kmerenkov
Established
Hi all, I've just finished my first experiments with analog printing...
I have kodak xtol as a developer, ilford rapid fixer as fixer, krokus as enlarger + negatives that scan really well. Also I have a 40W and 100W matte bulbs.
My experiments with 40W:
3 minutes exposition + 3 minutes in developer (1+4) + 3 minutes in fixer = very dark print, lack of details
+ a lot of tests under 3 minutes, pale black-and-white or brown-and-white prints
My experiments with 100W:
40 seconds of exposition + 1,5m in developer + 3m in fixer => pale browny print
2 minutes of exposition + 2m in developer + 3m in fixer => better but still pale print
What am I doing wrong? I don't have much paper left, please give me some points/advices so I could show some successful printing ;(
My friend said that he is exposing paper for like 10 seconds or so, and that it works well to him, though he uses different chemistry (I don't know which).
It would be best if someone here had xtol printing experience.
UPDATE:
Used paper: Foma "N312 NORMAL MATTE"
Lens: 50/5.6 (or 4, don't remember.. whatever)
I have kodak xtol as a developer, ilford rapid fixer as fixer, krokus as enlarger + negatives that scan really well. Also I have a 40W and 100W matte bulbs.
My experiments with 40W:
3 minutes exposition + 3 minutes in developer (1+4) + 3 minutes in fixer = very dark print, lack of details
+ a lot of tests under 3 minutes, pale black-and-white or brown-and-white prints
My experiments with 100W:
40 seconds of exposition + 1,5m in developer + 3m in fixer => pale browny print
2 minutes of exposition + 2m in developer + 3m in fixer => better but still pale print
What am I doing wrong? I don't have much paper left, please give me some points/advices so I could show some successful printing ;(
My friend said that he is exposing paper for like 10 seconds or so, and that it works well to him, though he uses different chemistry (I don't know which).
It would be best if someone here had xtol printing experience.
UPDATE:
Used paper: Foma "N312 NORMAL MATTE"
Lens: 50/5.6 (or 4, don't remember.. whatever)
Last edited:
kmerenkov
Established
Thank you,
I tried test strips, but they weren't helpful because time range is huge...
just now I exposed paper for 3 and 5 minutes under 100W bulb and "5 minutes" version looks much better than everything I've got before. Will try 7-8 right now + will keep paper longer in xtol (to avoid brown look.. I've got B&W result which was very dark, now since 5+ minutes looks much better in contrast, I will try to extend dev time)
About choice of developers: yea I asked this question myself about xtol but since it is night I can't just go and buy another one
Will proceed with wasting paper and guessing time
I tried test strips, but they weren't helpful because time range is huge...
just now I exposed paper for 3 and 5 minutes under 100W bulb and "5 minutes" version looks much better than everything I've got before. Will try 7-8 right now + will keep paper longer in xtol (to avoid brown look.. I've got B&W result which was very dark, now since 5+ minutes looks much better in contrast, I will try to extend dev time)
About choice of developers: yea I asked this question myself about xtol but since it is night I can't just go and buy another one
Will proceed with wasting paper and guessing timeJoe
Established
As far as I know, Xtol is film developer. You need Dektol, or some other paper developer, and a stop bath is important before the fix. Ilford's indicator stopbath is good.
Exposure times are usually from 10 to 20 seconds with all the enlargers I've used, but I don't think they have 40w bulbs, more like 350w.
Also your paper might be fogged, from the sound of it.
Exposure times are usually from 10 to 20 seconds with all the enlargers I've used, but I don't think they have 40w bulbs, more like 350w.
Also your paper might be fogged, from the sound of it.
kmerenkov
Established
Tomorrow I will go and buy some good philips matte bulb, as powerful as I can find.
Xtol works for paper as well, from what I see, though maybe it is not best.
At the moment what I've discovered - 10 minutes of exposure gives best results... screw that, tomorrow with new equipment results will be different.
About chemistry:
Our shop has ilford bromophen, harman and multigrade. 1-5 litres, expensive as <del>leica</del> $18 USD per bottle.
From what I see multigrade can be used as 1+14 => I am using 70ml per 1L, so about 15 litres may be prepared, sounds good.
venchka
Veteran
10 MINUTES EXPOSURE? Yikes! The enlarger could move around in 10 minutes. What f/stop are you using? Get some real paper developer. Get your exposures under 1 minute. 3 stops closed from wide open should be the optimum aperture for the enlarging lens. Be careful with those big HOT bulbs. You don't want to cook your negatives.
kmerenkov
Established
Yea, yikes indeed
f/stop is something about 4 or 5.6, wide open (hey come on, look at my exposures, I didn't want to close it down).
