contrast in black and white photos

[oliver_kurzemann]

if i look at some of my black and white prints (i can´t develop

them at home) they seem to be too grey. not enough contrast. is

there any special film for a hard contrast. i tried kodak t400 cn

and ilford, also agfa scala which is a film i really like but it´s a

slide film and very expensive.

or do i have to use yellow or red filters ? i like the style of mike

dixons documentary shots. any advise ?

 

<p>

 

thanks

[dpablo]

I too am a fan of contrasty film. In general, the higher the speed

the more the contrast. However, some photographers fear an increase

in grain as a result of a faster film (more circles of confusion). I

would recommend shooting Fuji Neopan 1600 film. It is a beautiful and

contrasty film that retains a fine grain. It is best shot with more

even lighting. Try this in the morning hours of the day or the last

few before the sunset. Unfortunately due to it's speed and contrast,

it is not the best for super sunny days yet is amazing in overcast

days. One might assume that an overcast day would produce images with

less contrast, however with the 800 speed it helps produce contrast on

overcast or more evenly lit days resulting in some amazing prints.

Try keeping to a 5.6/8 on the entire roll and have a lab develop for

proof sheets only. Keep in mind, printing is where most black and

white photography is created. Printing on cooler toned papers or

using contrast filters (3 or higher) can also give you a beautiful and

contrastry print with the "snap" that the better photographers get.

In addition, you mentioned a yellow (15) and a red (25) filter. These

too can give great contrast (that extral punch) to otherwise flat

negs. Again, stick with the 800 or 1600 speed film b/c you'll need

the speed for the stop compensation. That is, if you were outside and

had a red filter on you'd lose 2 2/3 stops. So, in order to stay

within the 5.6/8 range you'll need a 1600 speed film. Keep in mind my

comment about shooting in bright light. Again, once you start adding

filters (contrast) you'll not want to be in the brightest places b/c

the spectrum will be reduced producing pics that are much to bright in

certain spots and much too dark. I hope some of this was of help to

you. I shoot a Leica M6 and only shoot b&w film. I have been

printing for 10 years and consider myself a "st

[john_chan2]

You can specify the lab to "push process" your film by 1 stop or more.

That should increase the contrast at the expense of your tonal range

and fine-graininess. If you did your own developing you can also use

a high accutance developer like Rodinal (just be careful with the

agitation) to get a good edge definition or dilute your developer down

and accept a higher developing time. Really, I don't like to shoot

chromogenic B&W. The film substrate is softer than silver halide B&W

after hardening and the grain structure isn't the same. But

to-each-his-own.

[giles_poilu]

Oliver, by far the most important factor here is printing. Quite

simply ANY b+w film can provide more contrast than you will ever

need - provided it is well printed. It is really essential with b+w

to either print your own or find a decent pro lab who understands

your requirements.

 

<p>

 

Chromogenic or conventional - the local 1 hour lab or magazine cowboy

will do your pictures no justice.

 

<p>

 

For the price of 15 printed films you can set up a darkroom in a tiny

space and rival pro-labs with a bit of practice.

[philip_woodcock]

Giles is right, that's why I dug out all my old darkroom kit. I run a

small photo lab and now matter how hard I try colour printing a b&w

neg (silver or chromgenic) it looks crap! darkroom kit is cheap and

it doesn't have to be permanent too.

[fotografz]

Oliver,

I've found Kodak T-Max 400 cn to generally be somewhat flat

in intial contrast. That said, anything can be punched up in the

darkroom ( well, almost anything ). Choice of paper, filteration,

even Selenium Toner can help add snap. Unless you're looking

for a special effect or want to emphasize/correct sky, trees, or

skin tone, go for the best pure neg. and "do it in the darkroom".

That way you always have the neg to go back to.

Hope this is of some small help.

Marc Williams

[wilhelmn]

Developing is easy. Printing 36 negatives even as small, proof

quality will exhaust most of us. Contact sheet isn't really

satisfactory for critical evaulation. Suggest you have the negatives

scanned and look at them on your computer before deciding on final

printing.

