Ilford alludes oh-so-briefly to using multiple contrast filters in making a single print in its tech sheet for MGD IV RC variable papers. Anyone have a clue what this is?

-- M. Wylie (mwylie@earthlink.net), December 12, 2001

Answers

With multiple filtration one can alter locally, on the print, contrast. This is not (straight forward anyway) possible with graded papers. Work for Agfa and/or FB VC papers too.

-- Marc Leest (mmm@n2photography.com), December 12, 2001.

For instance: Suppose you are printing a landscape scene and are using a #2 filter. You decide that the sky needs to be burned in and you want something more dramatic, before burning in, replace the #2 filter with perhaps a #4 or #5, then burn in. This is multiple contrast printing. As Marc states, you are controlling local areas of contrast in the print by using different filters on the same print.

-- Arden Howell (serenisea@aol.com), December 12, 2001.

Thank you. I wasn't sure if one could use this technique in a simple burn and/or dodge or if it was limited to more complex techniques such as masking.

Much obliged.

-- M. Wylie (mwylie@earthlink.net), December 13, 2001.

I've recently been experimenting with multiple filter printing using only grades 0 and 4 filters. The concept is simple and remarkably controllable. You make two seperate exposures on the paper. One exposure is done with the #0 filter, for highlight detail, and the other is done with the #4 filter for the blacks. Midtones fall right into place. Looking at a test strip, one can learn to judge adjustments, ie. if the highlights look too gray, back off the #0 exposure time. Conversely, need more density in the blacks increase the #4 exposure time. Highlights can be dogded very easily during the #0 exposure time without reducing(dodging) the blacks.

I'd heard about this method, but was reluctant to try it, after twelve years of using a full filter set, or the wide range of a dichroic head. Now I rarely print any other way.

-- Paul Swenson (paulphoto@humboldt1.com), December 13, 2001.

A small suggestion here concerning split filtering that you might want to take into consideration. If you were to make two seperate prints one on say a one grade and a second on a 4 grade, making the "best" print you could using these two filters. Then compare the difference in the accutance of the grain of the two prints. You would likely find that there is a very different look and feel to the grain in these two prints. The one grade would have a much "softer" look than the four grade and the four "sharper". Not to say that the technique of selective contrast is not helpful with problem negatives, only that this should be a consideration when using this technique. Also - David Vestal published some tests awhile back that he claims shows that there is very little, to no difference, in using two filters for the overall exposure of a print to finding the filter that the negative is asking for. In my own experience I have also found this to be true.

-- James Megargee (jmegargee@nyc.rr.com), December 14, 2001.

There was a related topic several weeks ago: http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=006o3q

Please note the link to 2 Chris Woodhouse's articles about split filter printing, pointed out by N Dhananjay.

-- Andrey Vorobyov (AndreyVorobyov@yahoo.com), December 14, 2001.

Regarding James' comments on the end result being virtually the same regarding the use of split or single filter printing I agree to a point. Mainly I find the split filter technique more controllable, at least for the way my mind works. That is I find I can more accurately predict the changes in a test strip based on adjusting the two seperate filters, where as when I'm printing with a filter set, even now after twelve years of printing,I'm never quite sure if a half grade increase is going to be too much or too little. And for my finnicky nature, often 1/2 grade increments are too large. With the two filter system I can make unlimited adjustments. And finally I can dodge highlights more easily without affecting my blacks, sometimes eliminating or reducing doging halos.

I'm certainly not saying everyone should print this way. The end result is what counts regardless of how you get there and I have respect for all the printers who frequent this forum and their techniques. This is just more information for the pot.

-- Paul Swenson (paulphoto@humboldt1.com), December 14, 2001.

Paul I understand your response that the split filtering offers a more subtle control of "in between" contrast. And to take this issue of subtle contrast control a bit further - myself I rely on the chemistry rather than the filtration to get to that point. One rather overlooked technique in printing I find is agitation in the developer to control contrast instead of filter manipulation. Meaning using a standard agitation method for each print and then increasing or decreasing that method, in combination w/ increasing developer time, to get "in between" the established contrast. Again, more to add to that pot.

-- James Megargee (jmegargee@nyc.rr.com), December 15, 2001.

Thanks James, excellent point, and something I will give more attention to in the future.

-- Paul Swenson (paulphoto@humboldt1.com), December 15, 2001.