Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,931   Posts: 1,556,970   Online: 1003
      
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 31 to 35 of 35
  1. #31
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,369
    Images
    299
    Quote Originally Posted by nworth View Post
    My experience is that negatives that require grade 5 paper almost never give a decent print. Even trying digital tricks generally fails.
    Tell that to Ralph Gibson and his prints on Grade 5 Brovira.
    "Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank

    "Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman

    "...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh

  2. #32
    RalphLambrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Central florida,USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,623
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by gbenson View Post
    Hi all,

    I pretty often run out of contrast when printing underexposed negatives. Obviously the real answer here is I should expose better, but it seems I struggle to get decent blacks when I hit grade 5 on the enlarger. Also, the difference between grades 4 and 5 seems pretty small compared to the differences between other grades. I'm pretty new to all this, so I wanted to check if I'm doing something odd--and find out if there's something easy I can change to get a bit more contrast!

    Ok, here's what I do:

    Film is HP5, 35mm, exposed at 1600ASA and developed in DD-X 1+4 at 20°C for 13 minutes, 4 inversions totalling 10 seconds each minute (basically what the datasheet says). When I expose it right I get lovely negatives that print at 3-3½.

    I use an LPL VC7700 enlarger with a 60mm lens to print on 8x10" Ilford Multigrade RC gloss paper. Usually the exposures (at f8) end up being 12-14 seconds for a nicely exposed negative at 3-3½. I develop with Acugrade 1+9 for 90 seconds (which I do 80 seconds in the tray, and the final 10 seconds held above it to drip off, so the print goes in the stop exactly 90 seconds after it went in the dev). 90 seconds isn't what the datasheet says here--it says 60 seconds, but I would end up having to expose the prints forever (with really muddy results) when I tried that. I mix it at 20°C but I don't have any method of maintaining it's temperature (yet!) so it's generally dropped 2-3°C by the time I'm finished. That doesn't seem to make a lot of difference, I've done comparison prints at the start and end before and they look much the same.

    Does anything look obviously wrong here?

    Thanks,
    Gary
    to get min and max contrst out of any paper use a tri-color green orblur, respectively
    Regards

    Ralph W. Lambrecht
    www.darkroomagic.comrorrlambrec@ymail.com[/URL]
    www.waybeyondmonochrome.com

  3. #33
    Bill Burk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    3,427
    Images
    46
    Thanks for the tips in this thread. I had to make a print from a thin neg last week. This is a list of the things I did to improve contrast. I use single graded paper. But these things I did could apply to anyone hitting a wall:

    1. Switch from diffusion source to condenser source.
    2. Selenium intensified neg.
    3. Retouched highlights with New Coccine.
    4. Added Potassium Bromide to developer.
    5. Cleaned haze off the lens.

  4. #34
    MaximusM3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    NY
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    756
    Images
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Burk View Post
    Thanks for the tips in this thread. I had to make a print from a thin neg last week. This is a list of the things I did to improve contrast. I use single graded paper. But these things I did could apply to anyone hitting a wall:

    1. Switch from diffusion source to condenser source.
    2. Selenium intensified neg.
    3. Retouched highlights with New Coccine.
    4. Added Potassium Bromide to developer.
    5. Cleaned haze off the lens.

    All good choices there, Bill...and let's not forget, there is always lith Thin negs can make some wonderful lith prints as well.

  5. #35

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Cheshire UK
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,863
    Dear Garry,

    Lots of very good advice in this thread....

    PM me your address and I will send you a MULTIGRADE Printing Manual, if your new it can help...

    Also : Thanks for using our paper, it has a real and true grade 5 ( and in our tests shows to be consistently the highest contrast of any VC paper on the market today, we also know that it is the most safelight safe, along with the old KODAK Polycontrast ).

    I will add only one thing....as I was taught many years ago... 'if it aint in the neg, it can't be in the print' : People I am sure will disagree with this and to an extent they will be correct, you can 'add' into a print using your printing skills especially in the sky etc, etc but you know what I mean.

    As an FYI the grade 5 filter of a Multigrade filter kit is very carefully matched to maximum contrast in the construction of MGIV paper, no different or 'custom' filter could increase beyond it, cos its just not there... BUT all filters fade over time ( and with use ) so you should change them every four or five years or if they are damaged. Hope you are printing down at three pretty soon...

    Simon. ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin