Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,222   Posts: 1,532,454   Online: 1155
      
Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst 123456
Results 51 to 60 of 60
  1. #51

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Downers Grove Illinois
    Posts
    1,050
    Quote Originally Posted by chriscrawfordphoto View Post
    It would be easier for you to produce negatives that print well on grade 2. Develop them longer and you won't need to use grade 5.
    Yes 4 sure. Exposure controls shadow detail. Development controls highlight density. With more highlight density, you can expose longer and get blacker blacks. Another way to think is longer print exposure will get the blacks you desire, but the whites will grey. If they had more density, light would be held back more and they would stay white.

  2. #52

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    The highest state
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,892
    I'll see how I get along with black and white on a color head I guess. I have a Beseler 45S coming tomorrow and plan on hooking it up to my StopClock Vario, can't decide if I will use the spare sensor in it or not.
    I also got two brand new boxes of Ilford MG filters in 3.5x3.5 for my mural enlarger and students, nice to fall back on if I hate the Dichroic head I guess...also bought Ralph's book, look forward to learning a lot.

  3. #53
    bvy
    bvy is offline

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    838
    Images
    36
    Thanks again everyone. I'm still not convinced. I won't argue that my negatives aren't thin and/or underexposed. But the print I got of the boy (#1) has much more contrast than the prints I'm producing today (from similarly thin/underexposed negatives).

    I bought my Ilford multigrade developer (PQ) 13 months ago, but it has always been kept full in an airtight bottle. I wouldn't expect it to be bad, but I might pick up a fresh supply anyway.

  4. #54

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Oklahoma, USA
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    680
    I once had a Leitz V35 with speed matched contrast steps. Later I got a LPL color head and found myself using under the lens filters or dialing in only megenta. If your negatives normally print within a one contrast grade spread, (2.5 to 3.5) just using magenta is easy.

    I print test strips when changing contrast and the magenta only technique does not slow me down. I have learned instinctively when to add a second or two when increasing contrast. Megenta only allows you to avoid printing though higher density and avoid exposure times over 30s.

    If you do complex manupulation or print balancing this will not be as convenient as dialing in speed matched contrast changes. Good negatives with simple techniques produce good results with less frustration. Its all in a properly exposed negative.
    Last edited by Richard Jepsen; 01-10-2013 at 11:29 AM. Click to view previous post history.
    RJ

  5. #55
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,169
    Quote Originally Posted by cliveh View Post
    I would agree with this post and go further by saying that you should (where possible) produce negatives that require no filtration, given your film development procedure and enlarger type/set up.
    Actually Steve Beskin posted information that negatives processed to print on Grade 3 paper yeild the least distorted tonal reproduction scale. Also, when using multigrade paper, exposing without a filter negates any benefit of the multigrade technique.

  6. #56

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,608
    Quote Originally Posted by ic-racer View Post
    Also, when using multigrade paper, exposing without a filter negates any benefit of the multigrade technique.
    Exactly right. The notion proper exposure/development of the negative should always yield effortless grade 2 (or any grade) prints is nonsense.

  7. #57
    bvy
    bvy is offline

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    838
    Images
    36
    Thanks again everyone. I finally got a print of the crowd that I'm happy with. I took Richard's suggestion and cranked up the magenta. (As an aside, I noticed there's a second set of numbers that comes with the Ilford insert that represents dichroic equivalents of the graded filters; it shows grade 5 as 199M. I need to read more about this.)

    At first I noticed my blacks in this print weren't as black as in some of my other prints. Then I realized that when I bought new paper, I picked up Satin instead of Pearl. The Satin black isn't as deep as the Pearl black; it also seems to be warmer (more brown).

  8. #58

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,608
    bvy - for more from Ilford I'll suggest this again...

    http://www.ilfordphoto.com/Webfiles/...8932591755.pdf

  9. #59
    RalphLambrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    the villages .centralflorida,USA and Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,442
    Images
    1
    this is an extremely good article about the true behavior of mg papers.excellent. thanks
    Regards

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

  10. #60

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Oklahoma, USA
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    680
    Quote Originally Posted by bvy View Post
    Thanks again everyone. I'm still not convinced. I won't argue that my negatives aren't thin and/or underexposed. But the print I got of the boy (#1) has much more contrast than the prints I'm producing today (from similarly thin/underexposed negatives).

    I bought my Ilford multigrade developer (PQ) 13 months ago, but it has always been kept full in an airtight bottle. I wouldn't expect it to be bad, but I might pick up a fresh supply anyway.
    You may be surprized. Ilford PQ Universal and probably multigrade have a short shelf life when opened. Once the liquid changes several tones to a light yellow-brown, toss it. At a certain tone of light yellow-brown, it will produce a OK print but may not be full scale. In general, a print developed with oxidized developer lacks sparkle.
    RJ

Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst 123456


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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