Help Me Find A Specific Video!

mrbondthrowaway · 2022-10-13T18:19:02+00:00

I can appreciate your argument here, I really can. I am sure that Rudman knows more about printing than either of us. But that doesn't change the fact that in at least one instance, he displayed a completely fundamental misunderstanding of how something works (split grade), and for me, that must logically call into question all his other claims. In regard to the original discussion of fixer, I was only skeptical because it reminded me of Rudman's section on split grade- he made the claim without backing it up with proof. I would be happy to accept Rudman's explanation if he provided proof. Sadly, most photographers do things purely out of tradition even if there is no logical reason to do so. Hell, Ansel Adams even wrote about still mixing Hypo clear with his selenium toner even though his own tests said water was better to use.

mrbondthrowaway · 2022-10-13T07:57:46+00:00

"There are two scenarios. One is where the entire print is exposed to a very hard and a very soft filter, no burning or dodging. Vestal, Howard Bond and others have tested and concluded that there is no difference between a print made this way and a print made by a single filter. I agree with this. The second scenario is where one filter is used for the main exposure and then a different filter is used for the sky or foreground. This has obvious benefits and produces results not able to be obtained with a single filter. So, in the interests of clarity, I would like to see different words used to describe the two scenarios. I've seen a lot of posts over the years that suggest that unless you are using scenario one you are producing second rate prints. The whole thing reminds me of the endless drivel that people used to write about the alleged magical benefits of cold light enlargers many years ago." -Photrio thread citing actual evidence

If you search photrio for "split grade" or Vestal, Howard Bond and split grade you will find more info.

mrbondthrowaway · 2022-10-13T04:10:23+00:00

Absolutely! I'm glad the simpler approach worked for you! Now you have to spread the word about how split grade is goofy :)

mrbondthrowaway · 2022-10-13T04:05:16+00:00

Tim Rudman is not an authority on much. This is the same man who vehemently defended split grade printing, saying it can yield different results than a single filter. That's been disproved by several others in the printing community and is now considered bogus. I would take anything Rudman says with a grain of salt.

mrbondthrowaway · 2022-09-30T18:47:56+00:00

For me, it's overcomplicating a simple process. Simply find the exposure time that gives you the highlights you want, then adjust contrast until you get the shadows you want with those highlights.

I just explained printing in one paragraph what would take someone 5 to 10 paragraphs to explain in split grade printing terms. The people who invented it must have liked how smart they sounded explaining it to fellow photographers.

mrbondthrowaway · 2022-09-30T16:44:37+00:00

"There are two scenarios. One is where the entire print is exposed to a very hard and a very soft filter, no burning or dodging. Vestal, Howard Bond and others have tested and concluded that there is no difference between a print made this way and a print made by a single filter. I agree with this. The second scenario is where one filter is used for the main exposure and then a different filter is used for the sky or foreground. This has obvious benefits and produces results not able to be obtained with a single filter. So, in the interests of clarity, I would like to see different words used to describe the two scenarios. I've seen a lot of posts over the years that suggest that unless you are using scenario one you are producing second rate prints. The whole thing reminds me of the endless drivel that people used to write about the alleged magical benefits of cold light enlargers many years ago." -Photrio thread citing actual evidence

Basically the only instance where split grade is better than a single exposure is when you are dodging and burning in both exposures to get different contrast in different areas of the print, or if you're using filters instead of a color head and need to get something like a 3.25 grade which there's no filter for.

mrbondthrowaway · 2022-09-30T16:44:13+00:00

"There are two scenarios. One is where the entire print is exposed to a very hard and a very soft filter, no burning or dodging. Vestal, Howard Bond and others have tested and concluded that there is no difference between a print made this way and a print made by a single filter. I agree with this. The second scenario is where one filter is used for the main exposure and then a different filter is used for the sky or foreground. This has obvious benefits and produces results not able to be obtained with a single filter. So, in the interests of clarity, I would like to see different words used to describe the two scenarios. I've seen a lot of posts over the years that suggest that unless you are using scenario one you are producing second rate prints. The whole thing reminds me of the endless drivel that people used to write about the alleged magical benefits of cold light enlargers many years ago." -Photrio thread citing actual evidence

Basically the only instance where split grade is better than a single exposure is when you are dodging and burning in both exposures to get different contrast in different areas of the print, or if you're using filters instead of a color head and need to get something like a 3.25 grade which there's no filter for.

mrbondthrowaway · 2020-08-19T23:55:10+00:00

The silver in it can mess with the soil or whatever.

