Developer/paper question

[Florian1234]

Hey,

can I use regular paper-developer for multigrade papers? I have the regular Ilford Multigrade paper in dull finish and Tetenal Eukobrom developer.

 

[shadowfox]

I believe so, there's nothing special about variable contrast (or multigrade in Ilford parlance) that requires a specific developer. I use Silvergrain Tektol currently.

 

[Florian1234]

Thanks, so I can do some first prints tonight. 🙂

 

[Roger Hicks]

Thanks, so I can do some first prints tonight. 🙂

Yes.

Good luck!

I'm especially stoked about printing at the moment because Frances has been printing the last couple of days, now the water supply to the darkroom is restored.

Post your results.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Roma]

You should be able to use your combination without problems. I personally stick with Ilford paper developer and Ilford paper, but it's certainly just my thing and I know people who mix and match whatever they like.
Best wishes with it Florian and let us know how it works out!

 

[Florian1234]

Thanks guys, it works quite well. I did my first wet prints in my own darkroom today. All in all I did "only" 4 18x24cm prints in 2 1/2 hours, with all the test stripes and looking for a good shot in my negative folder.

They have to dry now. I'll scan and post them tomorrow (or make a crappy p&s camera shot from them and put it up here...). 😀

 

[Florian1234]

The prints are dry now and look very nice for my first time, but could be a tad sharper.
(scanned the prints) #1

and #2:

What do you think?

 

[dfoo]

I like the first one, but it looks a little light.

 

[john_s]

I like the first one, but it looks a little light.

I like it too, but it's a very difficult lighting situation, with important parts in sun and also in shade. This was a tough one to start with!

 

[Erik van Straten]

The second print is better. To improve the first print, just take a softer filter and expose longer.

Success!

Erik.

 

[Florian1234]

Thanks for the hints and encouragement, guys.

Regarding the first print: I already fiddled with my hand above the tent's entrance. Without that the girl would not be visible, but deep black 😀

 

[Florian1234]

Here are #3 and 4 out of the four I did on friday.

#3

and #4

If you ask me they are a bit too dark.

 

[Erik van Straten]

It looks like your negatives were a bit underexposed. Just put the ISO dial of your lightmeter on a lower number, for instance TriX not on 400 but on 320.

Erik.

 

[Florian1234]

This is how the scanned negatives look like:

and

So I most likely put a bit too much light on the paper. Or am I wrong?

 

[shadowfox]

Cool!
I'd be really happy with print #2. The exposure is spot on.
To tackle no.1 I'd probably try pre-flashing the paper to get rid of that blown-white edges.

No #3 and #4 probably needs split-grading. First expose with low contrast to get the shadow details (about half the total exposure time), and then punch in the filter to a higher grade to add the contrast back into the picture.