Using Rosco filters for Multi-grade printing??

[Bob Farr]

Hi,

Am curious, can Rosco filters be used for multi-grade printing on Multi-grade paper??

If so, which ones??

Thanks in advance,
Bob

[vinny]

I've got this info saved:


"The September/October 2005 issue of Photo Techniques has an article by
Howard Bond titled "Variable-Contrast Printing and Rosco Filters". He suggested using the
Rosco Calcolor 15Y, 30Y, 60Y, 90Y, 15M, 30M, 60M, and 90M filters.
The article explains how he made those choices, and how to test for
your own

[Leigh]

Rosco gels are light modifiers, designed to be used on the lights, not in the image optical path.

They might (or might not) degrade the printed image if used between the negative and the paper.

I've seen enlargers with a filter drawer above the negative, which would be appropriate for these.

- Leigh

[Bob Farr]

Hi vinney,

THANKS, that is the article I loaned out and then it was misplaced.

Do you know of anyone who has experience with these filters??

Have seen the Rosco filters at B&H, will check to see if they are the Rosco Calcolor filters.

Cheers,
Bob

[Bob Farr]

Hi Leigh,

That is also great to know!!

Thanks,
Bob

[bigdog]

If the enlarger has an above the negative filter drawer.

Another approach is to do split grade printing using blue and green filters. The Lee filter numbers are #58 green and #47 blue. There are Rosco equivalents.

[John Kasaian]

Oh.
I thought this thread was about Bosco and I was getting a hankering for some chocolately goodness!
Never mind.:o

[Bob Farr]

Haven't had any Bosco in ages. It's still made??

[EdWorkman]

Use Roscoe Green, Minus Green and if you gotta pull out the stops for contrast, Blue, maybe
They come [ well when I bought them] in "1/4" increments and can be stacked.
Forget yellow. It may get you to a more neutral cold light, but why , it just wastes light.
Multi-Grade responds to green and blue light, so all you need are the above, and a little experience to see how contrast and print time change.
Per the thread above, I use them above the diffuser and negative. Unless you hawk a loogie on one the optics are not a problem.

[Dan Henderson]

If the enlarger has an above the negative filter drawer.

Another approach is to do split grade printing using blue and green filters. The Lee filter numbers are #58 green and #47 blue. There are Rosco equivalents.

I first learned to split grade print using these exact filters, and still use them. The instructor who first taught me split grading thought it made more sense to use the actual colors that VC paper is sensitive to, rather than the complementary colors. After learning more, I think he was teaching the use of them reversed, (blue first, green second), but his basic premise was sound.

Oh, I only use them above the negative stage, not below.

[Leigh]

The instructor who first taught me split grading thought it made more sense to use the actual colors that VC paper is sensitive to, rather than the complementary colors.
Absolutely. I only use additive heads, not subtractive.

My Ilford Multigrade-500H head has two 300-watt halogen lamps; one with a green filter and the other with a blue filter.

Back when I was printing Cibachromes I used an RGB head.

BTW, in split-grade printing the order of the filters should make no difference.
The paper only responds to the result of the two exposures.

- Leigh

[Dan Henderson]

BTW, in split-grade printing the order of the filters should make no difference.
The paper only responds to the result of the two exposures.

- Leigh

My experience suggests that the green filter affects the highlights and midtones a lot, and the shadows a little. The blue filter affects the highlights almost not at all, the midtones a little, and the shadows a lot. So by testing the green exposure first, the highlights are set, the midtones mostly set, and the shadows weak. The blue exposure then finishes the midtones and sets the shadows where I want them without further darkening the highlights. I visualize it like a bungee cord: I "pin" my highlights where I want them with the green filter, then "stretch" the shadows where I need them while the highlights stay "nailed" in place.

Finding the blue exposure first sets the shadows where I want them, but then the green exposure comes along and darkens them further, usually too far. I think it also lowers contrast overall.

Having once decided on the green and blue exposure times in that order, I agree that it should not matter which comes first on subsequent prints, I don't think the paper knows which color hit it first. But, being a creature of habit, my routine is ALWAYS green first, blue second. Keeps things simpler for me. But that's just me.

[ic-racer]

There is one odd-ball case. When using a coldlight head without an intensity-compensating timer, the order of exposure can make a difference. As the pre-heated bulb heats up it gets dimmer.

[Bob Farr]

This thread has taken an interesting direction- split printing. At first I didn't pay attention to the order of low contrast and high contrast filters. I would make a series of vertical exposures with one of the filters and then a series of horizontal exposures and see which intersection looked best and then proceed.

After a time doing only contact printing on graded paper I read an article from the RH Designs web site. The author stated that it worked better [his opinion] if the low contrast filter is used first to obtain the first hint of tone in a highlight area. Then use that time and do a test strip using the high contrast filter. I have found that it's still necessary to adjust the time of each for the print to work.

