Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,972   Posts: 1,558,689   Online: 854
      
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 44
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    55
    I'm using a Kaiser with multigrade head and a Kienzle T67/69 with digital color head.

    I'm aware of the problem, that i can't expect to obtain a real grade 5 with a color head (or even 4, at least not with every paper). But as mentioned, even with white light (no filtration) i only get about grade 0.5, and just about grade 2 with full magenta, which definitely should not be the case with fresh paper.
    Matthias

    Once you get born you're never the same.

  2. #12
    Bill Burk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    3,432
    Images
    46
    Well, it's not like you are using a bargain or compact colorhead with limited controls.

    One thing I do now that I didn't do before is develop for a full 3 minutes in Dektol 1+2.
    -I used to develop 1 1/2 minutes...

    Also make sure you give enough exposure to result in several choices of black.
    -The scale gives you 21 steps, so any overexposure will simply give you more information.

  3. #13
    Bill Burk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    3,432
    Images
    46
    OK 7-8 clearly distinguishable steps. Plenty of development.

    How many of those steps would you want to use? If the last few dark steps are so close together that you wouldn't want your shadows plunged into them... Maybe you shouldn't count them.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Cardigan, West Wales
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    90
    Hello, Matthias.
    Are you getting a full range of tones with you results, albeit at Grade 2, e.g. are shadows muddy at all. If your tones look good it would seem the developer may be ok. I breifly had an LPL enlarger with the multigrade head which appeared fine, but I also could not get beyond @ grade 2 at the maximum setting.
    Also, are your bulbs ok, a spent halogen bulb won't bring any joy.
    Regards, Mark Walker.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    55
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Burk View Post
    OK 7-8 clearly distinguishable steps. Plenty of development.

    How many of those steps would you want to use? If the last few dark steps are so close together that you wouldn't want your shadows plunged into them... Maybe you shouldn't count them.
    Hard to tell, but i wouldn't say that the darkest or lightest steps are too close together. If i center the exposure around step 11, i get three to four nicely graduated steps before max. black as well as towards paper white, using full magenta filtration.

    I will wait until i have the Dektol mixed, and might try to find someone who can borrow me an Ilford MG filter set to make some comparative test.


    Quote Originally Posted by chimneyfinder View Post
    Are you getting a full range of tones with you results, albeit at Grade 2, e.g. are shadows muddy at all. If your tones look good it would seem the developer may be ok. I breifly had an LPL enlarger with the multigrade head which appeared fine, but I also could not get beyond @ grade 2 at the maximum setting.
    Also, are your bulbs ok, a spent halogen bulb won't bring any joy.
    Tones look good, as far as i can tell. But as the problem is exactly the same with both enlargers, i don't think it's an enlarger issue at the moment. And as i said: white light results in grade 0.5 (+/- a little) which shouln't be the case even if the magenta filtration is too weak.
    Last edited by mcilroy; 07-08-2012 at 10:29 AM. Click to view previous post history.
    Matthias

    Once you get born you're never the same.

  6. #16
    Bill Burk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    3,432
    Images
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by mcilroy View Post
    ... and might try to find someone who can borrow me an Ilford MG filter set to make some comparative test.
    I'd keep an eye out for a CC 40 or CC 50 Magenta filter. That would be a good thing to throw in the drawer if you have one... That way you can use the colorhead + magenta to get the full range (instead of sometimes using MG filters and other times using colorhead - which I would find frustrating)

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    55
    Sure, if it really turns out to be a color head issue, i will have to look for some permanent and convenient solution. The MG Filters would just be interesting for some comparisons (full magenta compared to #5 Filter, full Yellow compared to #0 and no filtration compared to #2).
    Matthias

    Once you get born you're never the same.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Daventry, Northamptonshire, England
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    7,051
    On what basis have you concluded that without filtration you are only getting 0.5 grade? Without filtration of any kind most papers and certainly Ilford will give you grade 2.

    As you say that your developer is fine and presumably your exposure is correct and paper is fresh, I wonder if your conclusions from your step wedge is wrong or is it a question of a different set of perceptions about what each grade looks like.

    There is no way that unfiltered MG paper should be grade 0.5. A grade 0.5 print from a properly exposed neg should be very soft and grey looking and without any real blacks and yet you say that the blacks are OK?

    I am very puzzled

    pentaxuser

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    55
    In my first post of this thread i mentioned this article:
    http://www.jbhphoto.com/articles/vcno2/eyeballcal.pdf

    Sure, without a refection densitometer it is hard to tell exactly which grade one actually gets. But as far as i understood it, counting the number of clearly distinguishable steps between max black and paper white will at least tell me the grade within a reasonable amount of accuracy.

    Using no filtration, I counted 9-10 steps, which according to the article corresponds to 1.35-1.50 log ER or roughly grade 0.5 (1.40 log ER).

    And prints do indeed look too soft, but getting real black is of course just a question of exposure time with any negative and grade, when we ignore highlight exposure.
    Matthias

    Once you get born you're never the same.

  10. #20
    Bill Burk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    3,432
    Images
    46
    In this recent thread we discussed how you need a scale that reaches 150 or 170 to dial in Magenta for high grades - use the most you can get. OP in this thread could only go up to 100.

    http://www.apug.org/forums/forum41/1...e-paper-2.html

    I don't exactly know how to measure the density of a magenta filter, but I took a #4 filter and put it under the green dot on my densitometer, it measured over 2.50

    So I think a CC 100 Magenta would be awesome to add...

    ---
    I also think this may be a matter of interpretation. The standards are based on a specific range, somewhere like 4 to 96%... and mcilroy, you're using eyeball to interpret. So you could be counting a higher number than technically getting.

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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