# Tonights Print



## gsgary (Nov 9, 2014)

HP5 negative that was stand developed in the fridge, split grade print 16 seconds at  grade 0 and 12 seconds at grade 5

Print looks better


----------



## KenC (Nov 9, 2014)

Cute dog and nice image, even thought the focus is a little behind his face (look at the collar).  It must be a really nice print if this doesn't do it justice.

I've never heard of this method.  How is it different from exposing the whole time at, say grade 2?


----------



## timor (Nov 9, 2014)

Very popular and effective method. Basics:
http://www.camramirez.com/pdf/P1_SplitFilterPrinting.pdf
Split Filter Printing Darkroom Technique | Guide to Film Photography
Split Grade Printing
Especially useful with hard to print negatives, helps to separate tonal values. With normal negatives it's an overkill. The danger is of moving the enlarger during filter exchange.
I thought, that Gary has colour head on his enlarger which gives stepless scale of contrast making split totally unnecessary.


----------



## timor (Nov 9, 2014)

KenC said:


> the focus is a little behind his face (look at the collar).


 Focus is weird. Looks to me, that the right leg (the "longer" one) is also in focus. Maybe doggy moved it's head ?


----------



## gsgary (Nov 10, 2014)

timor said:


> KenC said:
> 
> 
> > the focus is a little behind his face (look at the collar).
> ...


Yes I shot it wide open, there is quite a difference between the print I did at grade 5 and this I did at grade 0 for 16 seconds and grade 5 at for 12 seconds it has more pop


----------



## timor (Nov 10, 2014)

gsgary said:


> there is quite a difference between the print I did at grade 5 and this I did at grade 0 for 16 seconds and grade 5 at for 12 seconds it has more pop


No wonder. Grade 5 is very high contrast. However, before you go into trouble of split filtering try #2 to #3. If the print then has this "pop" split filtering will not get you anything better. Good print on grade 2 is usually a proof of good exposure and development. For the beginning of wet printing stick with one brand and type of paper and one paper developer until you understand by heart the relation between exposure of your favorite film, development and resulting print. Each type of paper has different characteristics of sensitivity and tonal scale which may frustrate you.


----------



## gsgary (Nov 10, 2014)

Trouble is I love the high contrast of Don McCullin


----------



## bribrius (Nov 10, 2014)

I don't understand have the back and forth. But hey, cool photo. focus or something might be off but it is still kind of cool.


----------



## gsgary (Nov 10, 2014)

bribrius said:


> I don't understand have the back and forth. But hey, cool photo. focus or something might be off but it is still kind of cool.


It was shot at F1.5 so dof is thin


----------



## timor (Nov 10, 2014)

gsgary said:


> Trouble is I love the high contrast of Don McCullin


To emulate that you gonna have to start with your negative processing. Remember, films he was using are no more. Even Eastman Double X, despite theoretically unchanged since creation is not the same film. I figure for that sort of look you gonna have to start with much lower contrast negatives than from Rodinal to be able to choose your point of higher contrast by eliminating zones 7 and 8 and having zones below that very richly represented. This is not much different from Eugene Smith photography. (Hm... same times, same job, similar look ... just coincident ?)


----------



## gsgary (Nov 10, 2014)

Don used Tri X, leave it with me I'll get the look I want


----------



## timor (Nov 10, 2014)

You can't get TriX anymore, was discontinued some 30 years ago. In that place we have now TX, much more modern film. Shoot rather HP5.
O yes, I gonna leave it with you (like there is other choice ) and let talk, after you get through first 1000 prints.


----------

