missed anything, it doesn't make dodging and burning any easier in any way that I know of but perhaps Donald could explain further.
I've always been a little mystified at the idea that I could accomplish something by making one exposure with say a 1 filter and another with say a 5 filter that couldn't be accomplished in a single exposure with say a 2 1/2 filter. Phil Davis wrote an article in Photo Techniques, Sept./Oct. 1994 issue, that I thought pretty conclusively demonstrated that you don't accomplish anything special by making two exposures with two different filters (i.e. split filter printing). Of course some people just like to work that way, they find it more intuitive or something, and that's certainly fine, we all work in the way that's best for us. I just part company with people when they start telling me that by split filter printing they're able to make a print that couldn't be made with a single exposure and a single filter.
Many of the arguments that develop when this topic comes up result from miscommunication. Some people use the term "split filter printing" to mean the practice of burning selected areas of a print with a different filter than was used for the basic exposure. That's a very useful technique, in fact the ability to do that is IMHO the principal advantage of using VC paper. But that isn't what is usually meant by the term "split filter printing" (at leat I don't think it is). The term "split filter printing" usually means a technique whereby two basic exposures are made, one with a low contrast filter and the other with a high contrast filter, and that's how I'm using the term here.
Kirk Gittings
2-Nov-2006, 19:43
Brian, I think your use of the term is backwards. The term as I have understood it from like thirty years ago, has always meant the first example with burning and dodging, and the the simplest example as you say is being able to burn down highlights with a lower contrast filter. It does work differently. Many years after I learned this people started refering to your your second example as another way to utilize the technique, but that was like 15 years later.
Hans Berkhout
2-Nov-2006, 19:49
I tend to splitfilter print with the Heiland Splitgrade unit, with my dichro lightsource. Subsequent (edge)burning I quite often do with a hand held Multigrade filter of choice for the particular print.
Eric Biggerstaff
2-Nov-2006, 20:05
I always learned splite grade printing to mean if you have a base exposure of say 20 seconds, then you might use a #5 filter for 6 seconds and a #1 filter for the remaining 14 seconds. After that, all burns could be done at whatever filter setting the printer thought best for the areas that were to be burned; one edge might require a #3 while another area might be a #1.5 or something depending on what the print needed. Light areas that needed to be burned down would use a lower filter setting so as not to effect much change on darker areas that might be close.
Brian Ellis
2-Nov-2006, 22:31
I always learned splite grade printing to mean if you have a base exposure of say 20 seconds, then you might use a #5 filter for 6 seconds and a #1 filter for the remaining 14 seconds. After that, all burns could be done at whatever filter setting the printer thought best for the areas that were to be burned; one edge might require a #3 while another area might be a #1.5 or something depending on what the print needed. Light areas that needed to be burned down would use a lower filter setting so as not to effect much change on darker areas that might be close.
That's how I learned it too. And that's how Phil Davis uses the term in the article to which I referred in my previous message. Kirk apparently has a different understanding. But I don't think it makes any difference as long as everyone is clear about exactly which technique they're talking about when they use the term "split filter printing." I've seen people get into very heated arguments about the merits of "split filter printing," only to eventually realize that the people arguing were using the term in two different ways, one the way you and I use it, the other the way Kirk uses it. That's why in my two previous messages I've tried to be very clear about exactly what technique I was talking about when I used the term "split filter printing."
Kirk Gittings
2-Nov-2006, 22:42
I always learned splite grade printing to mean if you have a base exposure of say 20 seconds, then you might use a #5 filter for 6 seconds and a #1 filter for the remaining 14 seconds. Eric.
See, I thought this "split filter base exposure printing" was largely discredited. I simply find the best filter for the overall base exposure say a grade 3 to give the foregound some crispness and then burn in the sky with a 2 and then burn in some of the highlights in white clouds maybe with a 1.
I use a Beseler Color Head and just dial it in each time.
Geary Lyons
3-Nov-2006, 08:34
Eric.
