Support our Sponsors, they keep FADU free: AG Photographic The Imaging Warehouse Process Supplies RH Designs Second-hand Darkroom Supplies |
> Graded or VC papers for Pyro-Negs? |
*** Click here for the FADU 2015/2014 Yearbooks *** |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
In that case Les, I will have to try it and see for myself. I will use the stuff as recommended and if necessary experiment with differents dilutions, times, temperatures etc to see what I feel works best for me. If I`m not satisfied, then I can switch back to my regular developer.
Thanks to everyone for their advice and opinions. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
If there were a certain way of achieving negative or print quality I think we would all be using it by now. Equally it is the job of the salesman to convince us that their companies product has worthwhile advantages over others, and may therefore be used exclusively with great benefit.
The challenge is to find a product which work for you; the enduring mystery is that it will almost certainly be something that doesn’t work for me. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Hi,
Many years after the post this has answered a question I was going to ask in a new thread! Thanks 9 years later; a vindication of the endurance of analogue printing and the usefulness of the Advanced Search function! Robert |
#14
|
||||
|
||||
Good Afternoon Robert.
I've been using PMK Pyro as my principal developer for a while now. I moved to it when Paterson chemistry disappeared and I was forced to find something new. I went through the process of calculating EI's and development times for my favourite film at that time (PanF and HP5). All my testing was done on VC papers, specifically Ilford MG Warmtone FB, with the aim of creating negatives which printed at about grade 2. I thought that would give me 'wiggle room' for difficult negs, using harder and softer grades. With hindsight it means my negatives are tailored to that paper, and most 'difficult' negs are a result of me doing something stupid during exposure. Some recent discussion about graded papers prompted me to try Ilford Gallerie again, and I was printing on it on Friday night. It really is a lovely paper, with deep blacks and a restrained gloss finish. I was using grade 3, which seems a good match for the negs I was using (all Fomapan 100). It also tones beautifully in Selenium, more evenly than MG WT. However, I'm not sure it was so much nicer than MG WT that I would go back to graded. VC means fewer grades/sizes in stock and the possibility of split grade printing for challenging images. In short- VC paper is a fine match for stained negs if you process your film to suit the paper you plan to use. You might also want to look up a guy called Steve Sherman. He has a website, and a whole string of YouTube videos. His work is fantastic, and is based on matching stained negs to VC paper. He appears to use staining dev and stand development to produce negatives which are a less dense and lower in contrast than average, but with the shadows moved up from the toe of curve onto the straight line portion. He then uses VC paper to expand the tones in the print to achieve his creative vision of the image. Most certainly, he makes Stained negs and VC paper look like a perfect match. He has a couple of videos showing just how flexible the combination can be, with prints taken from just one negative you would swear were from completely different originals. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Thanks for that!
After discussions with a supportive local photographer I have acknowledged that I need a gentle "up ramp" in 5x4 shooting before Pyro. I intend to try Xtol first and may well stay there. I haven't done any processing for decades. In addition I can process 35 mm in Xtol, might not want to use Pyro for that. The idea of VC seems attractive. My aim is to produce "fine prints" of my own work and to frame up work I like from others: my own little gallery (with input from my wife as Main Curator!). Robert |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Xtol is a good choice. I have certainly found it to be a good all around developer
Mike |
#17
|
||||
|
||||
What I miss are some of the participants in this thread... a lot has changed here in 9 years.
|
#18
|
||||
|
||||
I had a look at some Steve Sherman videos on YouTube. He overexposes, under-develops and then prints on a harder grade to make up for the lack of contrast. That's all fine except he cloaks it all under his "Power of Process" sales spiel to entice you to spend hundreds of dollars on his private tutorial videos. From what I can see, he's not doing anything that hasn't been done before by guys like Bruce Barnbaum who are more generous with their information.
