The Problem with the Digital Black and White Print
Hextone: The Fine Digital Black and White Print
The Problem with the Digital Black and White Print
Digitally produced color photographs surpassed traditionally made color photographs some time ago. (There are some that would argue, not so. However, except for a handful of the world’s finest Ilfochrome or Dye Transfer printers, I’d have to respectfully counter such a position).
Digitally produced black and white photographs, on the other hand, lagged far behind. There were four big problems to overcome.
Those four problems were:
- Digital black and white photographs were made on color printers, loaded with color inks, and black. Therefore, to create a black and white print, color inks were used in a black and white photograph. This creates two problems:
- Printers use Cyan, Magenta, and Yellow to create the full gamut of colors within a print. Unfortunately, color pigments, especially Yellow, are unstable. In a color print, shifting of the pigments over time will not considerably alter the print. With today’s technology, a color print will hold its colors very well for over a hundred years. In a black and white print, however, any shift in tone becomes very recognizable, and is a big problem from an archival stance.
- When loaded with color inks, printers only had one black ink, which leads to the next problem:
- If a digital black and white photograph is printed without color inks, and only with black ink, then it is impossible to create a continuous tone photograph. Within the dark values, the black creates enough dark shades of gray by spacing out black dots. The problem is always the highlights. With only black ink, the printer can only simulate medium and light grays by spacing black dots farther apart. From a distance, this creates the illusion of lighter tone. When viewed up close, however, it becomes blatantly obvious that the light tones are made up of spaced black dots.
- From problem number one, it is seen that color inks must be removed from the process. However, a black and white photograph that is purely monochromatic is highly unappealing. The third problem involves bringing some warmth to a print without bringing back the color inks.
- Problem number four stems from problem one: Making an archival print. As previously stated, color inks are fine in a color print, but are very problematic when used in a black and white print. Within a short time, the black and white photograph begins to color shift.
Hextone: The Fine Digital Black & White Print
Hextone is a printing process that utilizes black ink with five shades of gray. Pioneered by Tom Mallonee of Owens Valley Imaging, Hextone is a remarkable method for the printing of black and white digital photographs. Through tedious and time consuming testing and retesting, Mallonee was able to solve the four big problems that kept the digital black and white photograph separated from the term “fine art.”
Four problems had to be addressed:
- The first, and most obvious problem was the color inks. A stable, archival black and white print could never be produced with color inks. The answer was a monochromatic inkset.
- The quick answer to the problem of one black ink was simply add some shades of gray. There was a new printing process for black and white photographs, called Quadtone, which utilized black, and three shades of gray. Although this was a vast improvement, it still fell short of the truly fine print. Three shades of gray just weren’t enough to create a flawlessly continuous tone print. And the lightest gray still wasn’t light enough; It was still creating the illusion of very light tone by spacing gray ink farther apart.
- To create a black and white inkset that exhibited a pleasing hint of warmth, some color pigments, somewhere, had to be used.
- The last problem was stability. Even without color inks, it was thought a digital black and white photograph was not going to be very archival.
The answer to all these questions was Hextone. The Hextone Process utilizes a black, and five shades of increasingly light gray ink.
- There is no color ink. Therefore, there will be no shifting of image tone over time.
- Since there is now a very light gray, the software uses it for the areas of a print that are lightest in tone. The printer no longer has to space dark ink farther apart to give the illusion of a light tone. Additionally, because there are five shades of gray, there are now six inks employed to go from black to white. This makes for a beautifully continuous tone photograph. Tonal gradations and separations are smooth because there are many inks to mix to achieve the proper density.
- To create prints that exhibit a hint of warmth, Hextone uses carbon pigment inks. However, carbon ink by itself is very warm. Therefore, some color pigments have to be added to offset some of the warmth and cool down the ink. Although it was previously stated that color inks were a big problem, that has been negated, for two reasons:
- First, color inks are actually color inks. The Cyan is bright blue, the Magenta is bright Magenta, and the Yellow is bright yellow. With the inks of Hextone, only trace amounts of color are added, just enough to cool down the inherent warmth of carbon ink.
- Second, the pigments added to cool down the carbon ink are blue pigments, some of the most stable color pigments available.
- Most importantly, except for Black and Light Black 1 (the darkest gray), each ink is custom mixed. One ink can be slightly warmer, while another can be slightly cooler. The result is a print that is warmer in the darks and mid-tones, and cooler in the highlights, which leads to a heightened sense of contrast.
- Hextone prints are now extremely archival with the use of carbon pigment inks. One of the earliest printing processes was the carbon print, made in the late 1800’s and early 1900’s. Because the base of the tone for the prints was carbon, there were extremely stable, and many survive today.
