Hi Shel
I forgot to mention, that I think that by just reducing dev. time, as
suggested, you will just get a weaker negative, not more "colour" in the
shadows (on the contrary).
The cat pictures are indeed very difficut, as for most back lit scenes, the
contast in the main subject tends to be rather low (often considered somehow
charming). It seems Tom wants both - detailed, printable higlights
behind/above the cat as well as god contrast and a lot of tones, drawing the
fur of the the cat. He might use a white screen (fill in) to brighten the
subject next time. He might also consider printing the diffent parts of the
picture using diffenrent multigrade filters. It can be done. "Fine printers"
do this alot, so I've read. Buttom line is, that a "perfect" negative
allways seems to be the best way to get great prints, isn't it?
Jens
Jens Bladt wrote:
> I can't help wondering if your problem lies in developing, rather than
> printing. Your cat pictures have very high contast. One way of dealing
with
> this is to stop development halfway through. Exchange the developer with
> plain water for a few minutes. Then exchange the water with thr developer
> again and proceed as if nothing has happened. This procedure will reduce
the
> contrast and make printing easy (normal).
Hi, Jens ...
I've never heard of such a technique, and I'd be concerned that
it wouldn't be repeatable. A better approach would be to just
cut back on development time, adjust the agitation, or a
combination of both. What's the advantage of your technique?
Where'd you learn it?
--
Shel Belinkoff
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