What Watt bulb I should buy? From what I remember highest watt I've seen is 75 or 100 in our shop. However 350 was mentioned earlier in this thread... 350 sounds like a joke to me, I've never seen something like this before.
Joe
Established
Yes I'm wrong about 350 watts, it's probably more like 250 watts, it just reads "350 watts max" on the back of the lamp housing.
Last edited:
kmerenkov
Established
MartinP
Veteran
The usual tungsten bulbs for enlargers the size of the the Krokus would be 75w or 150w "Photocrescenta" bulbs. The white covering and the filament layout are not the same as ordinary household bulbs, although a very white household bulb of 100w would at least get you in the right area. Main thing is to avoid having the bulb brand-name printed on the end of the bulb near the negative !! The bulb problems would not, on their own, cause the problems you have seen.
Xtol developer has nothing to do with printing-paper. Bromophen (mixed from powder, use the entire pack and store the stock solution) or Multigrade (mixed from a liquid concentrate) will remove most of the development problems you have seen and are apparently available to you.
Make sure that your safelight is completely safe (a normal household red-coloured bulb doesn't work) and that there is zero stray light from round doors etc. Printing at night with the curtains shut will probably not be dark enough - if you can see anything after being in the room for ten minutes without the safelight on, then it is too light.
As a very general guide, usually a 25cm long print would take 15s to 30s, when stopped down a couple of stops using a small enlarger. If you use a "strange" bulb then you might have to double that time in the worst case.
Fixing has not much bearing on the state of the print tone, as that is done in the developer. Follow the instructions on fix-time, dilution and washing (very, very important) that came with the paper and fixer (choose the longer of the two times if they don't match).
Stop bath can be replaced by a tray of plain water (all at the same temperature) for print-processing. Change it a few times during your print session.
Roger Hicks (a mentor here) has a clear description of printing, and you can also look on the ilford website for excellent instructional material.
Lots of people have lots of success with printing negatives, but it is unfortunate that you are stuck there on your own. After the problems are fixed you will be very pleased I'm sure ! (Wouldn't want things to be too easy would we ???)
Congratulations on your English !!!
Xtol developer has nothing to do with printing-paper. Bromophen (mixed from powder, use the entire pack and store the stock solution) or Multigrade (mixed from a liquid concentrate) will remove most of the development problems you have seen and are apparently available to you.
Make sure that your safelight is completely safe (a normal household red-coloured bulb doesn't work) and that there is zero stray light from round doors etc. Printing at night with the curtains shut will probably not be dark enough - if you can see anything after being in the room for ten minutes without the safelight on, then it is too light.
As a very general guide, usually a 25cm long print would take 15s to 30s, when stopped down a couple of stops using a small enlarger. If you use a "strange" bulb then you might have to double that time in the worst case.
Fixing has not much bearing on the state of the print tone, as that is done in the developer. Follow the instructions on fix-time, dilution and washing (very, very important) that came with the paper and fixer (choose the longer of the two times if they don't match).
Stop bath can be replaced by a tray of plain water (all at the same temperature) for print-processing. Change it a few times during your print session.
Roger Hicks (a mentor here) has a clear description of printing, and you can also look on the ilford website for excellent instructional material.
Lots of people have lots of success with printing negatives, but it is unfortunate that you are stuck there on your own. After the problems are fixed you will be very pleased I'm sure ! (Wouldn't want things to be too easy would we ???)
Congratulations on your English !!!
kmerenkov
Established
Thank you MartinP for such a complete reply!
I don't know what to reply besides "roger that"
I don't know what to reply besides "roger that"
titrisol
Bottom Feeder
You have the wrong developer
Xtol is for film, thus it is too weak for paper.
40 s under a 100W lamp should give you almost solid black so the probnlem is the developer.
Buy some PAPER developer, Dektol or Foma something (Fomaton I thin k)
Xtol is for film, thus it is too weak for paper.
40 s under a 100W lamp should give you almost solid black so the probnlem is the developer.
Buy some PAPER developer, Dektol or Foma something (Fomaton I thin k)
kmerenkov
Established
It's me again, I have some successful experience for now.
Bought ilford universal paper developer + 100W Phillips bulb.
2 seconds of exposition and few seconds (literally) in developer = fine image. Woot!
Thanks all, I think there's nothing to post for now
Bought ilford universal paper developer + 100W Phillips bulb.
