Methods for contrast control in intermediate stages

[Seth Baldwin]

When going to IP / IN, what are the options for contrast control without implementing silver retention? I would have thought it might be possible to get away with pushing and pulling an intermediate print but from what I've heard it's a process control nightmare. I'm talking contrast control strictly in terms of classic intermediate printing (no film out). Just ON > IP > IN > print.

Is the only option to push and pull ON for contrast control or is it worth experimenting with push and pulling IP / IN.

Perhaps there's another form of contrast control i'm not aware of.

Edited August 1, 2022 by Seth Baldwin

[Mark Dunn]

You don't control contrast in development with colour film at all. It's not a standard tool as it is with b/w.

There was a low-contrast option with VNF, in order to get flatter reversal prints for TV, but that's long extinct.

[Seth Baldwin]

28 minutes ago, Mark Dunn said:

You don't control contrast in development with colour film at all. It's not a standard tool as it is with b/w.

There was a low-contrast option with VNF, in order to get flatter reversal prints for TV, but that's long extinct.

Well contrast control probably isn't the best word. I more so mean we obviously know pushing original negative increases contrast along with grain structure. With of course the disadvantage of dye density offsets. But none the less, a particular gamma change is likely observable through status m densitometry.

I take that because 2242 under correct development is designed to have a straight line portion appropriate for duplication, that pushing an intermediate would affect the linearity of that straight line portion. Causing loss of highlight or shadow detail depending on whether it's an IP or IN print and potentially introducing none linear printing densities for each record.

In the end though, is contrast actually increased in the print?

Edited August 1, 2022 by Seth Baldwin

[David Sekanina]

David Watkin shot Out of Africa on Agfa 320, to lower the contrast, from what I read in the ascmag. So the choice of film for the original negative and how much it was pushed or pulled was probably the biggest contributor on contrast.

David Mullen on Agfa 320

 

[David Mullen ASC]

It might look odd but perhaps using Ektachrome as an intermediate stock, similar to the old CRI system. Trouble is, like CRIs, you'd have to print through the base. Or use print stock as the IP step - I think Mark Van Horne at Fotokem had a test of that technique.

But what exactly is the point -- are you planning on needing a hundred 35mm release prints but no digital master?

[Mark Dunn]

I'd assumed this was in the nature of a thought experiment. After all, I have a Steenbeck and a K3, but next time I want to make a movie, no way. It's going to be the DLSR and Lightworks.

[Seth Baldwin]

15 hours ago, Mark Dunn said:

I'd assumed this was in the nature of a thought experiment. After all, I have a Steenbeck and a K3, but next time I want to make a movie, no way. It's going to be the DLSR and Lightworks.

I'm running some experimental timed prints with a BHP printer. In small quantities though for photography. As mentioned above, the idea of choosing none native original negatives is an interesting idea actually. I'll just start by meeting regular intermediate aims and try to achieve a particular gamma from the original negative. Then proceed from there.

Thanks guys.

Edited August 2, 2022 by Seth Baldwin

[Frederick Knauf]

As traditional printing has pretty much become a lost art, much of the information on the film stocks and their performance in specific types of situations has also gone by the wayside.  The extremely tiny grains in Color Intermediates do some funky things when pulled or pushed and not with all three color records equally, as they were not designed for those purposes.  You might adjust contrast but it will not be consistent layer to layer and linearity will definitely be impacted.

Experts like John Pytlak, whose 15th year of his passing is on 8/18/22, and Geoff Whittier, who passed away a few years ago,used to say "Contrast is Contrast - make the film correct right from the beginning and there will be no troubles when customers use the film."

In the olden times, Kodak manufactured a Professional  Internegative film that actually had a lower contrast portion of the curve and from the midpoint onward, a higher contrast.  This "boomerang" looking curve film was set up so that labs dealing with different contrast stocks could place properly to obtain the best result possible.

Though I've never seen experiements done with it here, your best bet might be to try pre-flashing the intermediate if you need a slightly lower contrast.

[David Mullen ASC]

Lowering the contrast is easier, you can flash the intermediates -- it's increasing the contrast that is harder without resorting to a silver retention process. Of course with optical printers, a lot of things were possible -- you could make YCM separations and increase the gamma of those, you could combine a color IP and a color print to create a new IN with increased contrast, etc.

[Brian Pritchard]

Sorry to join in so late.  The main problem with altering the development time on all colour films is the fact that the three layers respond differently giving you colour mismatch. for example green shadows and magenta highlights. As David says altering the contrast of black and white separations is the correct way to go photochemically.

Brian

[Robert Hart]

David. Would pre-flashing the camera film assist or would that be the DP equivalent of running with scissors?

[David Mullen ASC]

Easier to use an on-camera flasher like a ARRI VariCon or a Panaflasher (I think now there is a Panavision device for flashing in front of the lens like the Varicon).

Trouble with pre-flashing on set is that if you use a camera to flash a roll, you have to rethread the stock to match the perf you started on because the flash is bordered within the framelines.