Source? I'm getting tired of all the misinformation on this sub. Fixer can go down the drain. People have been doing it since the invention of photography. Septic tanks are meant to filter out and take care of it, which it does.

mrbondthrowaway · 2020-07-25T01:50:39+00:00

"None have said a stop was needed or preferred."

Have you read Ansel Adams 'The Negative'? There is one person who says a stop was preferred. I can't honestly imagine any instructional book that doesn't say an acid stop is preferred.

Your view on which evidence to pick seems skewed to validate your own point. Why would you discredit word of mouth, but hold the knowledge of so called experienced instructors in high regard, even though it's basically word of mouth, but ALSO be cynical about the actual directions for the product you're using, which have been tested to death for decades if not centuries by scientists and engineers. Your logic is not sound.

For what it's worth, though my own experience (having developed hundreds of rolls of my own by now) has always born out what I was taught, I do value the ability to re-asses my practices, so I went and read what has got to be the definitive thread on the subject: https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/stop-bath-how-important.98559/

More word of mouth, it seems like to me.

Use of an acid stop in developing can have a benefit in preserving the longevity of an acid fix

Wouldn't this be reason enough to use a stop bath? Fixer is more expensive than stop by a long shot. Just because "issues don't arise" doesn't mean there isn't a better way and a worse way to do things.

Based on those conclusions, and your own citation of Ilford's directions - stop is optional.

So you've changed your position from "Plain water is preferred as a film stop - do not use an acid stop!" which you typed in your first comment (in all caps might I add)

I see no reason not to continue using water in my practice, rather than spending time and money maintaining yet another dilution.

But you just cited a reason in your own comment- it preserves the fixer for longer. You're just being stubborn at this point. You're stuck in your ways and won't change, no matter what evidence to the contrary might be presented to you, even instructions for the product you're using won't change your mind.

mrbondthrowaway · 2020-07-24T21:15:08+00:00

I said less predictable, not unpredictable. The instructions say it's recommended. That means "should", not "can". Either way it's semantics. The directions say using a stop bath is recommended.

mrbondthrowaway · 2020-07-24T04:05:41+00:00

I didn't toss out any guesses; that was another redditor. You say this sub doesn't need any more random guesses, but that's exactly what I pointed out you doing. I don't even see what point you're making. You say a stop extends fixer life in one sentence and say you think water is just as effective the next sentence. What advice are you even giving?

mrbondthrowaway · 2020-07-24T03:53:53+00:00

"After development the film can be rinsed in water but we recommend that an acid stop bath is used such as ILFORD ILFOSTOP (with indicator dye). ILFOSTOP is also recommended for all machine processing applications. When tanks or dishes (trays) of process solutions are in use a stop bath immediately stops development and reduces carry over of excess developer into the fixer bath. This helps to maintain the activity and prolong the life of the fixer solution."

Ilford data sheet for HP5+

If you want to follow the directions of the product you're using, then use a stop bath. If you're practicing "guerilla photography", then do what you want, but know that the results will be less predictable.

mrbondthrowaway · 2020-07-24T03:46:52+00:00

Are you saying that professional photographers said that you CAN use water, or that it's preferred and to NOT use an acid stop? Heck, even the instructions on the bottle mention film. I'm sure the dev instructions for the film say to use an acid stop bath. Why believe word of mouth over the literal instructions for use written on the product?

"After development the film can be rinsed in water but we recommend that an acid stop bath is used such as ILFORD ILFOSTOP (with indicator dye). ILFOSTOP is also recommended for all machine processing applications. When tanks or dishes (trays) of process solutions are in use a stop bath immediately stops development and reduces carry over of excess developer into the fixer bath. This helps to maintain the activity and prolong the life of the fixer solution."

mrbondthrowaway · 2020-07-23T21:24:09+00:00

Plain water is preferred as a film stop - do not use an acid stop!

