Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,533   Posts: 1,572,694   Online: 859
      
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 37
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Columbia SC USA
    Posts
    27
    Thanks everybody! I see I have a lot of options, and even more to learn. I appreciate the insight...I'm really going to like this place! I've learned more in the last few days than I have in months!!! You guys are awesome!

    ~edye
    One should really use the camera, as though tomorrow you'd be stricken blind.-Dorothea Lange

  2. #12
    frank's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Bit north of Toronto
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    877
    Images
    2
    After years of b+w printing with the same materials and enlarger, I work rather intitively. I make an educated guess at the exposure based on the appearance of the image on the contact sheet. I use ripped up paper about 2 inches square placed on an important area of the photo (eg. a face) throw it in the developer to see what comes up. I usually only have to adjust the exposure by a few seconds to get it right. Then I make a full sheet at that exposure. Then I'll decide if any dodging or burning need to be done (usually burning the edges) and make a second full size print, usually 5by7 or 8by10.

    Getting a new enlarger a year ago set me back on the learning curve for a bit but now I'm almost up to speed again. People have different styles of working; some are meticulous and write enerything down and others like myself are more intuitive. I use photography and darkroom work as therapy and for artisic expression. For me it would be counter-productive to work in an orderly way. With enough experience, you do get to the point of being able to "eyeball" it. I know this would drive the meticulous workers nuts, but it works for me, and that's what photography is all about for me.

    It's kind of like a time some years ago when I joined some friends in throwing darts and having some beers one night a week. For all of us it was just recreation, but when they got really serious and began counting backwards and calculating which numbers to hit near the end of the game to be able to finish efficiently, it stopped being fun for me and became a chore, so I stopped. It would be the same for me and photography. My real job is very regulated and provides me with enough mental stimulation, for recreation I'm looking for a creative outlet and I've found it in photography, doing it the way I'm doing it.
    My blog / photo website: http://frankfoto.jimdo.com/

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    southern california
    Posts
    11
    I find that test strip sgive you most of the information you need with the first try. I use a strip about 2 inches wide placed along an important area of the image and use the same 2,4,6,8,10 sec exposure. I have found that gives me enough to make another strip that will allow a good guess at what to print the test print at. A test strip is much less expensive than an analyser and it allows you to see what the densities look like. If you have to be concerned with the cost of paper, then you need to find something else to do. Photography has certain basic costs and if these are too high, then maybe you should take up knitting.
    james

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Texas
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,576
    Images
    27
    Also use a projection as a general guide, have already found that many of my negatives fall into the same general times and just eyeball it. Not as scientific as an analyser, but much less expensive.

    It really depends on how you work, some prefer to have a measurement to base their times on, others just work their way through without any type of equipment. Which way is best - whatever works for you.

    Just another 2 cents....
    Mike C

    Rambles

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Columbia SC USA
    Posts
    27
    Quote Originally Posted by jamesiscool
    If you have to be concerned with the cost of paper, then you need to find something else to do. Photography has certain basic costs and if these are too high, then maybe you should take up knitting.
    Really??? Oh my God! I guess I should sell all my equipment and join the quilting bee!!! Seriously James, what the heck was the purpose of that comment? I asked if there were a more efficient way of determining exposure times vs test strips, and guidance in purchasing a new timer. Your opinion they (test strips) are the best way of doing so was sufficient. As a novice, and self-taught darkroom enthusiast, I could be doing a LOT of things that are unnecessary and/or wasteful...just looking for direction, not a lesson in the obvious. Thanks for your input.

    My apologies to everyone for getting a burr under my saddle. I will probably stick with the analog timer and test strip method. Maybe one day I'll be able to guesstimate exposure! Thanks all for your advice.

    ~edye
    One should really use the camera, as though tomorrow you'd be stricken blind.-Dorothea Lange

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Chalk Hill, PA, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    63
    I rarely use more than 1 sheet to make test strips. I cut a sheet into quarters (usually 2" strips). The first one gets 3 expsoures, 1 stop apart (usually 4-8-16). The next one is in third stops including the best full stop (usually 8-10-12 or 10-12-16), with minor adjustments to contrast (VC paper) . A 2"x8" strip is usually long enough to get the darkest shadow and lightest highlight from an 8x10 print. I use a few small magnets to hold the strip to my easel. With some practice, you can usually estimate the exposure and contrast and skip the first strip. This is easier if the whole role is exposed and developed the same.

  7. #17
    Leon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Kent, England
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,075
    I noticed a sharp reduction in the amount of paper i used once i bought my analyser pro - it is superb. I did find myself having to do the additional test strip occasionaly, but much less often than not.

    My advice (for what it's worth) is for you to spend the additional money, I dont think you'll regret it. And dont forget the analyser pro does much more than reduce the need for test strips.

    And, printing is an expensive pastime. Anything that can reduce the cost (after the additional outlay) for people wanting to learn has got to be a good thing ... surely?

  8. #18

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Shooter
    Large Format Pan
    Posts
    112
    Images
    3
    One printing expert suggested using teh whole sheet, but not making stright exposure strip across it. Instead, pick a corner and work away, letting an inch more expose on the longitude and lattitude. This allows you too see the affect of the exposure across more of your frame. As you get more accustomed to this, you will be able to pick the corner piont taht will show you a combination of the more challenging areas of the print (i.e. face and sky, or something like that).

  9. #19
    glbeas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Roswell, Ga. USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,307
    Images
    109
    One quick note to try out is using the safelight as an extinguishing meter (I think thats the right term). I used to do this before I ever got anything resembling a meter and quite often one sheet was all I needed for an acceptable print.
    Works like this- the safelight stays when the enlarger is on, unlike most setups where it's hooked to the other plug in the timer. The safelight is hung in a permanent location that illuminates the work area evenly at a reasonable level, not too bright or dark. When you put a neg in the enlarger notice when you turn it on the image projected looks blueish in the shadow (clear) areas and red tinted in the highlight (dark) areas at certain aperture settings. This is because those light levels relative to the safelight are higher or lower and look the color of the brighter source. I would fiddle with the aperture until the colors would swim a bit as they balance each other. Using your test strip find a time that works for that light level. Next print do your twiddling and just try a print straightaway and see how it goes. With practice you can judge the exposure quite close using that standard time for the paper you use.
    It can be a little complicated if you are switching from really big prints down to little ones but the big ones you should be making test strips on anyway because of the cost factor for the paper.
    Gary Beasley

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    southern california
    Posts
    11
    I made the comment because of other comments about equipment and testers that cost quite a bit of money and don't give you the value you should have if you are an amateur. Somewhere was a statement that someone doesn't want to waste paper doing test strips. But was looking for an analyzer to do the job hence the cost comparison. The cost of paper is quite low compared to the cost of some of these analyzers. It would be prudent to compare and decide for yourself, which is the best way for "you" to go. Not every answer is aimed at the original person who asked it. So take no offense at the answer.
    james

Page 2 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