Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,919   Posts: 1,556,504   Online: 1259
      
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14
  1. #1
    Schlapp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Isle of Lewis, Scotland
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    738
    Images
    99

    Development for POP printing

    I've acquired some Adox 400 sheet film 5x7 which I use in my old FKD. I'm trying to get enough contrast for POP printing - so far with little success. I have been told that using Ilford PQ Universal print developer will achieve better contrast - instead of my normal Aculux2 or fx-39.
    Has anyone any advice regarding the times for PQ Universal with this film please.

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Queens, NY
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    625
    I doubt you'll find anyone using that exact combination, but let me chip in with what I know. I've developed FP4+ 5x7 in Neutol WA paper developer 1+7 for cyanotypes. My times were a little above two minutes. A 400 speed film would need more time, and POP a lot more. I would start with 4-5 minutes if I were you.

  3. #3
    c6h6o3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    3,189
    Images
    6
    You need a ton of density with POP. You also need to control the contrast well in the negative, because you have very little contrast control when printing POP.

    I'd use a staining developer. My favorite is 510 pyro.

  4. #4
    Jim Noel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    1,867
    Blog Entries
    1
    Ilford Universal PQ will give you an amazing amount of contrast in most any film.

    I have used it at 1:4 for building contrast and it will go almost off the charts.

    Sorry but I don't have development times at hand at the moment.
    [FONT=Comic Sans MS]Films NOT Dead - Just getting fixed![/FONT]

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,243
    Images
    9
    I do not use that combination. I use pyrocat-HD for pop or DDX and JandC 200 and Efke PL100. I get plenty of contrast with the Efke but the JandC is a little on the un contrasty side in the development arena, so I get the contrast at the scene by shooting in really contrasty light. I have used the print developer to process copy negs and the contrast was a PIA to control. As was said it will produce contrast that goes off the charts.

    For POP, the shortest exposure time I have gotten is 13 minutes, but I cook the hell out of the paper and then fix before toning in KRST. Good luck.
    Technological society has succeeded in multiplying the opportunities for pleasure, but it has great difficulty in generating joy. Pope Paul VI

    So, I think the "greats" were true to their visions, once their visions no longer sucked. Ralph Barker 12/2004

  6. #6
    Schlapp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Isle of Lewis, Scotland
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    738
    Images
    99
    Many thanks all

  7. #7

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Northern Aquitaine
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    4,913
    I seriously doubt that many ISO 400 films can deliver enough contrast for POP in anything. For POP I use Ilford FP4 Plus and Ortho Plus, both of which can be developed to a high gamma in almost anything.

    Because of the inherent self-masking of POP, you can get excellent prints from a wide range of contrasts, as long as you have plenty of contrast (too little won't work). As the shadows darken, they mask the emulsion behind them and darkening slows in those areas while continuing apace in the highlights.

    Cheers,

    Roger (www.rogerandfrances.com)

  8. #8
    donbga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Shooter
    Large Format Pan
    Posts
    2,084
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Hicks
    I seriously doubt that many ISO 400 films can deliver enough contrast for POP in anything. For POP I use Ilford FP4 Plus and Ortho Plus, both of which can be developed to a high gamma in almost anything.

    Because of the inherent self-masking of POP, you can get excellent prints from a wide range of contrasts, as long as you have plenty of contrast (too little won't work). As the shadows darken, they mask the emulsion behind them and darkening slows in those areas while continuing apace in the highlights.

    Cheers,

    Roger (www.rogerandfrances.com)
    Roger,

    So you don't think Kodak Tri-X, TMAX 400, or HP5 can't be developed for POP?
    Don Bryant

  9. #9

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Northern Aquitaine
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    4,913
    Quote Originally Posted by donbga
    Roger,

    So you don't think Kodak Tri-X, TMAX 400, or HP5 can't be developed for POP?
    Dear Don,

    Well, put it this way. I couldn't get the contrast that I wanted from HP5 Plus for POP and when I spoke to Mike Gristwood about it (this was obviously before the bankruptcy) he agreed that getting a gamma of much over 1.0 out of HP5 was hard work and that 1.2 to 1.3 (which was what I was looking for) was probably out of sight.

    I don't say it can't be done; I just said I doubt it.

    Cheers,

    Roger

  10. #10
    Ole
    Ole is offline
    Ole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Bergen, Norway
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    9,281
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    31
    The best result I've had so far was from a negative developed norrmally, and then bleached and redeveloped in a pyrogallol/sodium carbonate mix. No sulfite at all, the "redeveloper" lasted just long enough to do the job.
    -- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
    Norway

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