Creating an archival print has always been one of the biggest obstacles that had to be overcome, if digital printing, color or black and white, was going to be accepted as “fine art.” Modern color photographs produced digitally are surpassing traditionally printed photographs as color pigments and papers become more stable.
Until Hextone, it was assumed that nothing from an electronic printer could rival an archival gelatin silver print. Gelatin silver prints, when produced by current archival standards and toned in selenium, are declared to have a life of 100-200 years. However, modern black and white papers have optical brighteners embedded in the emulsion, which can yellow in much less time than 100 years.
Hextone is one of the most, if not the most, archival digital printing process. Hextone uses carbon pigment inks, and carbon does not shift in tone. It is one of the most stable elements around, much less within ink.
The final credit to the stability of the Hextone process is the paper. Prints are made on Hahnemühle Photo Rag paper. The paper is made of a cotton base, free of chemicals and pH stabilized. Since no chemicals are used in the Hextone process, there is no chance that one of them has been under or over mixed, or under or over used, therefore eliminating the possibility of instability over time due to improper processing. Lastly, there are no optical brighteners embedded in the paper to cause yellowing over time.
Hextone may turn out to be more archival than the benchmark silver gelatin print.
Although I used to use traditional photographic materials and techniques from start to finish, I now utilize a hybridized process. It is a process that I feel combines the best of traditional and digital photography.
I suppose my ultimate reasoning can be expressed in a few words: Quality, Control, Precision, and Environmentalism.
Quality, Control, Precision, & Environmentalism
I started in photography, like most, with a 35mm camera. Although I was young and new to the black and white process, almost immediately I knew that the 35mm format fell short of the quality I sought. Lucky for me, my father had been very into photography before I was born, and still had a medium format camera. Two months after shooting my first roll of 35mm black and white film I had moved to a Mamiya 645 1000S.
The Mamiya seemed adequate for a little while. Although the negatives were larger, skies and highlights still showed grain in medium sized prints, and things just weren’t as sharp as they could be. Additionally every exposure on a roll of film had to be developed the in the same way.
After two years of the Mamiya, it became apparent that I was not going to achieve the finest results possible with the camera. I was effectively done with medium format.
The only logical step, in terms of quality and control, was to begin photographing with a 4 x 5 large format camera, utilizing the Zone System for determining the exposure and development of each individual sheet of film.
4 x 5 is superior for quality of negatives, and the Zone System offers great control for exposure and development. I find working with a large format camera much more enjoyable than any of the smaller formats. It not only allows, it demands, that the photographer slow down when making a photograph. As a result, the mindful photographer will become much more conscious of the photograph he is making. Although it is heavy, slow, and cumbersome, I truly enjoy working with a large format camera.
However, in the darkroom, I was not so fully enjoying myself. I am something of a perfectionist, and so I tried to print as precisely as possible. There are tricks and techniques at hand for printers in the darkroom, but I found that they short. I could not refine my images to the degree I desired.
Additionally, the traditional darkroom requires the use of toxic chemicals, and silver laden, non-recyclable paper. I care about the state of the natural world. Being a landscape photographer seemed to heighten what one could call an ironic situation. I felt terrible throwing chemicals down the drain and paper in the trash. I felt even worse when I thought that what I did print was not even a photograph that was the finest that could be achieved.
There had to be a better way. After investigating for a while, in the spring of 2006, I found that there was.
My savior was Hextone. It addressed all the issues I had with the wet darkroom.
I am extremely satisfied with my current hybridized photographic process.
- Photographing with a 4x5 camera, and utilizing the Zone System provides the ultimate in quality and control of negative.
- Scanning with an Imacon X5 creates the finest file from which to work.
- Manipulating the image in Photoshop allows for an unsurpassed level of control and precision.
- Printing with custom, hand-mixed, carbon pigment Hextone inks on Hahnemühle Photo Rag paper results in a print that has beautiful tonal separations and gradations, and is extremely archival.
- Finally, there are no toxic chemicals, all paper is recyclable, and due to the fact that any adjustments made to the image can be seen instantly, on screen, means that fewer prints must be made.
Although it is being lessened over time, there is still somewhat of a stigma attached to digital photographic processes. Most of the time, the main issue is archival. Early generation digital prints were not stable, and would color shift or fade in a short time. Today, a color photograph produced digitally has a greater estimated lifespan than an Ilfochrome print. And, as outlined previously, black and white digital photographs produced with Hextone may turn out to rival gelatin silver prints.
While the archival issue may finally be passing, the big stigma that still remains comes from the ease and speed of process. Most who scoff at the digital print do so because they assume that it is easier and quicker to produce than if it were made traditionally.
