|
Let me state
at the start that in the following discussion I am assuming the use of
good quality negatives and variable contrast (VC) printing paper. If you
are not yet producing consistently good negatives then spend time sorting
that aspect out first (see the methods described on the Zone System pages).
Good printing has always been a three step process:
1.
Find the correct exposure for the negative/paper combination
2.
Match the paper contrast to the negative density range (usually done
visually by test strips)
3.
Apply local variations (burning and dodging)
This is the
most efficient method in terms of both time and materials of achieving excellence
in printing. However, many people attempt to rush matters and try to complete
step two before they have established the best exposure (step 1). I believe
the reason for this is that a change in paper contrast inevitably requires
an adjustment to the exposure, hence many people (and many books) advocate
trying to do steps 1 and 2 in one go. This usually results in neither step
being done properly and hence the result is a disappointing print. What
is required is a method that makes step one easier to complete accurately
so people aren't tempted to skip straight to step two.
The tonal range (or contrast) of VC paper is controlled by the colour of
the printing light. The colour of the light is controlled by filters. You
can use either separate filters for each contrast grade (sold as kits) or
use a colour/VC head on the enlarger. No matter which method you choose,
using a filter reduces the amount of light reaching the paper which in turn
changes the exposure (I am well aware that the filters in commercial sets
are a combination of colours designed to produce similar exposures). It
is the change of filter value that causes the exposure change thus requiring
new exposure test strips to determine the 'corrected' exposure.
To remove the need to make new exposure test strips you can calibrate your
filter system to determine accurate 'filter factors' that can then be used
to calculate the new exposure time whenever you change contrast grades.
I am aware that some filter kits have a calculator dial with them but this
dial is usually based on the paper speed point (a middle paper tone of around
0.6 density) which is not the tone to use for determining print exposure
in your darkroom. When you change contrast grade and then use these dials
to correct the exposure, the mid-tone will be unchanged but all the lighter
and darker tones will move which is not what you want to happen.
Getting
your foot on a rock
Since the
object of a filter change with VC paper is to change the tonal range of
the paper, it is only possible to determine a filter factor that fixes the
print value of one actual tone on the paper. The question is which tone
do we use? Certainly in monochrome photography, many people will be familiar
with the expression "expose for the important shadows and develop for
the important high values" (I have added the word 'important' here).
This refers to the best way to obtain good negative quality, it is a two
stage process. My own equivalent expression for VC printing of negatives
in the darkroom is "expose for the important high values and filter
for the important shadows". Notice again that this is a two stage process.
With film it would be a waste of time and materials to develop the film
before you have exposed it in the camera. Similarly in the darkroom, it
is a waste of time and materials to mess about with the contrast before
you have nailed down the basic exposure time for the important lighter tones
of the subject. The best exposure to use is the minimum that produces the
high values of the print accurately. Get one foot on a rock before swinging
the other around!
Following on from the above, since it is the exposure we want to correct
when changing filters it makes sense to obtain filter factors based on a
light tone (dense area on the negative). My personal preference is to use
zone VIII as my pivot point. I make a zone VIII negative by exposing a lightly
textured board, such as painted white fibre-board, three stops more than
the light meter indicates and develop normally (this assumes your negative
technique has been calibrated).
The filter calibration method is quite simple, set the enlarger up to produce
a 10x8 inch image from the test negative. Set the lens aperture to the optimum
f/No. Now start without any filters and make exposure test strips to find
the exposure time that will produce the tone you want from your test negative.
For a zone VIII negative area this would be very, very light grey with subtle
detail showing (e.g. a white woollen sweater, snow etc.). This is a crucial
step so don't rush it. When you have the correct time, make a test piece
(about 2 inches square) at that exposure then process and dry it. This will
be used as your reference or 'master' tone for each filter test. Make a
note of this exposure time and f/No (try to use the same f/No throughout
the tests).
Now using the first filter value, e.g. Grade 0 or 10Y, repeat the above
test strip method until you find the exposure time that produces the same
tone as your master piece. Make sure you dry each test before comparing
them so that the dry-down effect is eliminated.
To find the factor for that filter value, simply divide the exposure time
with the filter by the exposure time without the filter. For example, if
your unfiltered time is 14 seconds and the time for 10Y is 15.4, the factor
for 10Y is 15.4/14=1.1. Make a note of this factor.
Repeat this procedure for each filter value you wish to test. With a filter
kit, you need to test each separate filter. With a colour head I recommend
working in units of 10 for both the yellow and magenta filters. Needless
to say, with a colour head there is more work to do but the reward is that
you have finer control over your printing and you will save many hours of
time in the future. A few hours invested now will be well repaid.
Eventually you will end up with a table like the following:
Durst
Filtration |
Yellow
Factor |
Magenta
Factor |
10 |
1.15 |
1.15 |
20 |
1.32 |
1.32 |
30 |
1.41 |
1.55 |
40 |
1.55 |
1.82 |
50 |
1.70 |
2.15 |
60 |
1.90 |
2.45 |
70 |
1.95 |
2.65 |
80 |
2.04 |
2.91 |
90 |
2.10 |
3.11 |
100 |
2.22 |
3.27 |
A working
example
Let's say
you start with a new negative and make test strips based on the lightest
important tone. Assume this gives an exposure time of 12 seconds. You make
a work print and decide the dark tones are not dark enough for your visualisation
of this print. The print contrast is too low so you dial in some magenta
filtration. Let's say you use 20M for the next test. Previously, you needed
to make completely new test strips but using the filter factors this is
not necessary. In this case, the new exposure time is 12seconds x 1.32 (the
factor for 20M) which is 15.84 seconds (rounded to 15.8). When you make
a test print at this exposure time you will find that the lightest tone
has stayed where you want it but all the other tones have darkened proportionally
hence increasing the print contrast.
You evaluate the new print and decide that the dark tones are now too dark.
Too much contrast! The next test will be at 10M. Using the unfiltered time
again, the new time is 12 seconds x 1.15 (the factor for 10M) which is 13.8
seconds.
If you prefer to start printing with a filter already in place, e.g. the
grade 2 filter, the calculation required when changing filters is as follows.
The new exposure time is new factor/old factor multiplied by the latest
exposure time. In this case, had we started with 10M and obtained a time
of 15 seconds for the first test, changing to 20M would produce the following
1.32/1.15 x 15 seconds. Which is 17.2 seconds.
If your evaluation of the original calibration tests (to produce the filter
factors) wasn't as accurate as it should have been, you will notice that
the key light tone of your print changes slightly as you change filtration.
This indicates that the factor needs adjustment. If the tone gets darker
the factor is too high, conversely if the tone gets lighter the factor is
too low. You can fine-tune the factors as you gain experience with the method
during printing sessions.
This kind
of calibration may seem daunting but believe me it is a lot quicker than
making new test strips every time you change filters and a calculator makes
it easy! You will also save money and time in the future! |
|