Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,970   Posts: 1,523,495   Online: 875
      
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12

    calibrating your printing process

    Recently, I have gathered equipment for enlarging and is ready to start. I want to get my printing process standardize somehow that I can save time/cost in processing my prints. Here is my though:

    1. Buy a Stouffer Transmission Projection Step Wedge and then use it with my Ilford EM10 and Durst 605 for calibrating my film processing, i.e. EI and development time.

    2. Use the Step Wedge to calibrate the EM10.

    3. Use the same equipment for determine the standard print time for Ilford VC paper for maximum black, esp. for 5x7 and 8x10 paper sizes. (Ralph Lambrecht plots the EM10 graph similarly, right?)

    Hopefully, I can determine:
    (i) EI and N development time for individual film
    (ii) Calibrate the EM10 that the corresponding film density for each EM10 number is known.
    (iii) Standard printing time for commonly used print sizes 5x7 and 8x10 are known
    (iv) determine the filter grade for a given film with a contrast range measured by the EM10 exposure monitor

    I have everything standby me except the Step Wedge. There are other Stouffer products, does the one mentioned above suit my need? Should I opt for a 21-steps or (EM10 not sensitive enough for) a 31-steps one? Calibrated one?

    Please feel free to comments and share your experience on calibrating your printing process, in particular if you use similar equipment.
    Black and white make my life [COLOR=Red]c[/COLOR][COLOR=DarkOrange]o[/COLOR][COLOR=Yellow]l[/COLOR][COLOR=Green]o[/COLOR][COLOR=Cyan]u[/COLOR][COLOR=Blue]r[/COLOR][COLOR=Purple]f[/COLOR]u[COLOR=White]l[/COLOR].

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    6,242
    If you want to get serious about this then I would follow the procedure outlined in the BTZS 4th edition.

    The reason that I suggest this is that it seems to be more comprehensive then other methods.

    I recognize other methods exist and I am not discounting them...just offering what my experience has shown me.
    Art is a step from what is obvious and well-known toward what is arcane and concealed.

    Visit my website at http://www.donaldmillerphotography.com

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    284
    For the weary, note: BTZS can be very dense stuff (no pun intended)

    edit: Ansels 'The Negative' and 'The Print' can be equally as dense
    Last edited by Christopher Colley; 07-20-2006 at 03:07 AM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: fair and balanced!
    "Where is beauty? Where I must will with my whole Will; where I will love and perish, that an image may not remain merely an image."

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Eastern, Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,020
    Images
    55
    g'day arthur,
    it seems to me, and it's my experience, that one shouldn't standardise too much as each printing is a creative process with lots of variables that can be manipulated to produce unique works

  5. #5
    df cardwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Dearborn,Michigan & Cape Breton Island
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,342
    Images
    8
    Knowing what's going to happen to your film when you push the button is nice. Some may even say it is important. For me, it's like knowing what the piano is going to do when I press the key. For nearly everybody, I'd say get that far: know what's going to happen when you push the button.

    Beyond that, it's up to an individual's temperament. Some folks look outside and see a mass of details, and measure everything in sight before deciding if it's a nice day. Fine. For them, I heartily suggest Beyond the Zone System.

    For me, well, if it looks good, and I feel good, it's good. I have a less numerical approach, and it suits me well.

    If you are more confident in an analytical, numerical, approach to life you'll be confident and effective only if you bring this approach to your photography. If you are more intuitive, don't on any account start drawing graphs.

    An incredibly effective and reliable approach for the intuitive is to begin with a manufacturer's suggested Exposure Index and development time. Pick a scene that is the kind of scene you like to shoot and make a series of exposures at different settings, and give them the suggested development time. Make a series of proof prints. You'll probably have a couple pictures that are close to what you like: pick the one you like best, and note the exposure index you used for it. Load a second roll, of a few more sheets, and makes a series of images that are at the same setting, and give them development times. I'd choose the manufacturer's time, 20% more time, and 20% less time. Make quick prints and see which one brings you closer to your ideal. If you like the results, shoot that way. If you think an in-between setting is better, go with that.

