Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,832   Posts: 1,582,356   Online: 935
      
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 20
  1. #1
    Matt5791's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    England, Birmingham
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    998
    Images
    17

    Received my Analyser Pro...few questions!

    Had a couple of questions about the Analyaser pro - I know I can call RH, but it is out of office hours now.

    First, I am using Ilford MG and I seem to be getting really dark prints, too dark for the test strip sequence - so mabey I need to calibrate?

    Second, what I cant understand is if the reading suggests I need an increase in contrast, and I push the increase contrast button, the time goes up too - but I though the Ilford MG filters remained the same exposure apart from the likes of no's 5 upwards??

    I tried reducing exposure time with the reduce time button but this seems to call for an increase in contrast afterwards.

    Anyway I wanted to produce some quick proofs last night and I discovered that if I reduced the exposure by 10 steps it was somewhre about right - but the grey scale leds were flashing at me when I did this - the prints looked OK though.

    I have read the book a few times - so mabey I'm showing my general inexperience here in the darkroom?!

    Any pointers and help / experiences woudl be gratefully received.

    Many thanks,
    Matt.

  2. #2
    nyx
    nyx is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Prague, Czech Republic
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    54
    Images
    3
    Just an idea. Do you put filters away when you're metering? If you meter with them, you'll get dark prints.

  3. #3
    Dave Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Middle England
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    3,894
    Images
    2
    I agree with nyx. You should be metering under white light.
    Regards Dave.

    An English Eye


  4. #4
    Matt5791's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    England, Birmingham
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    998
    Images
    17
    Yes - filters are removed

    and I have the safelight wired into the Analyser.

  5. #5
    mikeg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Shropshire, UK
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    570
    Images
    6
    Hello,

    You say that you're using Ilford MG paper. Is that the MG IV RC resin coated paper or is it the fibre version? Just that the default settings are for the RC version.

    Mike

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    205
    Hi Matt,

    I have a zonemaster II but it works the same as the Analyser for what you are doing.

    When you say the test strip sequence is too dark I presume you are starting from the default time of 15 secs at grade 2, correct? This would give you a initial exposure of 12.4 secs. and move up from there for each strip. Yes?

    The thing to bear in mind is that this is just a default. If you find it to be too dark then reduce the initial time accordingly until you get a sequence that is in the right ball park.

    I am not sure what you refer to when you say that reducing time causes an increase in contrast as you do not use the densitometer for test strips, or are you talking about contact prints?

    Antonio

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt5791
    Had a couple of questions about the Analyaser pro - I know I can call RH, but it is out of office hours now.

    First, I am using Ilford MG and I seem to be getting really dark prints, too dark for the test strip sequence - so mabey I need to calibrate?

    Second, what I cant understand is if the reading suggests I need an increase in contrast, and I push the increase contrast button, the time goes up too - but I though the Ilford MG filters remained the same exposure apart from the likes of no's 5 upwards??

    I tried reducing exposure time with the reduce time button but this seems to call for an increase in contrast afterwards.

    Anyway I wanted to produce some quick proofs last night and I discovered that if I reduced the exposure by 10 steps it was somewhre about right - but the grey scale leds were flashing at me when I did this - the prints looked OK though.

    I have read the book a few times - so mabey I'm showing my general inexperience here in the darkroom?!

    Any pointers and help / experiences woudl be gratefully received.

    Many thanks,
    Matt.

  7. #7
    Robert Hall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Lehi, Utah
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    2,040
    Images
    28
    Sounds like you are too close with your light source or your aperture is open wide. You told us nothing about how your enlarger is setup.

    Also, the filters take one stop more than what you measure, then the 4th grade and up take 2 stops.
    Robert Hall
    www.RobertHall.com
    www.RobertHall.com/mobile
    Apug Portfolio
    Facebook Profile


    Technology is not a panacea. It alone will not move your art forward. Only through developing your own aesthetic - free from the tools that create it - can you find new dimension to your work.

  8. #8
    L Gebhardt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    NH - Live Free or Die
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    1,719
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    18
    I have the Analyser 500 (for the Ilford 500 head) so this may not be applicable. The default calibrations did not work for me on either RC or FB. The calibration process is not that bad if you have a densitometer and can figure out what is going on. Or for a small fee RH Designs will read your strips for you and send you new calibration values.

    As an aside, when I mentioned that I was using the Analyser to Les McLean he called me "lazy". I am begining to think he might be right.

  9. #9
    mikeg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Shropshire, UK
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    570
    Images
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by L Gebhardt
    As an aside, when I mentioned that I was using the Analyser to Les McLean he called me "lazy". I am begining to think he might be right.
    One of the main reasons why I got the Analyser Pro was that I'm hopeless at working out what contrast grade to print a negative at. Obviously, a lot of this is down to experience and I'm sure that Les can pick the correct grade from a contact sheet at 100 paces. Maybe when I'm a bit more experienced I'll be able to do likewise, but at the moment it's a huge help to me to be able to see the contrast range of a negative on the Analyser Pro's LEDs and to see what the effect is of changing the paper grade.

    Cheers

    Mike

  10. #10
    Matt5791's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    England, Birmingham
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    998
    Images
    17
    Ok - had another session last night and I reduced the exposure by 5 steps (1/12th) for each contrast grade and this seems about right - it may not have been as far out as I originally suspected.

    Mabey I was being a bit impatient!

    Incindentally I was using the regular Ilford RC MG IV.

    I think this is going to be a very worthwhile investment indeed as the bulk of my work is weddings and similar where I need to output large volumes of acceptable prints.

    I will be able to feed these into my Durst Printo once I have set it up and go even faster!

    Matt.

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