2 seconds of exposition and few seconds (literally) in developer = fine image. Woot!
Thanks all, I think there's nothing to post for now
40oz
...
good to hear
Joe
Established
Glad to hear it... but to be able to make adjustments to the print's brightness and contrast you will need longer exposure times. I usually end up somewhere between 12 and 20 seconds. Also the paper should be in the developer for a full minute or two, depending on RC or FB. Water works as a stop bath in a pinch, but real stop bath is much better, since you don't have to remember to change it. Good luck.
kmerenkov
Established
Then I have the opposite problem now, developer is TOO DAMN fast, and if I do "big" enlargement (or printing contact sheet) - i.e. enlarger is far above paper - I need about 15 seconds or so. But it won't work for small prints. I am using 40W bulb for now (because 100 is an overkill as for now).
MartinP
Veteran
Pleased to hear that you have some progress happening in the process !
Generally one would expect to keep the development exactly the same most of the time, as pulling prints out early will make the darkest black look more like grey (as Joe mentioned above). The 15s for a contact-print sized patch of light (roughly 25cm long) sounds fairly normal though, especially if the lens is closed down a stop or so.
Checking the Ilford site, it seems that the PQ-Universal developer should be diluted 1:9 (so 50ml concentrate to make up a volume of 1/2 litre, for example) and they don't recommend temperatures over 20C - perhaps these are more variables that can be controlled.
The only Foma paper I have seen locally with the code "312" is a variable contrast R/C paper. If that is the case with your packet, then using a contrast-filter will mean a slightly longer exposure time which could actually be helpful for smaller sized prints. You didn't mention using a contrast changing filter, so I am just guessing a bit here
I eventually found a couple of useful links that I mentioned earlier, but - of course - you probably already have this sort of information as you have got this far. Nevertheless . . .
Ilford getting started guide.
Roger Hicks information pages (some are pay pages, but lots of useful free ones too).
There is undoubtedly a lot more information accessible out there, and in RFF too.
Generally one would expect to keep the development exactly the same most of the time, as pulling prints out early will make the darkest black look more like grey (as Joe mentioned above). The 15s for a contact-print sized patch of light (roughly 25cm long) sounds fairly normal though, especially if the lens is closed down a stop or so.
Checking the Ilford site, it seems that the PQ-Universal developer should be diluted 1:9 (so 50ml concentrate to make up a volume of 1/2 litre, for example) and they don't recommend temperatures over 20C - perhaps these are more variables that can be controlled.
The only Foma paper I have seen locally with the code "312" is a variable contrast R/C paper. If that is the case with your packet, then using a contrast-filter will mean a slightly longer exposure time which could actually be helpful for smaller sized prints. You didn't mention using a contrast changing filter, so I am just guessing a bit here
I eventually found a couple of useful links that I mentioned earlier, but - of course - you probably already have this sort of information as you have got this far. Nevertheless . . .
Ilford getting started guide.
Roger Hicks information pages (some are pay pages, but lots of useful free ones too).
There is undoubtedly a lot more information accessible out there, and in RFF too.
Carlo
Member
I tested Foma paper some time ago and was very, very disappointed by the extremely low sensitivity. I had to expose 5 minutes at f2,8 with a 120W halogen head before I started to see something on the paper. Also, developer must be higher concentrated than given from the supplier, but I cannot remember exactly which solution I used.
Sorry I am not able to tell more, hope my experiences might help.
Sorry I am not able to tell more, hope my experiences might help.
titrisol
Bottom Feeder
15s sounds about right for exposure
If you need more exposure close the diaphragm in your lens (higehr f number)
If you want the developer to be slower dilute it, ie.e add water
If 1+1 is too fast go to 1+3 and times should roughly double
then 1+7 and so forth.
If you need more exposure close the diaphragm in your lens (higehr f number)
If you want the developer to be slower dilute it, ie.e add water
If 1+1 is too fast go to 1+3 and times should roughly double
then 1+7 and so forth.
kmerenkov
Established
2 titrisol: developer was 1+9, maybe it was too fast because it is hot in my bathroom (well I can't help it)
Thanks for all the tips and advices. Now I have to take more pictures to have something interesting to print
Thanks for all the tips and advices. Now I have to take more pictures to have something interesting to print
palec
Well-known
N312 is RC paper, in PQ 1+9 it needs at least 40-60 seconds of development, depending on temperature. If your prints are too dark, it means that you have too much light/exposure. Stop down the lens to f8 or f11 for small prints. Just don't underdevelop the paper, always adjust the exposure time/f-stop.