    This is no more than applying sorting theory, and is equally effective to less integrative approach like BTZS. Use what makes sense, keep notes whatever you do, and go take pictures.

    Most importantly, SHOW us the pictures !

    good luck
    "One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid,
    and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision"

    -Bertrand Russell

  6. #6
    Joe Lipka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Cary, North Carolina
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    808
    The entire premise behind the concept of calibration is that you will be able to maintain consistency throughout the process. This is what Fred Picker espoused with his Zone VI methods. That's cool. The key point that is missed by most people is that you need to purchase enough film and paper (of the same emulsion batch) to get through your calibration and testing to take advantage of the efficiencies of the standardization.

    If you must, do the calibration and testing for one batch so you know how it works and you can develop your eye for what works and what doesn't. Then you can get to spot that df cardwell describes above.

    The technical stuff is easy. Get it over with quickly so you can spend time on making better pictures.
    Two New Projects! Light on China - 07/13/2014

    www.joelipkaphoto.com

    250+ posts and still blogging! "Postcards from the Creative Journey"

    http://blog.joelipkaphoto.com/

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12
    It's enjoyable to chat with APUGers. Thanks for the kind reminders.

    Cardwell, a photographer's intuition is very important. Yes, photography is more than a scientific process, it also needs our creativity and interpretation as input. I will keep this point in my heart. As Joe points out, the underlying idea of calibration is to maintain consistency, i.e. for quality control. Like many other APUGers, I had been spent much time testing and comparing different dev/film combos to the point that I seldom focused on making good pictures. I have a 6 weeks summer vacation. Of course, I will spend only part of it on calibration. Hopefully, calibration is to set up an emergent exit for me.

    Comments and thoughts are welcomed. ;p
    Black and white make my life [COLOR=Red]c[/COLOR][COLOR=DarkOrange]o[/COLOR][COLOR=Yellow]l[/COLOR][COLOR=Green]o[/COLOR][COLOR=Cyan]u[/COLOR][COLOR=Blue]r[/COLOR][COLOR=Purple]f[/COLOR]u[COLOR=White]l[/COLOR].

  8. #8
    stormbytes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New England, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    244
    Images
    1
    For what it's worth...

    I've spent years and years on senseless "calibration" without much success. Let me cut to the chase and save you what could very well be a similar fate. Photography, though not altogether without some scientific constants, is above all, an art form. What you are aiming for is a photograph that is aesthetically pleasing rather then one that may or may not be "mathematically correct".

    So here's my advice:

    Choose a film & developer combination, and a subject range that is in line with your area of interest.

    Batch 1:

    Shoot a few frames of your chosen film at varrying ISO settings. Process your film at two or three time/temperature configurations. Print the resulting negatives to their respective states of "perfection".

    Batch 2:

    Repeat the tests, tweaking your exposure/process based on the results obtained from batch one. Repeat this step as needed.

    Batch 3:

    Confirm that you are getting the results you want, based on data obtained from previous batches.
    -
    Daniel

  9. #9
    kunihiko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Tokyo
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    242
    Images
    17
    Hi arthur,
    It looks like you've already tested and found standard film/dev combo which works for you. Then, standard printing stage should be very easy. You would be able to fine your standard printing time without such equipments, but with little experience.
    Most of the time, especialy in the prtinting stage, experience works better than equipments.

    And, standard tends to be boring.
    kunihiko kario

  10. #10
    RJS
    RJS is offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Southern Cal
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    246
    If you want to or are willing to spend I would suggest you obtain an RH Designs timer. Read Paul Butzi's review - it will make doing what you seem to want far easier and save considerable time and money in printing. Perhaps the best investment I have made in 'gear' for many years!

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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