Chromogenic B&W film

I just crawled up out of the darkroom where I was making some mundane
11X14s. While down there I realized that one of the things I like best
about the chromogenic black and white films (XP2 and its kin) is the masking
layer. These films almost print themselves. Very little manipulation was
needed, even for some scenes that might be problemsome with other films.

"Norman Worth" wrote in message
link.net...
I just crawled up out of the darkroom where I was making some mundane
11X14s. While down there I realized that one of the things I like best
about the chromogenic black and white films (XP2 and its kin) is the
masking
layer. These films almost print themselves. Very little manipulation was
needed, even for some scenes that might be problemsome with other films.

I suspect what you're experiencing is not the masking layer (which should
not have any effect), but rather the long, straight characteristic curve, so
that your pictures all have the same contrast, despite variations in
exposure.

Choose your paper grade for one of them, and you're set for the whole roll.

It's more than that, although I'm sure the long curve is needed for the
effect. Prints need very little dodging, burning, and other manipulation.
That means a couple of things: the film characteristic tracks the paper
characteristic well, and overall contrast does not overwhelm local contrast.
The last part is what masking does when it's done right.

"Michael A. Covington" wrote
in message ...

"Norman Worth" wrote in message
link.net...
I just crawled up out of the darkroom where I was making some mundane
11X14s. While down there I realized that one of the things I like best
about the chromogenic black and white films (XP2 and its kin) is the
masking
layer. These films almost print themselves. Very little manipulation
was
needed, even for some scenes that might be problemsome with other films.

I suspect what you're experiencing is not the masking layer (which should
not have any effect), but rather the long, straight characteristic curve,
so
that your pictures all have the same contrast, despite variations in
exposure.

Choose your paper grade for one of them, and you're set for the whole
roll.

"Norman Worth" wrote in message hlink.net...
I just crawled up out of the darkroom where I was making some mundane
11X14s. While down there I realized that one of the things I like best
about the chromogenic black and white films (XP2 and its kin) is the masking
layer. These films almost print themselves. Very little manipulation was
needed, even for some scenes that might be problemsome with other films.

There is no 'masking' effect on B&W chromogenic films. Color negative
films have color masking built in to help correct the deficiencies of
the dyes used for the three color layers. The masking (orange) helps
overall color accuracy.

What you're experiencing is simply the lack of Callier effect. Silver
negatives reflect super-proportionally more light from dense areas
than from thin areas. Not just more, super-proportionally more, when
using a condenser enlarger, and even when using a diffusion enlarger
there is some of this effect. The use of compensating development will
help prevent this.

Norman Worth wrote:
I just crawled up out of the darkroom where I was making some mundane
11X14s. While down there I realized that one of the things I like best
about the chromogenic black and white films (XP2 and its kin) is the masking
layer. These films almost print themselves. Very little manipulation was
needed, even for some scenes that might be problemsome with other films.

I don't think the masking layer is an issue. It simply raises the
base density. The one characteristic of XP2 that can make some
exposures easier to print is the shouldered H+D curve. Contrasty
scenes are tamed, thin portions of the neg retain contrast and
dense portions tend to retain detail. It's also pretty easy
to controllably burn-in highlight detail.

All this said, I found that I prefer the straighter curve
of the Kodak family of chromogenic emulsions. A matter of
taste; XP2 and T400CN-family are both excellent films. They're
just not that similar.

Dana

Michael A. Covington wrote:

I suspect what you're experiencing is not the masking layer (which should
not have any effect), but rather the long, straight characteristic curve, so
that your pictures all have the same contrast, despite variations in
exposure.

XP2 certianly doesn't have a straight curve. It's pretty shouldered.
IMHO this is what makes it so easy to print in many cases.

Dana

I just burned a roll of the new Fuji Neopan 400 CN. It is almost identical
to Ilford's XP-2, but with a slightly better tonal scale. I love the Fuji
Neopan films. Great stuff.

"Norman Worth" wrote in message
hlink.net...
It's more than that, although I'm sure the long curve is needed for the
effect. Prints need very little dodging, burning, and other manipulation.
That means a couple of things: the film characteristic tracks the paper
characteristic well, and overall contrast does not overwhelm local
contrast.
The last part is what masking does when it's done right.

What do you mean by "masking layer"? I am not aware of anything like that
in chromogenic film. The "masking layer" in C-41 films is merely an overall
orange tint, not a built-in unsharp mask.