Does film affect the tone of the print?

[pkr1979]

Hi all,

I printed som T-Max 400 and Ilford Ortho Plus this weekend. I noticed that some of the printed images shot on T-Max are warmer when compared to the same image shot on Ortho. I was a bit surprised as I assumed the film wouldn't affect this - or does it? Everything else was the same except maybe the temperature of the chemicals.

Cheers
Peter

 

[Don_ih]

What do you mean by "printed"? Enlarged or printed from a negative scan?

A negative will not impact the warmth of an enlargement. That is only impacted by paper, developer, and toner.

A computer printed scan can get any tone whatsoever, depending on the scanner settings.

 

[loccdor]

We should define what we're talking about by "tone" here.

For example, I've noticed that HP5 images feel warmer to me than Fomapan even when both are displayed grayscale on a monitor. But this is our brains getting a feeling rather than a different color temperature being produced.

 

[pkr1979]

Contact printing in the darkroom from 8x10" negatives. Everything analog.

 

[pkr1979]

In this case its not my brain The contact print from Tmax is warmer than the contact print from Ortho.

 

[Don_ih]

The contact print from Tmax is warmer than the contact print from Ortho.

You an do whatever you want to the light that hits the paper, it will only change the contrast. The warmth/coldness won't be impacted. That includes whatever negatives you are using.

So it's an illusion or your developer caused it.

 

[David Brown]

I had the same experience with T-grain films vs, say Tri-X. The two films mentioned by the OP will have different "looks" when printed. While the actual color of the paper remains the same, the relationships of tonal values are different enough that the viewer may perceive one as "warmer" than the other. I wouldn't dismiss this perception of the OP so easily. Technically, the answer to the OP's question is no. But, there are other factors.

 

[loccdor]

Why don't you take a picture of both the prints together and use the color picker in imaging software in order to measure the results.

 

[Don_ih]

I wouldn't dismiss this perception of the OP so easily.

I'm not trying to dismiss the perception. I believe him - there's no reason not to. Tonality of prints can vary wildly, using the same paper and developer, and films have different tonal scales. Tmax400 is very very different from Ilford Ortho. They vary in colour sensitivity and granularity - I would say Tmax has a much more nuanced tonal scale than Ortho. Even the fact that one is faster than the other can impact things (especially handheld - a higher shutter speed and tigher aperture can bring out sharper detail). But it all adds up to an illusion when it comes to warmth/coldness.

Perception of an illusion is still accurate perception. That particular problem is one of the reasons Descartes needed to bring God into his ideology (it also helped hold back the potential heresy charges).

 

[koraks]

I was a bit surprised as I assumed the film wouldn't affect this - or does it?

Have you mentioned what paper you're using? If so, I've missed it.
I've noticed with e.g. Fomatone that warmth can depend on the contrast grade you dial in, which isn't too odd given that they're basically several different emulsions that you're using. The differences tend to be slight; I've never tested it systematically. Maybe we should?

So, what paper are you using, and did you use different contrast grades? If it's the same contrast grade, then yes, it's either a process variable that's shifting around or just your mind playing tricks on you. Note that as a paper developer is being used, halides leach into it and this can affect its activity and most certainly the warmth of the tone. Developer temperature can also affect the outcome of course, but you'd need to have a fairly big drift for it to show up, and it should be eliminated by using factorial development instead of fixed-time development.

 

[Don_ih]

I've noticed with e.g. Fomatone that warmth can depend on the contrast grade you dial in, which isn't too odd given that they're basically several different emulsions that you're using.

Truthfully, I noticed that, too, particularly with the matt surface. Ortho and Tmax400 will naturally be quite different from one another in terms of contrast, too, since one is essentially a copy film.

So that's a viable explanation.

 

[cliveh]

Surely by warmth you are implying colour and so the answer is no.

 

[Ian Grant]

It's an illusion because the Ortho film is rendering some tones lighter than the Tmax-400.

Same day, top image EFKE PL25 @ 50 EI, 2nd either Tmax-100 @ 50EI or Agfa AP100 @ 100 EI.

Ian

 

[pkr1979]

Thanks guys! This is interesting. The paper is Adox Lupex (silver chloride). There is less contrast and more detail in the T-Max print than the Ortho print. Also, the Ortho print is a bit darker. The temp of the developer might have changed but very, very, very little.

 

[koraks]

The paper is Adox Lupex (silver chloride).

In that case, disregard what I said as it doesn't apply, since this is a single grade paper.
Temperature doesn't seem to be the factor, either.
How much developer do you use (what volume) and how many prints were there between the two prints that showed a difference?

I'm leaning towards a psychological effect along the lines of what @Ian Grant suggests above.

 

[MattKing]

It could also be related to the viewing light and the sheen of the paper surface.
A print with more shadows and less highlights will reflect back a different amount of light than a print with less shadows and more highlights. The difference may be perceived as a difference in colour.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Length of development time can also often make a visible difference in actual tonal hue nuances, especially if you're attempting to equalize the net contrast look attained from quite different films in this manner.

 

[pkr1979]

In that case, disregard what I said as it doesn't apply, since this is a single grade paper.
Temperature doesn't seem to be the factor, either.
How much developer do you use (what volume) and how many prints were there between the two prints that showed a difference?

I'm leaning towards a psychological effect along the lines of what @Ian Grant suggests above.

There where made no prints between these two. Im thinking the ones suggesting a trick of the brain are right to.

 

[pkr1979]

It could also be related to the viewing light and the sheen of the paper surface.
A print with more shadows and less highlights will reflect back a different amount of light than a print with less shadows and more highlights. The difference may be perceived as a difference in colour.

The Ortho one has more black in it than the T-Max one.

 

[pkr1979]

Length of development time can also often make a visible difference in actual tonal hue nuances, especially if you're attempting to equalize the net contrast look attained from quite different films in this manner.

Development time was the same.

 

[MattKing]

It occurs to me that the grain in the film - and therefore in the resulting prints - can affect our perception of tone.

 

[MattKing]

The Ortho one has more black in it than the T-Max one.

Change the viewing light to something warmer, or cooler, and then see if your perceptions vary.

 

[pentaxuser]

In this case its not my brain The contact print from Tmax is warmer than the contact print from Ortho.

So the question mark at the end of the thread's title is redundant. isn't it?

Can you tell us what it is about a TMax negative that makes a contact print warmer than the contact print from Ilford Ortho?

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[DREW WILEY]

Even if the development time and temperature was the same, there could still be a different distribution of the densities involved which cumulatively affected the overall appearance between them enough to the same seeming hue distinction effect. Or it could be a combination of factors. You also need to consider a bit of progressing developer exhaustion as a least a possibility. Which version was developed later than the other one?

 

[pkr1979]

Even if the development time and temperature was the same, there could still be a different distribution of the densities involved which cumulatively affected the overall appearance between them enough to the same seeming hue distinction effect. Or it could be a combination of factors. You also need to consider a bit of progressing developer exhaustion as a least a possibility. Which version was developed later than the other one?

I cant really remember - but none were developed in between. And I had not developed many others before this.