Re: Contrast in alt photo

Dan Estabrook (desta@ix.netcom.com)
Tue, 01 Jul 1997 20:04:27 -0400

I know this goes without saying for any alt-photo subject, but there are
clearly many factors involved here. First, let me recall that the issue
of colored glass dates back to the dawn of paper photography and John
Herschel himself, who noticed the remarkable increase of exposure under
his blue "exalted glass". Pretty much thereafter, photographers would
have blue glass in the studio skylights for this very reason - the UV
spectrum being the area useful for us here. Obviously, the sun and our
bulbs are not wholly UV (we can see the light, right?) so anything that
pushes towards that end of the spectrum probably helps.

On the issue of contrast, my remarks are primarily regarding the
printing-out processes I use these days (Albumen, Salt, P.O.P.), since I
haven't yet tried the same neg. for Pt/Pd in both sun and a light bank.
(Does the slight printing out of Pt/Pd make any difference?). I suppose
VDB would also fall under this category...

I once inferred (incorrectly) from Friedlander's discussion of making
the E.J. Belloc prints, that softer light and longer exposures gave more
contrast. The _opposite_ is true. Here's why:

Quick exposures under strong light cause a darkening of silver nitrate
emulsions faster than the natural self-masking effect can act. In soft
light and a long exposure, the dark areas of the print _slowly_ darken
and at the same time inhibit further exposure as they print out, leaving
more details visible in the shadows (less contrast). [There is also a
color difference as the silver animalculae, oops, I mean, silver
clusters are larger or smaller in proportion to the intensity of light.]

So, "strong" light can be the sun (vs. light bank), or blue glass (vs.
reg.)... I think. For super contrast try both...

Now, does this apply for non-silver processes, such as gum? Let's get
the scientists in on this one - anyone?