See, I thought this "split filter base exposure printing" was largely discredited.
Discredited? Well that would be news to me! But yet again, the semantics may be the issue. I find split grade printing, as defined as, expose highlights with softest, (Y or 00),filtration and then expose shadow with hardest, (M or 5),filtration. This method yields both exposure and contrast closely determined with 2 test strips.
I like the simplicity of getting the image I want without having to fuss with exposure then contrast independently. I think that both methods will achieve the desired end result, as far an image is concerned. I do not believe, based on my experience, that there are any unique imaging characteristics to my split grade filter method. I just enjoy the perceived shortcut and minimal waste of time and materials to get to my desired image.
Having your negative pretty much "locked in" is still the greatest contributor to quickly getting the image visualized, with minmal prining manipulations. MMV!
Cheers,
Geary
If this is not "split filter printing" then excuse me as that is what I was taught to call it. When I use my Durst 138s condenser enlarger I use a green filter that is close to a Wratten Green 58 and blue filter that is very close to a Wratten Blue 47b. That approximates the color of my Aristo VCL 4500 tubes on my Omega. I start with the Green filter and make a test print using my Stopclock timer. (http://www.rhdesigns.co.uk/darkroom/html/stopclock_professional.html) I select the tone I want in the highlight after I process that piece of paper or test strip. I then make a second exposure on a new piece of paper at the time I selected from the test strip with the Green filter still in place. Leaving the second exposure alone and still in position in the easel I then change the filter to the Blue filter and make another test exposure ON TOP of the Green exposure. After processing that test I then should have two exposure times (one for each filter color) and I can then go back with the green filter in place and make the green filter exposure then the blue filter exposure on the same piece of paper. This for me is a work print. It also might be a final print if all is ok but generally a little burning is necessary.
As to the question of burning in there are several techniques and the advice given above is good advice. Something that Les McLean taught me wrt to burning in is to use the blue filter. This will help any tones in the burn in area that are dark and it will strengthen them and give some presents. Then by using the Paper Flasher from RH Designs (http://www.rhdesigns.co.uk/darkroom/html/paperflasher.html) you can fog the paper to the tonality you wish. This technique has made a big difference in my printing. I have used it also for negs that were developed for some of the alt processes where the highlight is pretty dense also.
lee\c
Eric Biggerstaff
3-Nov-2006, 09:02
Kirk,
That is pretty close to what I do as well. I have tried the "split grade" printing as I understood it to mean and could not see any advantage over what I was already doing so went back to my old way.
One photographer I know, Steve Mulligan, swears by the "split grade" method and it works for him. Of course, it comes down to finding what works for you and sticking with it.
This has been an interesting thread and I hae enjoyed readig it.
Thanks Brian for posting this.
Brian Ellis
3-Nov-2006, 10:38
Eric.
See, I thought this "split filter base exposure printing" was largely discredited. I simply find the best filter for the overall base exposure say a grade 3 to give the foregound some crispness and then burn in the sky with a 2 and then burn in some of the highlights in white clouds maybe with a 1.
I use a Beseler Color Head and just dial it in each time.
I think it has been "discredited" in the sense that AFAIK people no longer claim they can make two basic exposures, one with a high contrast filter and the other with a low contrast filter, and thereby make a print that couldn't have been achieved with a single exposure. It was that claim that Phil Davis refuted in the article I mentioned earlier. But as I indicated in my first message, some people just like to work that way because it seems intuitive to them or for whatever reason is a system they are comfortable with. While I worked the way you do when I was in the darkroom (i.e. one basic exposure with one filter, then when desirable burning in some areas of the print with a different filter), others just like "split filter printing" (in the sense Eric and I are using that term) so if it works for them it's certainly still a viable method of printing.
Confuson usually reigns when the term spilt "grade printing" is used in a thread.
I don't think anyone would argue that using different grades to print different areas of a print is a very useful technique for obtaining variable contrast in a print. This is often described or referred to as split grade printing.