This raises two important critiques I’d like to address:
- That a digital photograph is quicker and easier to create.
- That a digital photograph is of inherent lesser artistic value.
The Digital Photograph: Quick and Easy
Put simply, my current hybridized photographic process takes far more time than I ever spent during my time with the purely traditional approach. And it is not easier.
Both processes, traditional and digital, were exactly the same until the negative dried after being developed.
In the wet darkroom, once the negative was dry, it could be inserted in the enlarger and printing could begin. A few hours and a handful of prints later, I would be close to a working final print. I would let the prints dry down overnight (a gelatin silver print is lighter when it is wet). After inspection of the dried prints, I would print again the following day, making slight adjustments that were needed. In all, a final print from the wet darkroom would take anywhere between four and eight hours to produce.
The hybridized approach, however, requires far more time.
First, negatives must be scanned. Due to the quality I demand, no commercial desktop scanner will do. Scanning requires that I drive to Palo Alto to rent time on an Imacon X5 virtual drum scanner. I am able to scan ten negatives per hour, at fifty-five dollars an hour. Scanning a batch of negatives costs hundreds of dollars, and a lot of time.
Next, all adjustments are done in Photoshop. This is not easier than the wet darkroom, but it allows for a significantly greater degree of precision. Most importantly, though, is that it takes far more time.
The least amount of time put into one of my Hextone prints is probably around eight hours. The average, however, is between fifteen and twenty hours of work to a single image.
My hybridized process is neither quicker nor easier than the traditional darkroom.
Additionally, this is still a rare process. I learned Hextone directly from its pioneer, Tom Mallonee. Only a handful of people who print black and white digitally do so with Hextone. Furthermore, my inkset was custom mixed by Tom Mallonee, to achieve the tone I desired. I am the rare person printing with the inkset.
The Digital Photograph: Less of a Fine Art
The benchmark, for most people, has always been the gelatin silver print. It was assumed that a digitally produced black and white photograph would always be inferior until it was able to be indistinguishable from a gelatin silver print. While it is true that no digital printing process to date can perfectly mimic a gelatin silver print, it can be said that it doesn’t have to. People continue striving for a digital gelatin silver print, but something has happened along the way.
Hextone can carve out its own niche. Before digital photography came along, gelatin silver prints were not the only fine art photographs. Although it was the most popular, it was only one niche of black and white photography. Others included Bromide or Bromoil gelatin silver, Gum, Platinum, Palladium, a combination of Platinum and Palladium, Photogravure, Wet Plate, and Hand Colored.
Hextone is one of the finest printing processes around. It stands side by side with the others. It doesn’t look exactly like gelatin silver, but then, neither does platinum.
Hextone has brought the black and white digital print to fine art world.
The argument that a digital photograph is inferior, simply due to its method of creation, bothered me long before I even thought about going digital in any way. I can recall looking at some color photographs with another person. They did not know the prints were digital, I did. After viewing the show for a while, I told the person that the photographer was printing digitally. A visible scowl crossed the person’s face. What had been a pleasant showing of finely produced color photographs suddenly turned to be the inferior result of a lesser art.
I could not find this to be any more ridiculous. First, as outlined previously, my time in the digital darkroom is far greater than the time I used to spend in the wet darkroom. Disregarding the issue of time, however, there still exists the opinion that how a photograph is made relates directly to its artistic value.
Consider this scenario: There are two photographs on the wall. Same photograph, but one is printed with traditional means, the other digitally. If they are exactly the same, are we to discount the artistic value (or for that matter, monetary value) of the digital print simply because it’s digital? I would ague: Of course not. Unfortunately, some still argue that the digital print, exactly the same as the other, is in some way not as good.
Why do we have to consider the methods employed to make a photograph in order to determine its merit? The photograph should stand alone, and be judged in isolation from the process used to create it.
The stereotype that a digital photograph is inferior is slowly fading, but it will take time to lay it completely to rest.
To help speed its descent into history, I would like to include an account written by my friend, Tom Mallonee.
“In 1981, I attended my first & last workshop with Ansel Adams. With a captivated group of neophytes in the piano & gallery room of his Carmel home, he eventually brought our attention to two images on the wall: A traditional silver print of his well-known Aspens, and next to it, a poster of the same image printed by Gardner Lithograph. He explained that it was difficult to make a truly satisfying print of that particular image in the darkroom, and that the printing plate for the poster had been made by laser-scanning, digitizing, and manipulating a traditional print. The poster glowed, especially in the shadows, and I’ll always remember how Ansel’s eyes brightened as he talked about the potential of the "electronic" image.”
Back to top