Great guide to split grade printing... I have to admit my method is pretty similar to yours except i start with grade 5, get my shadow detail sorted, then work the highlights on grade 0 and let the mid tones fall where they may, this gives a nice contrasty print. Overall I print everything split grade now, the results are better and far easier to produce as the reduction in dodge and burn saves so much time.
Excellent video as always. Only suggestion I can think of that may help make them a bit clearer, but require a bit more editing and whatnot, would be to do high res scans of the prints when you're talking about contrast and exposure results. It can be a bit hard to see the subtle impact of things when it is just held in front of a camera from a bit of a distance. Keep up the great work.
Interesting video! Decided to try this technique of split grade. Then I remembered “Shoot Film Like a Boss” who have a grate video on F-stop printing developed by Gene Nocon. Got the book after seeing that video (recommended). Anyway after doing a landscape and a portrait oriented 35mm test print I thought of something: combined F-stop printing with split grade. I exposed the entire paper with a Ilford 0 filter as you showed but for 5, 10, 20 and 40 seconds so there is one F-stop between each step. But I did that horizontally. Then I did the same thing with a Ilford 5 filter but vertically. So when I developed the print I got a 4x4 grid pattern with 16 different F-stop combinations of 0 and 5 filter combinations. From 5sec 0 +5sec 5 to 40sec 0 + 40sec 5. So I got the 0filter on the X-axis and 5filter on the Y-axis. Anyway, just a small thing I thought to chare. Again really cool video!
Fantastic video. I personally use the colour head, as I like the fact I need only adjust the filter values as opposed to getting the filters out of their box and keeping them clean. Trick is to experiment often to see what works. Alasdair
Good video. Personally I follow LeytonC‘s method. What this really makes it powerful is in combination with f-stop printing along Gene Nocon‘s methid. That way I can precisely dial in what level of density I get in highlights dark tones and specific parts of the image. Intro f-stop printing should follow in your excellent series! R.
Great video! I always dread opening up one of your videos, because of that half naked pose... but the content is worth the dread. You are a great teacher! Thank you ! )))
Hi from England again. I have seen all your videos and do recall that the answer to my question is somewhere on your channel but I can't find it. I used to print colour and b&w professionally for a few years early 2000. Now I am going back to hand printing in my own practice and I have recently bought a De Vere 504 with a colour head. I have never printed b&w with a colour head before so I am not confident with the CMYK dials on the head. I will use Ilford MG filters 0-5. I presume I should just exclude any CMYK filtration on the colour head when using the MG filters. Many thanks in advance, Lowe H Seger
I have watched this video more then a few times but things finally clicked ( I think) this last watch through can't wait to get back to the darkroom and give it ago.
Thanks for sharing your tecnique, it seems simple and effective. One of these days I want to give a try to your method: sometimes my prints come flat even at 4 or 5 grade with my diffuser enlarger and color head. Two questions: does your method give different results using the filtration of the color head instead the Ilford gelatin filters ? Have you ever made a final comparison with the same image printed both with split grading sistem and the classic way ? Congratulations for you darkroom, it looks coozy. Ciao.
I have not compared the two methods. I may make a video about it in the future. My upcoming video shows some new changes to the darkroom, mostly the wall opposite the sink.
Your DeVere enlarger has a colour head. Why wouldn't you just print with yellow and magenta through your collar head, same result and you'll probably use less test strips?
Good video, I am just now starting to try this, very helpful. I was a bit surprised to see you shooting through flexible contrast filters. Seems like they belong above the negative?
Let's say, using this technique, that you had a negative with some totally blown highlights. I'd assume, you'd look for detail or tone in the highlights that have them, establish your 0 filter exposure from that, then make a test adding the 5 filter at various increments. So, how might you add some tone to the blown areas? Preflash the paper?
I use the RH Designs Analyzer Pro and haven't really felt the need to do split grade printing with it (the Analyzer isn't really designed for split grade). I will, of course, burn areas of a print using different grades - that's a form of 'split grade' but not in the sense shown in this video where the entire print is exposed using two different grades. However, there are times when I think that split grade would be beneficial. For example, I'm currently printing a landscape photo that contains trees that cross the horizon line. Burning the sky using traditional methods unacceptably darkens the tops of the trees, leaving a discontinuity in tone between the tree tops and trunk. Another option is to pre-flash the paper so that the sky takes on sufficient density during the primary exposure and doesn't require burning. But I haven't had good results from pre-flashing in the past. Instead, I'm going to try and split grade print the image using the technique shown here. I think this method should be a good solution to this printing problem. Greg, it would be great to see a follow-up video that motivates the need for split grade printing and shows some situations in which it is particularly beneficial. I know some people who split grade every print they make, but I tend to think it's unnecessarily complex in situations that don't require it.
