Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,914   Posts: 1,584,712   Online: 803
      
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 29 of 29
  1. #21
    DF
    DF is offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    92
    Yeh, I think it could be the chemicals - old/bad.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,098
    Quote Originally Posted by DF View Post
    Gerald - I've allways known more development time meant increased contrast, but, you're saying that I can leave the print in the developer for an additional 30-60 seconds longer!? I leave/gently rock it in there for one minute.
    O.K. I'll start "experimenting with longer development times. I think that's where the problem could be.
    You want full development. Not sure what developer you are using but normally an Ilford RC paper would require 1-2 minutes at 20C/68F (except Cooltone which takes longer). Check Ilford's instructions for the processing times. Check your temperatures. Continuous agitation is a good idea. Don't just leave the print to sit in the developer during development. Rock the tray (not too gently) or keep flipping the print manually.

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Southern USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,141
    Quote Originally Posted by DF View Post
    Gerald - I've allways known more development time meant increased contrast, but, you're saying that I can leave the print in the developer for an additional 30-60 seconds longer!? I leave/gently rock it in there for one minute.
    O.K. I'll start "experimenting with longer development times. I think that's where the problem could be.
    Yes, paper development can be considered as development to completion. When the paper is first immersed there is a rapid change in image density but with time a point is reached when there is little change with time. It is at this point where the print should be removed. This is why I tell people to watch the print and not the clock. When there seems to be no change in the image then remove the print.
    A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral.

    ~Antoine de Saint-Exupery

  4. #24
    Stoo Batchelor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Hertfordshire, England
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,237
    Images
    42
    Dear DF

    I think you missed a very important part of Gerald's post, where he refers to the negative being developed to the correct contrast. 'More development means more contrast' is usually referring to film development. Please slap me down if I am telling you something that you already know, but I am unaware of your knowledge of the darkroom. A fine print starts from a fine negative, which starts from doing some testing to develop a negative to suit the paper that you are using. Very rarely will a negative exposed at box speed, developed in your chosen developer, at the manufacturers recommended time, lead to a fine print with rich deep blacks and crisp clean whites.

    As laborious as testing is, it might be worth going back to the beginning and do the leg work. There are many threads on APUG explaining how, though personally I would look up the posts of Thomas Bertilsson, as he has explained it here beautifully so many times.

    As I say, forgive me if you have already done this, but it is good to put it out there for others.

    Best, and good luck

    Stoo

    Quote Originally Posted by Gerald C Koch View Post



    Make sure that your negatives are developed to the correct contrast index CI or β. You shouldn't need to tone your prints just to get more contrast.
    _____________________________________________

  5. #25
    RPC
    RPC is offline

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    406
    Quote Originally Posted by Stoo Batchelor View Post
    A fine print starts from a fine negative, which starts from doing some testing to develop a negative to suit the paper that you are using.
    +1

  6. #26
    DF
    DF is offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    92
    I messed up my reply to Stoo. Keep the second one and eliminate the 1st/original. Sorry.
    Thanks
    DF
    Last edited by DF; 01-11-2013 at 07:40 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  7. #27
    DF
    DF is offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    92
    Stoo, Thank You for your your guidance. I've been in the darkroom for only 1 1/2 years, and for only one evening per/week. 'Wish I had more, so time learning/absorbing is abit lean for now, but it's all coming slowly but surely. I use Ilford Multigrade IV RC Deluxe Paper Pearl with either Delta 100 or PanFPlus films, Dektol developer.

  8. #28
    winger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Page County, IA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,505
    Images
    47
    Quote Originally Posted by DF View Post
    Stoo, Thank You for your your guidance. I've been in the darkroom for only 1 1/2 years, and for only one evening per/week. 'Wish I had more, so time learning/absorbing is abit lean for now, but it's all coming slowly but surely. I use Ilford Multigrade IV RC Deluxe Paper Pearl with either Delta 100 or PanFPlus films, Dektol developer.
    Do you have any APUGers near you that you can watch or who can watch you in the darkroom? Some things are learned much more easily with a quick personal lesson.

  9. #29
    craigclu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    NW Wisconsin, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    778
    Some years back, I volunteered to help resurrect a local high school's darkroom. It had gradually become a storeroom and after clearing it out, I was happy to see that it was equipped with decent equipment (Beseler 45XL's, MXT's and a few 23CII's) that were fitted with 6 element Rodagon and Companon-S glass for all formats. Our first actual printing session left me disappointed with flat results as you described. I'll spare you the trouble-shooting details but it turned out to be an almost indiscernible slight haze in the lenses. A quick initial exam of them had me thinking the optics seemed new appearing. A bright light, careful exam allowed it to be seen. I brought a known optic from home and the issue cleared up. It was such a subtle amount of haze that at first, I couldn't convince myself that it could have the dramatic effect that it did.
    Craig Schroeder

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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