[ralph_barker]

It strikes me that the real core of your question is whether the

prints are just bad, or if your existing negatives are poorly exposed

and developed.

 

<p>

 

Contrast is first a matter of lighting, then of exposure/development

of the film, then of printing. A bad print of a superb negative will

always be disappointing. If you are shooting subjects with reasonably

contrasty lighting, compare your negatives to the "normal" looking

negs in the Kodak books. If your negs show good contrast, the problem

is likely the prints. If you are using a "drugstore" lab, ask if you

can request better processing. Contrasty scenes will often fool the

auto-exposure features of the machine, resulting in muddy-looking

prints. If the lab can't print with reasonable contrast, with real

blacks and whites in the image, your choice is to use a custom lab or

do it yourself. Almost any conventional B&W film can produce good

contrast if properly exposed, developed, and printed.

[leonid]

Kodak's tech pan ( iso 25 ) has very nice contrast . It's pretty

expensive ( at least $7) though .

[frank_horn]

Oliver- I haven't submitted B&W to a local processor in years. Last

time I tried, the results were atrocious! I tried the C-41 process

stuff and it was sick looking. (From the local Wal-Mart, which has a

1-hr machine photo service.) Now, sending it to a custom printer,

that's another story! But it will cost you! I think the topic of

developing and printing B&W needs more input on this forum. Does

anyone know anything about the PhotoTherm Super Sidekick? It

processes slides, color negs & B&W. It does not require a darkroom,

plumbing, tempered water or long warm-up times. The unit measures

and heats one solution at a time, so you can process slides at 100

deg F, then after a short automatic clean-up, process B&W film at 75

deg F. PhotoTherm has a website at www.phototherm.com

Now, get those flamethrowers ready! Does digital do B&W? I don't

have any digital stuff, so I don't know. Can it replace slides?

Does digital know the difference between a 50mm Summicron-M and some

plastic Michelemousee lens? They're trying to turn our Noctiluxes

into paperweights, so we need to know!

[oliver_kurzemann]

hello ralph

 

<p>

 

i was the guy who asked the question. well i´m an amateur

photographer who wants to learn as much as possible about

photography. therefore a professional photographer helps me

quite a lot, but when i ask him about film he never gives me a

specifik answer. i shoot a lot with a canon eos 3 and various

canon lenses when i need to (motordrive), but i also own a leica

r6.2 with a elmarit r 2.8/28 lens which i like a lot more than the

canon gear. i know how to get the right exposure for a picture,

but i miss this extra thing (sorry, don´t know how to say in

english, i´m austrian) in the photos. maybe i try to change the

photo lab and see if i get better results.

by the way i´d like to say thank you to all the people who

responded so quick and gave me hints. as i said before i wanna

learn as much as possible about photography and this forum

helps me a lot.

 

<p>

 

thanks again

[phy1]

Oliver

 

<p>

 

IMHO the only way to get good quality B/W image is to develop the

film yourself. Develop B/W film does not require any darkroom

facility and it very handed and simple. In addition, you can control

the contrast by the developing time, temp and chemical density. It

is fun to work with.

[mark-j]

Oliver

 

<p>

 

I am not a professional, but have been shooting for 30+ years. It

sounds like your exposure is off if the pictures appear gray. Try

shooting a roll of slide film to check out your metering techniques.

If your slides are off, then then your B&W is probably off too.

Processing film is fairly easy, but not everyone wants to try it.

 

<p>

 

Slide film has less exposure latitude than print films, including

B&W, hence using slide film for checking your metering. Your meter

may be accurate, but your technique may not agree with how the meter

reads the scene.

 

<p>

 

Good luck, and keep trying.

[mike dixon]

Thanks for compliment. For ultimate control, you need to do your own

developing and printing. But if you're unwilling or unable to do

that, here are some ways to get more contrast (other than changing the

lighting):

 

<p>

 

Use slower speed films--these have more inherent contrast. Ilford

PanF+ exposed and developed normally has about as much contrast HP5+

underexposed and pushed one stop.