Hi there. Ive been printing a lot of color the last year using your good videos among others and its been working great. Recently ive startede doing bw and i love it. I use the ilford under the lens filters for splitgrade an so on and it is also working great. What i still dont get is this: i shot a photo on my olympus mju 1 with the kodak trix 400. I did a 50x40 split grade print.. it was like 21 sek filter 1 and 22 sek filter 5 at f11 . I think it looks great getting what see as really white and deep black. So in my holliday now i shot a new 35 mm photo on a new camera - a yashica 5t and i thought that now it was a piece of cake using my notes from the photo mentioned above - but i all came down to an exposure on filter 1 at 25 sek and 45 sek at filter 5 ( a lot more than on print same size mentioned above) . So my questio is: why such a huge difference ? ( i did use a other 50 mm enlarger lens - the first one a rodagon 50 2.8 and the other a durst neonon50 2.8) otherwise i think its just about same conditions - but ofcourse two different photos/negatives.
The ratio may stay the same, but the times will change based on the inverse square law of light. Larger sizes will need longer print times and smaller sizes will need less.
@@TheNakedPhotographer ok. That makes sense…that was two big questions cleared of my mind . Thanks for that. 😊 what i thought i colud use my notes for was to skip the test print but thats a no go 😀
Great method! I just wonder how do you calculate the nine and half second with filter 0. Once you know your right exposure for highlight, do you take half second from the exposure time? Please advice!
What about dry-down for the unglazed glossy paper? 2.5% adjustment needed? Also you’re using HEAPS of paper, especially to make that larger very nice print. in fact all split-grade printing seems to demand the use of more time and paper (and chems). Have you checked out the enLARGE app on the Apple AppStore, to save paper, time and chems?
I’ve never heard of that app, but my printing in real life vs. a video demonstration is different. I don’t go through all the same steps when I really print because I know my negatives and what contrast I develop them to. But since these videos are intended to be educational, I walk through every single step. As for dry down, every type of paper is different, so test your own.
I just checked out that app. $23 is way too high for basically a notebook and a calculator. Especially for calculating matching prints at different sizes. A couple test strips and a post it note would give me the same information at much less than $23. Same with dry down. Compare a wet test strip that matches a dry one and write the time difference down (as a percentage) on your timer. Done. It seems like you have to make comparison prints anyway to calibrate the app, so why use the app at all?
The Naked Photographer You only make the calibration once for the enlarger rig, not for every different print. The app functions like a super-calculator, you couldn’t/wouldn’t want to try doing what it does with a simple calculator. Not sure where the post-it note fits in? Anyway, good video, I know how much work goes into it!
Thank you so much for this video! As a beginner, i have looped this video over 10 times. Just one little question about 0 filter, why you choose 10 second, not 16 second? As the test result, the stone's highlight parts has more tone in 16sec.
The Naked Photographer thank for your quick reply！ by the way is there necessary to calculate 5 filter ‘s effect to highlight parts ‘s detail when I use the filter 0?
@@TheNakedPhotographer I would have liked to have seen the image that led you to select 9.5 seconds. I feel like this leaves me guessing a little about what was going on. You talked at 4:20 about not being sure if you could judge with the two strips and were concerned about assessing contrast vs density. Showing us the dried down image at that point would have really helped.
hi...I imagine some negatives require special development considerations that may push your skill to the next level. Otherwise, why do it? For less demanding negatives, which is your preferred technique of choice? For example, split grade printing, single filter with or without dodging and burning, or no filter with or without dodging and burning? If you have the time, please reply
Dodging and burning isn’t a preference, it’s a necessary part of printing regardless of your choice of contrast control. I typically use my color head to control contrast for my prints.
Hi -thanks for the video, I'm familiar with the split grade printing with the filters, but how do you use the colour head to achieve this? Do you use the magenta and yellow wheels simultaneously?Or do you go through the same process with each one? Could you make a video about this?
