Wow wow , you are a master! Your video is amazing! I am learning darkroom printing. I have done a few print now. A lot to learn. Thank you for sharing this.
Fantastic! I've not had a darkroom for many, many years now, but in the latter years of my printing I routinely did this. I often printed on a grade harder, maybe a 2 or 3 instead of a 1 or 2 , pre-flashed, and that got the slightly punchier effect I wanted - without blown out highlights
This is dope. I love learning about printing in the darkroom. I feel that all the videos out there cover the basics. You should make more videos of different techniques.
That‘s an excellent tip. I actually was printing today and had that problem. I exposed the white part with f2.4 and the rest with f8 so I finally did manage to get some detail in the white area of the print. But this would have helped a lot. So I guess I need to get some white acrylic. Very useful, thanks
Excellent summary of the flashing topic. I have use this very rarely as a contrast reduction device. You probably spent hours in the darkroom which have been left on the edit room floor.
Very informative video. Thanks for the information. I've tried pre-flashing before with very limited success. This has given me a better way to go about it. Whenever I want to learn something new on working in the darkroom, your videos along with those Lina Bessanova and Roger from "Shoot Like A Boss" are my favorite.
Excellent description of the process. I am having a problem with one image at the moment, and I think this will solve the problem. I have also preflashed 4X5 direct positive paper in the field to reduce long exposure times and control the image. Great video, Thanks.
This is a good instructional video, much needed. I didn't realize until near the end that you were flashing with the negative in the enlarger but you were basing your flash time on the window highlight and not the rest of the print. Also, I were flashing at the closed down aperture? No wonder the print turned out lower in contrast. If you have a print with highlights in different areas of the print, thing are going to get difficult to flash those. Not a perfect world.
Having a fixed distance flashing unit really helps, that way once you know the flash time for the paper it can be reused on any print. Also sometimes its useful to flash blue light to help shadows develop quicker and actually increase contrast.
I have a spare color head enlarger that I could use for pre-flashing. If I understand your comment correctly, are you suggesting that I could dial up just the blue light to control the contrast when using the pre-flash technique?
Absolutely great video and great explanation! Also, I'm really glad to see that this video does not have a single dislike. Which is very rare I feel. Congrats, well deserved!
I've seen this technique of pre-flashing used in regards to exposing the film, I think in situations that are high contrast and you're trying to maintain details in the shadows while getting the correct exposure for the highlights (not sure if that's right). Any chance you could demonstrate this or discuss it? Love your channel.
I have had really good luck with Alan Ross's selective masking techniques. Some tracing paper and a couple of colored pencils is all you need to get started. You can cut out sections of the paper to add density to windows and such. That would make a good video for you too.
If you can't find it in architectural drafting supply store, see if Lee filters has something equivalent in there commercial filter lines. Get it now before the UK leaves the EU!
Hi, well explained. Especially the milky glass thing is new to me. Another question: How do you think will a filtered pre-flash (yellow or magenta) have an influence on multigrade paper?
Since the highlights are affected most, it doesn’t really matter if you use a 00 or 2 filter during pre-exposure. A 5 would be mostly useless since it barely exposes the highlights anyway.
Interesting video. However, it seems to me that the density of the negative would affect the length of time you would preflash. For instance, if your negative is thin then more light would pass through to the diffuser thus reducing the flash time. If that is the case, you would want to run a test with each negative you print and not just a test of the paper you are using. I suppose, this is where a second light source would come in very handy. Am I missing something here? Is it best to factor the density of the negative in or will it really even make that much difference?
The pre flash is just getting the paper to the threshold of exposure so all the printing time goes into exposing the highlights. If your negative highlights aren’t overly dense then you probably won’t need to pre flash at all.
fantastic explanation. thank you! I'm just still curious to know if there are differences in the final contrast of the image if the (unmasked) pre-flash is made without filter (equivalent to filter 2), with filter 00 or with filter 5. I'm asking because some time ago I've seen a video of Tim Rudman using the pre-flash only with yellow light (the video name is "Iceland, an uneasy calm"). do you have any thoughts or print results about that?
Thanks a million for all your incredibly insightful videos. I've been wondering about the following: What would be the difference between a) A straight medium contrast print without filtration or with say filter 1 1/2. b) Preflashed paper (flashed till its very ceiling just so it overcomes the inertia but doesn't show tone just like you present in the video) + say a grade 5 filter exposure Of couse I'm thinking an average neg plus the filtration value & the preflashing strength is just an assumption/approximation. Have you ever tried to compare those two? Given that we achieve similar results (contrast & exposure wise), I'm wondering whether the tonal qualities will differ. I'm dying to know! Might try it myself but I'm wondering if you'd ever made such comparison. Greetings from Poland!
