Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,909   Posts: 1,521,570   Online: 798
      
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 32

Thread: Wet vs. Dry

  1. #21
    jp498's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Owls Head ME
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,448
    Images
    74
    It hasn't been mentioned, but matting and framing the photo with clean glass adds some dimension to the photo's presentation.

    The glass is sort of like the reflective sheen of water on a wet print.

    If you are also comparing your bare prints in your hand with other people's matted and framed photos, you need to do the same to make an accurate comparison.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    193
    Dry down amount varies by paper, but MOST (not all) are -10%. The test is easy. Make 4 prints. One you like, and three with -4,-7, and -10 %. Dry those three, keep the one you like wet in a tray. When dry, compare. One will match, or pretty close. If it's pretty close, interpolate and get on with life.

    Doing the test itself yields lessons other than dry-down amount, too. So please just don't take my word for it, do it for yourself.

    Want to have fun? Take a sheet of paper and tear it in half. Toss half in the fixer directly, develop and fix the other half. Compare. They'd better match. I found mine don't - developed paper was fogged until I added an ounce of benzotriazole to a half gallon of working solution of Dektol. That was true even of brand new paper, and more true of older stuff freezer-stored. My whites aren't dingy anymore.

    By the way, RC dries down, too. I use it for proofing and with new students. It also has fog.
    Bruce Barlow
    author, "Finely Focused" and "More Finely Focused"
    www.bwbarlow.wordpress.com

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Central Florida, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,913
    Quote Originally Posted by jp498 View Post
    It hasn't been mentioned, but matting and framing the photo with clean glass adds some dimension to the photo's presentation.
    Good point!

    One of my standard ways to review prints is to use a mat that is pearl white. The slight cream/off-white color of the mat enhances the white and the black of the print. It tends to bring some of the "glow" back. Since I always use that color to mat, I use it to judge my final adjustment.

    It is also important that when you evaluate your print, do it in similar light as the light that your print will be displayed. Doing it in dimly lit darkroom will often give you a false result.

    With experience, you will be able to account for the dry down process and make your prints accordingly. (either that or invent a frame with sprinkler system built in to keep your print wet....)
    Develop, stop, fix.... wait.... where's my film?

  4. #24
    ROL
    ROL is offline
    ROL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    786

    Science Faction

    Now that this thread is chock full of good suggestions and useful observations, I'll add a really bizarre one I happened upon accidentally while investigating my particular lab setup some years ago. I assume the OP is using glossy papers to begin with. At one time I used the kitchen micro-wave to see the immediate effect of "dry-down", after development. The (torn) micro-waved print exhibited a super, super contrasty, wet looking, cibachrome-like gloss to the print's surface. I have no idea how the radiation changes the actual paper or emulsion physically, other than to note that it was a bit "crispy".

    The next step would be to attempt to flatten and mount a print small enough to have been dried wholly within the device. I never completed this part of the investigation as my micro-wave is too small to treat normal (for me) sized prints and the changes to fiber based papers seems undesirable, by any classical consideration. But, there you go...

  5. #25
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,189
    Images
    148
    Papers, Colour and B&W like films can suffer from Micro reticulation, so do home made emulsions (as one Emulsion maker on APUG can attest).

    Kodak did tests with colour papers where they used a visual grading, a then current paper emulsions was the standard, they tested hardeners that prevent this happening (all were better than the standard), these improvements are now used in colour papers and most films.

    With papers the micro reticulation causes the surface dulling, heat drying alleviates it, steaming or use of a microwave momentarily remelts the surface gelatin super-coat, within reason the more the heat the greater the gloss, the extreme is glazing (ferrotyping) where the surface is deliberately re-melted against a chrome metal plate.

    Ian

  6. #26
    Tony Egan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,127
    Images
    69
    I would also recommend you keep all your less than perfect dried down prints for experimentation with other techniques such as bleaching, bleach and redevelopment and sepia or other toning options which often take the top of the highlights giving you a more contrasty, punchier print. On occasions you will find an initial discard comes out a winner.
    http://www.tonyeganphotography.com/index.html
    "Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others." Groucho Marx

  7. #27
    Ken Nadvornick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Monroe, WA, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,079
    Images
    48
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Grant View Post
    With papers the micro reticulation causes the surface dulling, heat drying alleviates it, steaming or use of a microwave momentarily remelts the surface gelatin super-coat, within reason the more the heat the greater the gloss, the extreme is glazing (ferrotyping) where the surface is deliberately re-melted against a chrome metal plate.
    So then there might indeed be something to my assumption that a gentle microwave heating of a damp print is similar to a steaming treatment? At least in terms of surface appearance alteration?

    But since steaming would seem to be an external application of damp heat and microwaving an application of internally-generated damp heat, would there be any other additional reasons for concern when microwaving?

    I know from experience that excessive curling is one possible downside. But the overall effect - the enhancement of surface sheen - is pretty darned dramatic, and to my eye worth the trouble, if it's not somehow destroying the print internally.

    Ken
    "Hate is an adolescent term used to stop discussion with people you disagree with. You can do better than that."
    —'blanksy', December 13, 2013

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Pasadena, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    813
    Images
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by BBarlow690 View Post
    ...until I added an ounce of benzotriazole to a half gallon of working solution of Dektol. .
    Bruce, was that an ounce of 10% solution?

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Ontario
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    775
    Images
    28
    I have only briefly hear someone mention selenium toning. about 5 minutes in 1:40 will increase the intensity of your photo slightly (making richer blacks, while adding some depth to the photograph), which might help.

    You also never mentioned what paper your using. If you're using FB Warmtone, it tends to appear duller as the base isn't as white. Also, if you're using matte lustre paper or semi-matt, it will look "weaker" than glossy.

  10. #30
    2F/2F's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,008
    Images
    4
    Selenium toning would make the darks that are already too dark even darker. It would also change the color of the print.

    If anything chemical to recover a print that has dried down unacceptably, it is a mild bleaching. I do it all the time when I decide I should have printed something slightly brighter over all. I also do it when I want to slightly change the contrast (pop the highlights throughout the print) of something, by using a quick shot of diluted bleach on a print that has not been pre-soaked. Then, of course, there is localized bleaching, which I also do not all that rarely. It allows you to "paint in" your highlights and really fine tune your print.
    Last edited by 2F/2F; 03-12-2011 at 05:11 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    2F/2F

    "Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."

    - Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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