From: Tom Ferguson (tomf2468@pipeline.com)
Date: 03/24/01-03:32:04 PM Z
The "problem" contrast in this situation is the internal contrast in the
transparency, not the films final density range.
Most transparency film is good for an exposure of plus or minus 2 stops from
zone 5 (typical meter reading). I mean that something 2 stops brighter than
your meter reading will be on the edge of "burning out". That is a small
range. In typical silver film you can get plus or minus 3 without any
special development. That is two stops more range than typical transparency
films. It can be seen that correct exposure and a mid to low light ratio
become very important.
The second "internal contrast" issue is that shadows and highlights that
come close to the "edge" in transparency film flatten out and lose internal
contrast. This "SEEMS" a bigger problems with slide film than B&W film (I
haven't measured it).
One can change the development time of the black and white film used in the
enlarged neg. But, if all your highlights are "smashed together" on the
shoulder of the transparency film..... it won't do you much good. My main
use for different development times is to match different processes (my
platinum negs require more time than my cyan negs).
This doesn't make the slide to neg system bad, it is just it's primary
limitation. All of the enlarged neg systems have limitations. The neg to
pos to neg is slow, uses lots of materials, and is farther removed from the
original film. The chemical direct positive system require non "off the
shelf" supplies and is very exposure sensitive. The home digital systems
are still quite limited in size, have archival issues, and d-max problems.
The "service bureau" digital systems are expensive, turn over a good part of
the process to an outside party, and require days of "turn around time".
Limiting yourself to "in camera" negs results in great film, but either a
small print or a very big and slow camera.
I've seen good work from all of these methods. I suggest whichever method
feels natural!
-- Tom Ferguson http://www.ferguson-photo-design.com> From: Sandy King <sanking@hubcap.clemson.edu> > Subject: Re: Direct negatives from slides > > Tom Ferguson wrote: > >> The biggest problem with this system is contrast. Transparencies are high >> contrast to begin with. Shot a low (for transparency) contrast film and shot >> mid to low contrast scenes. That is easy for me, as 95% of my work is >> studio. > > Can one not control the contrast of the negative by exposure and > development as with regular development of B&W negatives. After all, the > contrast range of a chrome is much less than the actual contrast range in > nature? Or what am I missing here? >> >> I do change the "internal" contrast of a transparency with colored filters >> while enlarging onto the FP-4. Just as "in camera", if I have a scene with >> a red and green bottle, I can lighten the red bottle by putting a red filter >> over the enlarging lens. > > Sounds very interesting and offers the possibility for a lot of control. > > Thanks for your comments. > > Sandy King > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 04/02/01-09:55:26 AM Z CST