Hey, thanks for one more excellent video. I have a question: can the same thing be achieved using the split grade printing method and burning that area (window) with a grade 0 filter?
@@TheNakedPhotographer well, for a slightly different take, what about the effects of preflash on split grade printing? On the one hand, when doing test strips I might catch any influence preflash would have on my exposure times both for 0 (00) and 5, but then, would it prohibit me from getting proper Grade 5 exposure? Another thing I would love to see your take on is using Ortho film to (unsharp) masking for contrast control (referring here to the late Barry Thornton). Thanks you for the good demonstration, R.
Great Video! But i am unsure if I understand right. Did you preflash with negative in the carrier and the white acrylic is averaging the light? Or is the negative holder empty?
Yes, the white acrylic evens out the light from the negative in place to create a smooth even preflashing tone. If I removed the negative from the enlarger, the acrylic wouldn’t be necessary, though it makes it easier when using a condenser enlarger either way.
Well done as always...thank you. If I did not want to mask off the area to be pre-flashed, is it plausible to pre flash the highlight test strip? For example, first determine the longest exposure time that does not create density. Then, after pre-flashing the highlight test strip to that determined exposure time, expose for highlights using CF 00, or CF 0. I understand that if doing split grade the CF 5 exposure time would be immaterially affected by the pre-flash. Is there anything special about that 1/8" acrylic sheet? Hopefully, the acrylic is generic from a hardware store like Home depot?
Hi, love your channel btw. So much invaluable knowledge you are sharing! I just tried this method and although it solved my problem in a very difficult area i could not accurately burn, it left my print very soft, as if the grain had been diffused. Any idea how i may have screwed this up?
Your preflash may have been just a touch too long. It’s also possible you enlarger moved (vibration) or focus slipped and caused it to be slightly out of focus
@@TheNakedPhotographer ive just done individual strip to be 100% sure as you did here and made sure my focus was right even made an additional test without the acrylic right after... all the pf tests are coming out noticeably soft. Im not sure how to move forward! Any thoughts?
Are you printing with your aperture wide open? If the grain seems less than sharp, the only things I can think of that would cause it is vibration or the aperture being too big (poor resolution) or too small (diffraction). There is a remote chance it could be safelight fog from the paper being out too long before developing.
@@TheNakedPhotographer the pf is done at 2.8 for 4sec but the printing is at 5.6. The image appears to be hazy and fogged but ive done the test again and im certain the 4s is below threshold. Pretty lost on how yo move forward, ill have to revisit this unless theres a clear solution. Thanks so much for your help !
Contrast loss can be explained as paper DR loss when pre-flashing. The paper is less able to show detail in the highlights. I think the explanation of the inertia to be overcome is not a good one, but it is just my opinion. :)
I would have thought that, by pre flashing, you would not have to expose your original timings.... Otherwise your original tones would be darker? How does this work?
I’ll try to explain this without being confusing. If we think of paper white with preflashing as “1” exposure unit and each stop of exposure darker doubles, so one stop darker from white is “2”, one stop darker is “4” and so on: 8,16, 32, 64, 128, 256, and 512 units. The “1” unit from preflashing has a significant effect on the very light gray because it raises the amount of exposure from “2” units to “3”, the next stop darker is affected, though not as much because it moved from “4” to “5” units, only 20% more. But the darkest areas that received “256” units now have “257”, barely any change at all at a 0.4% increase in density. So whites are affected most and blacks none at all. That is why the print loses contrast without being darker overall.
Since pre-flashing would bring the paper close to the point of forming an image, would it also reduce the "safe" amount of time available to work under a safelight? Since this seems quite similar to the safelight testing procedure.
Would you use exactly the same technique when pre-flashing in color process RA-4 for color prints contrast reduction? Or it depends on any particular color filter (in this case wichone and what amount?)? Thanks for such a great channel!!!
It’s more complicated because you have to put a blank negative into the enlarger for the orange color, then you balance the color head to provide a neutral gray print. Make the pre flash exposure, then put your negative back in the enlarger and put your color head back to the correct filtration to print.
The Naked Photographer Thanks so much!! Are you planning to create a new video based on this issue? And just another question, is there any way to control saturation in RA-4 process for color prints?? A video on that technique (If exists) would be also amazing!!! Thanks so much for your help as this is definitely the best video tutorials channel on color printing and B&W on RU-vid!!! Keep the great job!!
I have heard from a well known printer that RC variable contrast papers are impossible to pre-flash. Is this true? The paper you were using looked like RC paper to me. Can you explain.
@@TheNakedPhotographer I have a 2nd enlarger that has attenuators in a color head that I can try...if that is not enough I can try a rheostat. Will let you know if that works.
The acrylic diffuses the light as well as blocks it, so if you have a diffusion head the ND is fine. If your head is a condenser head, you need to diffuse it for flashing.
