What is Tonal Range?

Could anyone explain this concept, please? Is it something I should

aim for? How can you talk about it? How do you see it? What value

or importance does it have when shooting or judging a photograph?

 

BTW, I ran a search before posting this question.

 

If the object of my curiosity is waaaay to basic, sorry, but if I want

to learn, I have to ask questions.

 

Thanks a big lot for your replies!!!

http://www.lightdreams.50megs.com/contrast%20tonal.html

My concept of tonal range is based on black and white photography. To me, it means a wide range of and a clear separation of grey tones between pure white and total black.

Francisco: The aticle is a good one. Thanks, Eric. Tonal range has two meanings in B&W photography: one is the physical properties of the medium. That is, how wide a range of tones can the film or the printing paper "see" and reproduce; second refers to the tonal range or quality of the picture itself. Are the tones separated and shown in the final product, etc.

 

So when someone says "that picture had good tones or good tonal range" they are talking about the way the photo looks, compared to the original, or maybe just as a picture.

 

When someone talks about film and uses the phrase tonal range, they are referring to the ability of the film to pick up different tones. For example you might say: "Tri X has good tonal range but is a little too contrasty; I like HP 4 for outdoor scenes, same tonal range but less contrasty ..."

 

You can affect the tonal range in the final picture by either altering the exposure/development time, or in the printing of the negative, by choice of paper.

 

If you meter a scene and find that the difference between the darkest and lightest part of the scene is 3 stops or less (8:1) almost all film and paper will easily work. If it gets beyond 3 stops, you have to start thinking about altering the exposure to make sure the important parts of the scene are properly reproduced.

<a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/1624500&size=lg" >This</a> photo has beautiful, beautiful tonality (hope you don't mind my singling you out, Andy). Do read what some of the knowledgable folks here have to say and whatever articles they link to, but sometimes examples can speak louder than words. It also helps to look at lots of photographs, good and bad (that shouldn't be too hard), to train your eye technically (not to mention aesthetically).

<a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/1142100&size=lg">Here</a> is a good example of great tonal separation that happens to come to mind.

<P>

But then again sometimes <a href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo.tcl?photo_id=2260699">contrast</a>

is good too.

Francisco,

 

Can you order from Amazon? (don't know if you're in Colombia or the US) If so, please let me recommend <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0715305727/qid=1083890757/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/002-2280031-7805632?v=glance&s=books&n=507846">The Black and White Handbook: The Ultimate Guide to Monochrome Techniques</a>, by <a href="http://www.photo.net/shared/community-member.tcl?user_id=777437">Roger Hicks</a> and Frances Schulz. A superb explanation on how/what/why B&W.

Also take a look at <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0240803434/002-2280031-7805632?v=glance">Beyond the Zone System</a> by Phil Davies. BTW, this one was translated to Spanish. The title is "Más allá del Sistema de Zonas. I have this one, autographed, as a gift from the author, another good cyberfriend from ole good Compuserve Photoforum. It's heady reading, best reserved for darkroom honchos, but explains a lot of things that are difficult to understand from lighter readings.

Good tonal range in a final print or scan is generally the result of having a full range of black to white values with a distinctive yet balanced transition range. Too many middle values result in an image that looks dull, while too many values on the ends makes an image look too contrasty.

 

Seems strange that the transition of conventional B/W photography the past 50 years has been from fairly strong and dynamic contrast in images to increasingly murky and dull images as technology improved in those materials. With color, the trend is just the opposite. Not sure if I'll ever get that one.

Dear Francisco,

 

Tonal range is no more than the range of greys in a picture, from the whitest white the paper can manage to the blackest black. It is easily measured with a densitometer and equates to a log range of about 2.1 or 2.2 for most papers.

 

Tonality is the subtlety with which the tonal range is handled by the photographer and represented by the process. It is very easy to see and very hard to quantify, though Ilford reckons that low-frequency resolution contributes what they call 'sparkle'.

 

Cheers,

 

Roger

First of all... Thanks for your replies and links! I am in the middle of a grading marathon (or gradathon): lots of literature papers (in Spanish) and couldn't log in earlier.

 

Victor, I'm here in the US, so I can buy from Amazon. I'll bag one of your suggestions in my Wish List, because the other, which is Roger's book, I already have.

 

Thanks for your explanation, Roger! At least I'm a bit less ignorant today! It seems that tonal range is something I should aim when using B&W with my Leicas.