 

<p>

 

Overexpose the film slightly (this also increases grain) and develop

normally.

 

<p>

 

Expose the film normally and push by half a stop.

 

<p>

 

[i do all my own b&w developing and printing, so I spend an unhealthy

amount of time in the darkroom.]

 

<p>

 

Shot below was PanF+ exposed at EI 80 and pushed one stop, then

printed at grade 2.5 (on the real print, there's visible detail in her

hair and coat--just ask Jack!):

 

<p>

 

<img src="http://mikedixonphotography.com/alexbw28.jpg">

[reinier_de_vlaam]

Hi Oliver,

 

<p>

 

I know the problem you have. It seems to me that my pictures in

someway just miss the power other pictures have. I get als sorts of

complements on the content but lots of comments on the print itself.

I normally use Tmax 400 and have plans to develop it (in D76) at a

bit higher temperature (20C->22C) with the same time (12min), to

increase contrast. I once had a Tmax400 film underexposed at EI 100,

so I pushed it in 23C for 16min. The result was pictures with

excellent contrast. It will take some more expirimenting though.

 

<p>

 

I used neopan 1600 for some portraits in low light (I don't have

studio lights, nor softbox). Have a look here. I'm stunned at the

quality of the grain

 

<p>

 

http://www.photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=426947

 

<p>

 

(PS you may wish to set your monitor darker. The background of the

girl hanging backwards should be black. And the contrast of the

prints is much better than is visible on your screen, commets are

appreciated ;-))

 

<p>

 

I will be in Istanbul for a long weekend and plan to use neopan 1600

for street shots at night. I will develop it in d76 for 15min to push

it to 3200). In the same place as above you'll find the Stockholm

folder where I used Tmax3200 which has a really disapointing crude

grain.

 

<p>

 

cheers

Reinier

[AntonioC]

Really, printing by yourself would yeld much better results than any

1-hr lab. In any case, my suggestion would be to use c-41 films

(especially Ilford XP2-s), have them developed by any 1-hr lab (it's

nearly impossible to screw up a c-41 neg, really) and then a) print

it yourself, or b) have it printed through a Frontier machine, where

you can have contrast easily under control. I think frontier is the

best/fastest way to have real bw prints without a real pro lab, or a

home darkroom. Which would be the best anyway...

Regards

[andy_piper2]

1) Like Mike said.....

 

<p>

 

2) "The negative is the score; the print is the performance" - Ansel

Adams. If you're letting the folks at the local minilab play your music

for you - well......There really is no substitute for handling your own

images (whether by computer or traditional darkroom)

 

<p>

 

3) Look into rental labs if you can't do your own developing at home...

 

<p>

 

4) ...but I've always managed to set up SOME kind of darkroom

everywhere I've lived for 15 years, from micro-cheap apartments to

high-rise condos to houses

 

<p>

 

- collapsible tables in bathrooms - usually trays on/above the bathtub

and the enlarger on/over the sink or -uhhh- OTHER plumbing fixtures.

Black tape and/or black plastic covering doors, windows and other light

leaks. Some places I could only print at night - but I always figured

out a way.

[mike dixon]

"usually trays on/above the bathtub and the enlarger on/over the sink

or -uhhh- OTHER plumbing fixtures."

 

<p>

 

Been there, done that! The commode makes an excellent enlarger stand!

I used to, on occasion, go for a few days without a shower because I

didn't want to move the trays out of the tub. When you ride up on a

ragged motorcycle, stinking of B.O. and fixer, nobody dares to mess

with you . . . : )

[ken_prager]

Oliver, I find overexposing my film by 2/3 a stop helps increase

contrast, as well as provide greater detail of the shadow areas. For

example, I set my iso rating for Tri-x at 250 and have it processed

at 400. Using a medium yellow filter also helps and I often do both.