Please follow the following link for the image I am talking about: http://studentwebs.winona.msus.edu/sharalds5075/misc/mandy.jpg (note the blacks are not that black in the real image).

I am hoping to get some advice on what I could do or could have done to make this a better image. Something about it just doesn't work for me but I'm having a hard time putting my finger on it.

Technically I had a hard time with the photo. I started using really low lights to give the picture a soft feel, I pushed a roll of TRI-X 400 to 3200 and thought I developed it appropriately (as to the instructions on the www.digitaltruth.com website for push processing) but the image came out very flat. The actual image itself has what looks like a brown tint even after washing. The chemical I used were all fresh. Am I just out of luck with a bad negative?

I printed it using all the darkest magenta my enlarger head has and then adding an Ilford #5 filter over that. Even with that I'm still not getting tru blacks.

Looking for comments that are not only technical (printing) but also about composistion and lighting etc. This was for a assignment dealing with "enviromental portraits". The girl in the photo is a fellow coworker of mine at the bike shop we work at. Does this fit the description of an enviromental portrait?

Lot's of questions I know...

Thanks everyone, bw

bw

-- Scott (bike@minister.com), March 26, 2001

Answers

Why did you use Tri-X? Why not try TMax 3200 or Ilford Delta 3200? I've used D3200 rated at 800 and am generally pleased with the results.

You could also try using a tripod if you are worried about film speed. Can't hurt.

As far as I know, the times given on digitaltruth.com are for condensor enlargers. If you are using a cold light or diffusion enlarger you might have to give it more time.

-- David Parmet (david@parmet.net), March 26, 2001.

Blacks are set by exposure, not by setting contrast. Run a test for getting maximum black on a given enlargement. Some tips: - Careful dodging and burning to the various areas, eventually with split grades. - Enhancing Dmax by toning with selenium toner; - More drastic: intensify the negative with are chrome intensifier. - Or: Make a print that is too dark, but ok in contrast. Use potassium ferricyanide to bleach some parts of the print.

-- Marc Leest (mmm@n2photography.com), March 26, 2001.

Low light isn't the same as soft light. A single candle can give about the 'hardest' lighting you can get.
Light needs to come from a broad source to give soft results, and the brightness of the light has no effect on its character. Your example picture shows hard shadows and detailless highlights, with the skin tones having an appearance of being underexposed.
If you were to print this negative to give a good black, then either the midtones would disappear into the shadows, or you'd have to use a harder paper grade, with an even harsher result.
Make life easy on yourself (unless your subject is really shy, or a vampire), and use much more powerful lighting from a broader, more diffuse source, together with slower film.

-- Pete Andrews (p.l.andrews@bham.ac.uk), March 27, 2001.

To get deep shadows don't push the film so far. Microphen, DDX, Diafine or Acufine will get you 2/3-1 stop but I wouldn't go further if you want proper shadow rendition.

-- tim brown (brownt@flash.net), March 28, 2001.