www.theonlinedarkroom.com |
#19
|
||||
|
||||
Hi Brock-
posted a reply earlier which was too rushed, and would have sounded wrong. Steve Sherman- I came across him recently after an album was put up here comparing Multigrade filtration to 'Steve Sherman's green and blue filtration'. Never having heard of him I went looking. First of all, yes; Steve is promoting his ideas under a banner (Power of Process) but why should we mind? I do a job which it took me 30 years to grow into, and if Steve makes a living doing something he loves I wish him well. If the videos keep him solvent I'm happy for him. Next, the meat and two veg; He overexposes, under-develops and then prints on a harder grade to make up for the lack of contrast. I don't quite agree that that's fair. Most of us probably shoot our black and white 1/2 box speed with reduced development. Either we tested for ourselves and ended up there, or took the short-cut and followed the experience of others. Mr Sherman goes a little further; he isn't printing hard to 'make up for lack of contrast', he has reasoned out his position. Generous exposure to push shadows up the curve so they are better separated, dev to control highlight density and avoid the high tones crowding together on the shoulder, and hard printing to keep the highlights luminous. It's not about saving a soft neg, he's exercising real control over tonal range. You are absolutely free to think him a salesman, but when I see someone make better prints than me I do wonder what I might learn from him or her. A few folk on here have had prints from me in the exchanges and I hope they have been satisfied with them, but I consider myself to be no better than a proficient printer. I am not an artist and have insufficient time to dedicate to becoming as good (for example) as Blakemore. I think Sherman's ideas are interesting. I often visit you website, and enjoy your images. I think your style is bold and graphic, which I enjoy very much. However, if I personally could master fine printing I would see that as another useful tool to call on when I needed it, so whilst I do not intend to subscribe to Mr Sherman's video channel I think any proposition which challenges our habitual ways of thinking, and working must be useful. I did notice that on your blog you are going through a quiet spell- we all suffer it. I'm coming out of a drought, and using the print exchanges as a motivation. All the best! |
#20
|
||||
|
||||
I've no problems at all with someone selling a new system but I just don't see this as new or innovative in any way. As I mentioned earlier, Bruce Barnbaum has been advocating the placement of shadows on the straight part of the curve along with reduced development for 20 or 30 years. I doubt Barnbaum was the first to suggest that approach. OK, he's selling something too - his books - but they're £25 as opposed to, say, $300. And the over/under approach is just a small part of his books.
Regardless of what Mr Sherman actually says to justify his "system", it's simply a fact that if you place the shadows on zone four or five and reduce development you will end up with flattish negs. If he didn't print at a harder grade he'd have fifty shades of grey for a print. I don't doubt that Mr Sherman can produce very nice prints but it looks to me as if he's hit upon a personal approach that's good for his subjects and lighting and has decided to dress it up and sell it as a panacea. It's never going to be that for the simple reason that not everyone shoots under his conditions. I know that from personal experience. I've tried the Barnbaum approach and it wasn't for me but I shoot up here in Scotland in a lot of dull weather where even grade five wasn't enough. I see a lot of other salesman-type stuff in his youtube videos that makes me question him. The video extolling the virtues of VC printing where he shows his best effort at a print on graded paper and then the VC version actually had me laughing out loud. As did his insistence that printing using only hard and soft filters isn't really split-grading because...he says so, I suppose. He has to say that because if people thought he was just over-exposing, underdeveloping and split-grading then they wouldn't buy his videos. But I agree that Mr Sherman has the complete right to sell whatever he wants and people can make up their own minds whether it's good value or not. As for my quiet blog, yes I had a spell where I couldn't be bothered picking up a camera but thankfully it's passed. I've got 14 films in a jiffy bag waiting to be processed then I'll get back to printing again. I think sometimes you have to wait for these moods to pass. For me, trying to force myself to take photographs usually just depletes my film stash with nothing really to show for it. Quote:
|
Support our Sponsors, they keep FADU free: AG Photographic The Imaging Warehouse Process Supplies RH Designs Second-hand Darkroom Supplies |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Developing times and thin negs. | vincent | Monochrome Film | 6 | 18th May 2009 10:17 AM |
Printing on Graded Paper Using a Colour Head | Neil Smith | Monochrome printing techniques | 8 | 17th May 2009 11:03 AM |
Graded B&W papers. | Ag-Bromide | Ask Les | 1 | 19th March 2009 01:39 PM |
Resin coated papers versus Fibre-based papers. | Ag-Bromide | Monochrome printing techniques | 23 | 3rd January 2009 04:48 PM |
Who prints on graded papers and why? | Argentum | Monochrome printing techniques | 25 | 29th November 2008 11:16 PM |