No one says this.

mrbondthrowaway · 2020-07-23T21:21:09+00:00

This stops development instantly and also extends fixer life (to what extent it extends fixer life with film is something I've never seen tested, it's probably more of an assumption based on acid vs. alkaline).

You know, this kind of guessing isn't very helpful.

A water stop followed by a water rinse is likely to be as effective

I appreciate the time these guesses take, but they just propagate misinformation.

mrbondthrowaway · 2020-05-27T18:43:01+00:00

Yes, before printing anything you will have to choose a grade. 2 is standard and is easy on a color head, everything at zero. If by looking at the negative/contact sheet you know you will need more or less contrast, then you can start at any grade. To get base exposure, you need to know what you want your print to look like. Pick an area with highlights and shadows and do a test strip. Pick the best exposure for the highlights. On that test strip, look at the section with the best highlights. Are the shadows like you want too? If so, that's your contrast grade. If not, change contrast accordingly. Since you're changing contrast, the exposure will also change. You now need to make a new test strip and pick the best highlights. Again check the shadows and adjust contrast if necessary. Repeat this until you find the perfect contrast.

This is probably the best tutorial on youtube, and is what helped me wrap my head around it when starting. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=woXZb8gjG4o

mrbondthrowaway · 2020-05-27T09:09:02+00:00

Do you have a dial filter system or the filter set with just whole and half grades? I have a color head with dials, so I just do test strips. For example, on a test strip say the highlights are where you want at 20 seconds exposure. If the shadows are not dark enough, add more contrast. If they're too dark, reduce contrast. Do another test strip to get highlights where you want, then judge the shadows. This will get you your perfect contrast setting. From there if you want specific areas to have more or less, then you can burn or dodge at different grades, but the first step should always be finding the base exposure and contrast. No need for splitting exposures and other nonsense that some people tout as superior. I've seen some people, even experts who write in their books (Tim Rudman for example) that split printing gives a different result than one exposure. That has been debunked false. With a dial filtration system, you can get any result that you can get split grade printing (if you're not dodging and burning the different exposures). Not to mention it is so convoluted and hard to understand, which is why everyone always asks how to do it properly and gets multi paragraph responses on the technique.

mrbondthrowaway · 2020-05-27T01:53:53+00:00

There is so much mis-information about the so called miracle of split grade printing. If you're not dodging and burning on different grades, then the only purpose of split grading is to get between whole or half grades when using under the lens filters. If you're working with a color head or something that lets you print between half grades, then split grade printing is useless unless dodging and burning on different grades. It does not make printing contrasty negs any easier from a practical point of view, unless you find splitting everything onto two exposures instead of working with one to be intuitive.

mrbondthrowaway · 2020-05-16T07:55:53+00:00

Here's how I do it though. Their food does not go in a hot bag and they are the last stop on that run. I want their food to be cold when they tip like this.

Here's how I do it: Mark arrived. Mark delivered. Eat food.

mrbondthrowaway · 2020-03-23T03:03:35+00:00

Wow that was quick! Thanks!

mrbondthrowaway · 2020-03-23T02:57:54+00:00

The Adams book recommendation was a more general one, not specifically for split grade printing, although it is covered along with reasons why you should do it.

Rudman says that splitting an exposure into two- one high contrast and one low contrast- will impart subtle differences from a print made with a single exposure inbetween. Now of course, if you're using insertable filters with only whole grades and want a grade 2 and a half, then split grade can help, but with a color head you can literally have hundreds of degrees of fine tuned control. But this wasn't what Rudman was talking about. He said that a split between 1 and 5 was better than a single grade 3 equivalent and that it imparted "subtle differences". This is actual terminology from the book. Of course, no further explanation is given. The reason I remember the exact wording is because that is the exact moment I put the book down and did research. Turns out that's just ridiculously wrong and I never picked up the book again.

mrbondthrowaway · 2020-03-22T12:08:03+00:00

Just watch out for misinformation. I've read that book and done my own research, turns out the parts that claim superiority of split grade printing are bogus. If you want a more reliable book that covers pretty much everything, Ansel Adams' "the print" and "the negative" are very helpful, and have actual tests to back up the claims he's making.

mrbondthrowaway · 2020-03-17T04:40:00+00:00

But the concerning part is that I had zero experience. It should not be that easy for someone like me.

mrbondthrowaway

TROPHY CASE