Split printing does, in my experience, provide more control over the tones in a print.

Bob

[Dan Henderson]

This thread has taken an interesting direction- split printing. At first I didn't pay attention to the order of low contrast and high contrast filters. I would make a series of vertical exposures with one of the filters and then a series of horizontal exposures and see which intersection looked best and then proceed.

After a time doing only contact printing on graded paper I read an article from the RH Designs web site. The author stated that it worked better [his opinion] if the low contrast filter is used first to obtain the first hint of tone in a highlight area. Then use that time and do a test strip using the high contrast filter. I have found that it's still necessary to adjust the time of each for the print to work.

Split printing does, in my experience, provide more control over the tones in a print.

Bob

I was very fortunate to spend a day in the darkroom printing with Les McLean. One of the things I learned from him was the importance of establishing the soft exposure first and the hard exposure second.

I sometimes have to adjust the hard and soft exposure times as well after test stripping and making a work print. But it gets me really close and I can make slight refinements to the contrast and/or overall density from that point.

[Drew Wiley]

I don't do contact proof and don't do work prints, though several prints might be needed to
actually bag a keeper worth the cost of mounting board. But in principle it doesn't matter to me whether I start the high-contrast or low-contrast filter, or just with none and then
tweak it afterwards with one or the other. I make that procedural determination based upon the specific image, paper, and developer in question, not upon rigid "supposed to"
ideology.

[bigdog]

Since I am the one that apparently derailed this thread onto split grade printing, I should chime in here.

What I failed to say in my earlier post is that using Rosco or Lee filters for split grade printing makes sense to me, especially when electing to use blue and green. Regarding the OP question, however, - and this is only my opinion – while using a series of yellow and magenta Rosco filters for all the grades would work, it seems to me to make more sense to just use the made-for-purpose, properly calibrated filters. For instance, a set of Ilford filters can’t be that much more expensive (or perhaps not more expensive at all) than a substitute. YMMV

I certainly did not intend to open a discussion of whether or not split grade printing is better than another method. It is just that: a method, or a tool. It is not a rigid ideology (well, maybe to some), but another method, one of many. I learned it from one of the best, Les McLean, but I do not use it because I can get the same results using graded filters. It doesn’t make Les’ method invalid, or my method better; they are just two paths to the same result.

Cheers, y’all.

[EdWorkman]

Now I wonder why I got "Minus Green" instead of blue Roscoes.
Perhaps it was because the Minus Green was available in more fractions than blue- or I was silly- I'll look online to see what is available now. Thanks
Thanks for the split filter things. My Besler has a heater, and I didn't realize til now that it kept the light uniformly dim, just that it was for uniformity.

[Dan Henderson]

I certainly did not intend to open a discussion of whether or not split grade printing is better than another method. It is just that: a method, or a tool. It is not a rigid ideology (well, maybe to some), but another method, one of many. I learned it from one of the best, Les McLean, but I do not use it because I can get the same results using graded filters. It doesn’t make Les’ method invalid, or my method better; they are just two paths to the same result.

Cheers, y’all.
Seems like whenever split grading is mentioned here the opposing camps come to life: the one I am in that consistently uses split grading because it works for us, and your camp that feels they can get the same results with graded filters. There is enough room for all of us to produce prints that satisfy our individual eye using the method; tool that works best for us. I also appreciate your comment about split grading not being a rigid ideology.

[EdWorkman]

I can't split the exposure- my enlarger is not sufficiently rigid- non stock mount to fit into a ceiling recess for big prints, which also means the filter drawer is inaccessible and out of reach.
So the plus geen/minus green is my solution one exposure.
The fractional saturations make it easy to refine contrast and multiple sheets can be stacked to get say 2 3/4 green .
I see fractions down to 1/8 are now available, probably that much refinement is beyond my capabilities.

[Andrew O'Neill]

I split grade print with a blue and a green roscoe filter. They go above the negative (8x10). They have worked very well for me.

[Steve Sherman]

I have used the Roscoe Gels "above" the negative stage for years to effect contrast with multigrade papers. I use a deep blue # 68 and mid green # 389 for split printing. The method I have been taught and has become accepted by the masters is to use only the blue / green method rather than trying to find a mid point as using the extremes is much more friendly to the mid tones, surely the most difficult component of the print to control.

Recently I acquired a Ilford 500 Head which uses a blue / green form of contrast control and can report that the Roscoe gels on my old Beseler 45 can produce equal extremes of contrast as the Ilford head.

Lastly, the blue / green method is additive in nature there by reducing printing times whereas magenta filters are subtractive and increase printing times.

2 cents, Cheers!