Re: Why is paper "contrasty"?

To improve local contrast, extend range; you might try a half tsp of "Shap's
Bal. Bitz"per liter of working developer. It's now available through the
Photographers' Formulary.

S
----- Original Message -----
From: "William Erickson" <erickson@hickorytech.net>
To: <pinhole-discussion@pinhole.com>
Sent: Friday, July 12, 2002 7:29 AM
Subject: Re: [pinhole-discussion] Why is paper "contrasty"?

> I understand the behavior of VC paper, but my comments intended to deal
with
> the fact that the tonal range of brightly lit scenes exceeded the tonal
> range of any paper. "Ratcheting down" the exposure time in such situations
> would bring the highlights more into the tonal range of the paper, at the
> cost of shadow detail, advantage being that you at least don't lose both
> highlights and shadow. Thanks for your thoughts.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Guy Glorieux" <guy.glorieux@sympatico.ca>
> To: <pinhole-discussion@pinhole.com>
> Sent: Friday, July 12, 2002 8:05 AM
> Subject: Re: [pinhole-discussion] Why is paper "contrasty"?
>
>
> > William,
> >
> > If you go to the Ilford web site, on the B&W products page,
> > http://www.ilford.com/html/us_english/bw.html
> > you will find hiding somewhere towards the center of the page an Acrobat
> > document called "CONTRAST CONTROL" that deals with your question.
> >
> > Basically, contrast on B&W variable-contrast paper is determined by the
> > amount of blue that hits the paper. Under the enlarger, low contrast is
> > achieved by reducing the amount of blue from the enlarger lamp with a
> > yellow filter.
> >
> > VC paper is calibrated for tungsten, which is yellow in color, compared
> > to daylight which is much more blue. So, it's only natural that paper
> > exposed to "blue" daylight will be more contrasty.
> >
> > To reduce contrast, use a yellow filter similar to the 00 that you would
> > use under the enlarger for minimum contrast: it works very well. It
> > will block some light, compared to not using a filter. But, if you use
> > Ilford paper, its speed is higher at lower contrast grades than at
> > higher contrast. As for me, I use ISO 4 when I shoot paper negatives
> > and it works well for me.
> >
> > Hope this helps,
> >
> > Guy
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "William Erickson" <erickson@hickorytech.net>
> > To: "ppinhole discussion" <pinhole-discussion@pinhole.com>
> > Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 8:45 PM
> > Subject: [pinhole-discussion] Why is paper "contrasty"?
> >
> >
> > > I've thought this through but haven't completely verified it yet, but
> > I
> > > wanted to see what others reaction is. B&W paper used as a negative is
> > said
> > > to be "contrasty". What does this mean? B&W paper has a sensitivity
> > range of
> > > a little more than four stops for any given exposure. Burning and
> > dodging
> > > increase tonal range by shortening or lengthening the exposure. If you
> > meter
> > > a scene that has an eight stop tonal range and give the average
> > exposure for
> > > the scene using a paper negative, you risk having the highlights blown
> > out
> > > because they are more than two stops above average, and shadows go
> > black
> > > because they are more than two stops below average. If the scene has a
> > tonal
> > > range of only four or five stops, your negative won't be contrasty
> > because
> > > all the tones lie within the range of the paper. What, then, to do in
> > > sunshiney scenes, for instance, where the tonal range might be eight
> > or nine
> > > stops? If you place the highlight tones of the main object of your
> > > composition about two stops above average, you will get good tonality
> > in
> > > important spots, no blown out highlights, even though you may get lots
> > of
> > > black shadows. The implication is, much shorter exposure times (read
> > higher
> > > ISO) in bright scenes than in shadowiy scenes (effctively lower ISO),
> > using
> > > the same paper. My first tests suggest that a good ISO for Ilford
> > multigrade
> > > in bright sunlight might be as high as 15, while 5 works well in
> > shaded
> > > scenes. Any comments?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML
> > > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list
> > > Pinhole-Discussion@pinhole.com
> > > unsubscribe or change your account at
> > > http://www.pinholevisions.org/discussion/
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML
> > Pinhole-Discussion mailing list
> > Pinhole-Discussion@pinhole.com
> > unsubscribe or change your account at
> > http://www.pinholevisions.org/discussion/
> >
> >
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML
> Pinhole-Discussion mailing list
> Pinhole-Discussion@pinhole.com
> unsubscribe or change your account at
> http://www.pinholevisions.org/discussion/
>
Received on Sat Jul 13 02:57:30 2002