The opposing opinions seem to occur when we are talking about print the same area of a print using two exposures at different grades. This is also referred to or decribed as split grade printing. In this case I believe the results obtainable are no different than those obtainable using a single exposure at some grade in between.
So it is important when using the term "split grade" to say which technique you mean. Either same area or different area printing so that people know what you are talking about.
Whilst I don't beleive that there is any image quality benefit in using split grade printing for same area printing there are those who find it easier to work that way, and for that reason alone, it is as valid a technique as any other.
However, with regard to the original question, I would have thought that edge burning would be far more diffcult to reproduce consistently from one print to another if you are using split grade printing and combing that with moving your dodging card to do the burn.
robc said, "However, with regard to the original question, I would have thought that edge burning would be far more diffcult to reproduce consistently from one print to another if you are using split grade printing and combing that with moving your dodging card to do the burn."
why would you say that? Have you had trouble? I don't have any trouble. Please explain.
lee\c
If it works for you then do it. personally I would prefer to save time and allow less possibility of error by keeping the number of exposures to a minimum.
fair enough...one of the major advantages of this technique is that a lot of people seem to have a bit of a time selecting the proper filter to represent the proper contrast in the print. With this method you don't have to do anything but look and see what time is a good time for the contrast that is needed.
lee\c
Geary Lyons
3-Nov-2006, 12:05
Exactly. I really don't care what contrast grade at which I eventually arrive. I just want to get to my desired image without unnecessary waste of time and material. I use an f-stop timer. I have also found that the ratio of hard:soft remains constant, regardless of increased magnification ratio. So if I go to a larger print size, once I establish the new soft exposure, hard is the same ratio as the smaller size. Perhaps it was purely my technique at fault, but I found when using the single grade, (Y, M or Y+M), that the contrast had to be redialed, as well as exposure.
Cheers,
Geary
fair enough...one of the major advantages of this technique is that a lot of people seem to have a bit of a time selecting the proper filter to represent the proper contrast in the print. With this method you don't have to do anything but look and see what time is a good time for the contrast that is needed.
lee\c
Kirk Gittings
3-Nov-2006, 12:18
AFAIK people?
Brian, Sorry to be so initially challenged, but what the heck are "AFAIK people"?
Andrew_4548
2-Feb-2007, 05:53
The method I used to use I found in an article by Steve Hynes when he was editor of Professional Photography in the UK (when it was a proper mag and not just for wedding / portrait photographers... <rant over> ;) )
His method was to get the highlight tones as desired with a soft filter (not necessarily grade 0) and then keeping the same exposure time, open up the aperture and print over with high grade to get the blacks as dense as you want. This worked fine and I got some prints that I would't have been able to do with "single" exposures and local burning in.
I've since bought an RH Analyser Pro and whilst it's great for getting good exposures, it doesn't allow you to split grade in the same way. It assumes you'll print with the hard grade first and then effectively burn in with a soft grade - it's subtly different as it seems somehow less "controlled" unless I haven't got used to it enough yet... You've got to guess how deep the shadows will be with the hard filter before you put the more of all tones in with the soft rather than getting the highlights nice and giving it a touch of hard to give it punch... YMMV
bob carnie
2-Feb-2007, 08:08
I have been printing with multifilters for some time, I have tried a variety of ways to end up with the final print and for me I prefer the following on a condensor enlarger.
I pretend that I am using a graded paper. After some initial first tests I nail down a basic filtration and density that is good for the negative in question.
I then select a filter 1/2 grade softer and a density 10% lighter than my test strip.
I give this filter/density exposure to the paper. Then I put in the 5filter and give a 30% of main exposure with a full sheet . No/Dodge No/Burn.
From here it is a matter of % changes with the main and secondary exposures.
As Kirk says in his first post the burning in filter would be chosen based on what you are wanting to be enhanced, this is a asthetic/subjective choice the printer makes.
I usually end up using three filter, the third filter being the burning in filter which changes all the time based on the image.
I find this above method to work very well with VC Papers and could be defined as a split print.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.