Ilford has excellent guidelines for using color heads to control contrast. You can use two methods, either use the yellow alone to lower contrast and the magenta to raise it, or use them simultaneously to control contrast. Because the filters are adjustable between grades, split filter is not necessary. You can adjust the dials after your main exposure for burning specific areas, but no need to change for separate high and low contrast like split grade printing.
The Naked Photographer Thanks for the reply. I’ll have a look at the Ilford website. Interestingly I haven’t found any you tube videos about this. Your videos are refreshingly knowledgable !
Hi, could you tell something about choosing the f-stop? Like, what f-stop would be more appropriate when printing with 0 filter or 2,4,5 filter? I'm asking because when I do split grade printing, the times are quite similar when I use 2 grade or even 4 grade. I usually use f-stop 8. I don't know if I'm doing something wrong or what. Thanks.
The aperture is going to affect print sharpness as well as make your time longer or shorter. It is best to leave it at one setting while printing, and f/8 is a good choice for maximum sharpness. More open it doesn’t reach its sharpness potential, more closed it starts causing diffraction. As far as your equal print times are concerned, that just means your negatives print best with a medium contrast range equal to a 2 filter. Nothing to be concerned about.
@@TheNakedPhotographer LOL!!! Good enough for me Greg!! LOL I have a metric crap-load of Microdol X I acquired . . . when my stash of D-76 runs out . . ;)
Hi...Do you think there is any validity to this method? Use 2" x 2" squares, split grade test for highlights and shadow areas that matter most to the image. 1) Using CF 0, expose for the highlight that matters most in the image with increments of varying times using several separate 2" x 2" squares. Select the best exposure time for the highlight that matters most in the image. 2) Pre flash several 2" x 2" squares with CF 0 at selected exposure time from 1 above, then 3) Using pre flashed squares from 2 above and CF 5, expose for the shadow that matters most to the image with increments of varying times using several separate pre flashed 2" x 2" squares. Select the best exposure time for the shadows. 4) make full size print by first exposing paper to CF 0 at selected time in 1 above, then exposing paper to CF 5 at selected time in 3 above. All of this is as opposed to test strips, which may cover too much area of the image, with the exposure time too light, or too dark being discarded when it may be that the subject area of that section of test strip is to carry the most weight to the final image. In other words, the area that is selected for best exposure may be at the expense of the area of the image that mattered most though discarded because it was in the too light, or too dark area of the test strip. Thoughts?
The only difference I see between your description and what I did for this video is that you are making test prints of the same portion of the image and I did a traditional test strip. Both methods are valid and you should use the one that helps you make your best prints.
@@TheNakedPhotographer makes sense...I mention the method as I've been experimenting with it, and to me, the best part of the image in your photograph was the log, and not the rock that received so much attention. It may be that if the focus was shifted to the log, then the rock may have been poorly developed. Hard to say
Sorry but I need to call you out on one glaring error you made. At approximately 05.30 you state that you used the #5 filter @ increments of 5secs however you previously stated it was at 3sec increments. You need to reshoot this video correctly. Peace
Hi there. Im trying desperatly to use my durst m605 colorhead making b&w prints. This is what i do: setting built in filters to 0 and put a ilford 2.5 filter under the lens. 2, 4, 6, 8 , 10 sec. At f11 For test printing but when i develop its either blank or very very littel of the image has come on to the paper very faint. I have new dev, fixer and stop bath. What the heck am i doing wrong? :) its like the paper dosent get enough light or something ( id like to do a 30x40 print)...maybe i need to do a test strip with 10 sec increments?...funny i didnt use that long time when making ra4 prints from 35 mm
Try the lens wide open at its biggest aperture just to see if it prints darker. F/11 is very high aperture for a 35mm. I typically close the lens down 2 stops from its brightest, so an f/2.8 lens will get closed down to f/5.6.
Ok thanks. Actually i just set it to f4 and 3 sec increments 5 steps...so 15 sec at the most...still very pale allmost nothing. Tommorrow illtry 10 sec increments in 5 steps at 5.6. How does that sound?
Give it a try. I looked up the manual for your enlarger and it states your bulb should be a 100w halogen bulb. Do you have the right wattage in there? Is it old and need replacing?
