Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/01/26
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
- ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01BE495E.FEE92BC0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Dear KT,
Interesting post. I have done a little split filter printing, but am not =
an expert. You mention changing the characteristic curve of the paper. =
That is what the people I learned about technique from in a class taught =
by Laura Litinski claimed was the value of the technique. The total =
contrast range of the print is not greater, but the gradiation range is =
better at each end of the print's tonal range. Some one with great =
knowledge on the point may comment.=20
I agree with your comment that most prints can be made quite nicely on a =
single grade paper. The one print I tried using the split filter method =
was taken at Acoma Pubelo on a bright, contrasty. It did seem that split =
filter printing allowed hint of detail in a large, dark shadow area, but =
without loosing the brightest areas of the scene. However, it is a lot =
of bother for me because I don't have a color head.=20
Cheers,=20
Joe Stephenson
[cut]
=20
Printing, without dodging or burning in two exposures at a different =
contrast levels, will only give you a contrast # something in between =
the two. Each VC filter allows green and blue light to pass through in =
varying amounts. It really doesn't matter whether the blue light arrives =
in one exposure, and then the green, or the blue/green light is =
delivered all at once. The end result would be the same. I don't think =
the two exposure printing without masking can achieve tonal =
distributions that aren't achievable with a single exposure under the =
appropriate filtration. Of course, burning and dodging with different =
filters is a very powerful method of modifying images, but, there is no =
magic can be worked by simple split filtering. Such a result would have =
to come from changing the curvature of the characteristic of the =
emulsion and that is fixed by the emulsion itself.
I truly belive that mostly split printing proponents see something =
there for their efforts. Like so many Leica things, it's just an issue =
of personal preference, on which reasonable minds can and do disagree.
For further reading, I recommend the article "Variable Contrast =
Papers Revealed", by Phil Davis in Photo Techniques, Sept-Oct 1994.=20
=20
KT
- ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01BE495E.FEE92BC0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META content=3Dtext/html;charset=3Diso-8859-1 =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D'"MSHTML 4.72.3110.7"' name=3DGENERATOR>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman">Dear KT,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman">Interesting post. I have done a =
little split=20
filter printing, but am not an expert. You mention changing the =
characteristic=20
curve of the paper. That is what the people I learned about technique =
from in a=20
class taught by Laura Litinski claimed was the value of the technique. =
The total=20
contrast range of the print is not greater, but the gradiation range is =
better=20
at each end of the print's tonal range. Some one with great knowledge on =
the=20
point may comment. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman">I agree with your comment that most =
prints can=20
be made quite nicely on a single grade paper. The one print I tried =
using the=20
split filter method was taken at Acoma Pubelo on a bright, contrasty. It =
did=20
seem that split filter printing allowed hint of detail in a large, dark =
shadow=20
area, but without loosing the brightest areas of the scene. However, it =
is a lot=20
of bother for me because I don't have a color head. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman">Cheers, </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman">Joe Stephenson</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 solid 2px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-LEFT: =
5px">[cut]<BR><BR>Printing,=20
without dodging or burning in two exposures at a different contrast =
levels,=20
will only give you a contrast # something in between the two. Each =
VC filter=20
allows green and blue light to pass through in varying amounts. It =
really=20
doesn't matter whether the blue light arrives in one exposure, and =
then the=20
green, or the blue/green light is delivered all at once. The end =
result=20
would be the same. I don't think the two exposure printing without =
masking=20
can achieve tonal distributions that aren't achievable with a single =
exposure under the appropriate filtration. Of course, burning and =
dodging=20
with different filters is a very powerful method of modifying =
images, but,=20
there is no magic can be worked by simple split filtering. Such a =
result=20
would have to come from changing the curvature of the characteristic =
of the=20
emulsion and that is fixed by the emulsion itself.<BR>I truly belive =
that=20
mostly split printing proponents see something there for their =
efforts. Like=20
so many Leica things, it's just an issue of personal preference, on =
which=20
reasonable minds can and do disagree.<BR>For further reading, I =
recommend=20
the article "Variable Contrast Papers Revealed", by Phil =
Davis in=20
Photo Techniques, Sept-Oct 1994. =
<BR><BR>KT<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
- ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01BE495E.FEE92BC0--