ulrich.von.lich
Well-known
Hello,
I have been printing with the Tetenal TT Vario 316 Pearl Matt paper, and I'm satisfied with the results.
Last time I tried one Ilford MG IV Fiber paper with the same setting for the Teneral paper and got no response from the paper. It remains completely white in the developer. Then I realised a different paper might require a different exposure time, and tried different exposure times, but there was still nothing on the paper.
It sounds silly but I wonder whether I must use a multigrade filter to use the Ilford multigrade paper. Wouldn't expired papers still respond ? Or do I need a different developer ?
Any idea ?
I have been printing with the Tetenal TT Vario 316 Pearl Matt paper, and I'm satisfied with the results.
Last time I tried one Ilford MG IV Fiber paper with the same setting for the Teneral paper and got no response from the paper. It remains completely white in the developer. Then I realised a different paper might require a different exposure time, and tried different exposure times, but there was still nothing on the paper.
It sounds silly but I wonder whether I must use a multigrade filter to use the Ilford multigrade paper. Wouldn't expired papers still respond ? Or do I need a different developer ?
Any idea ?
Carriage
Established
From my vague recollection of reading around the web, the contrast grades are brand specific but they should still work, it's just that the grade numbers won't necessarily match. Try exposing a piece of paper in bright light/daylight and develop it to see if it's actually working at all?
KM-25
Well-known
I think it should still print at grade 2 by default with no filtration so something sounds odd about that. What is your enlarger / light source? And yes, different papers, different exposure times for sure. Fresh chemistry?
And pardon the "Capt. Obvious" question but are you accidentally leaving the red viewing filter in place?
And pardon the "Capt. Obvious" question but are you accidentally leaving the red viewing filter in place?
ulrich.von.lich
Well-known
The red viewing filter was not in place, as I was printing the Tetenal paper with success. The lab has a Leitz enlarger lens which I used at f11, printing correctly a Tetenal paper at the chosen distance takes 2 seconds only.
I think I will expose a piece of paper in bright light and see if it works.
I remember hearing somewhere only real B&W negatives can be printed on baryta paper, not even colour negatives (that can be printed without any issue on the Tetenal paper), which makes me think to the baryta paper I must pay some special attention.
I think I will expose a piece of paper in bright light and see if it works.
I remember hearing somewhere only real B&W negatives can be printed on baryta paper, not even colour negatives (that can be printed without any issue on the Tetenal paper), which makes me think to the baryta paper I must pay some special attention.
alexandru_voicu
Established
Are you sure you are placing the paper with the emulsion up? Sometimes, in case of matte papers, it's hard to distinguish between the two.
ulrich.von.lich
Well-known
I suppose the emulsion was up. When the paper was on the table, it was slightly concave, just like how they are packed (unless Ilford packs them face down).
Santtu Määttänen
Visual Poet
Done this few times, always hitting my self on the head afterwards. Specially if that happens with a large sheet.. Now days I've learned to be careful, too many euros in the bin
benji77
@R.F.F
Yeah after I did this to one piece, I found a trick to escape from it. Use a lightly wet fingertip, and rub along the edge of the paper. the sticky side is the emulsion
mikeg
Newbie
I've never used a Leitz enlarger so I don't know how bright the bulb is, but 2 seconds is a very short exposure time. For Multigrade IV, open the lens up to f8 or even f5.6 then try a test strip doubling the time for each strip. Say, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, and 64 seconds. So after 2 seconds cover one strip, then after another 2 seconds cover the 4 second strip, after 4 more seconds cover the 8 second strip and so on.
Also, use the moist finger technique to make sure that you have the emulsion side facing upwards.
Your information about colour negs is wrong. I haven't printed colour negs on B&W baryta fibre paper for ages, but it can be done. Exposure times will be much longer. Results will vary! The colour dyes can act as contrast filters so results can be strange. Better results can be obtained using a fixed grade paper, especially a higher contrast such as a grade 4. Similar results will be obtained printing C-41 B&W negs.
Let us know how you get on.
Robbie Bedell
Established
I hold a small bit of the corner of the matte paper between by lips. The side that sticks is the emulsion side...just make sure not to 'Bogart' it...
skibeerr
Well-known
Very hard to see or feel the emulsion side. I have been known to lick it, non emulsion side has no taste.
Johnmcd
Well-known
f11 and 2 seconds exposure is way too quick .
Normally something around 20 to 30 seconds is what I aim for so that there is adequate time to dodge or burn if required.
Try 20 seconds at f11 (for a 8x10 sized print) and you should get something.
Hope this helps.
Cheers - John
.Normally something around 20 to 30 seconds is what I aim for so that there is adequate time to dodge or burn if required.
Try 20 seconds at f11 (for a 8x10 sized print) and you should get something.
Hope this helps.
Cheers - John
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
Wrong side up is the most likely the problem. Expired (or never mixed - I am known to have omitted the concentrate when interrupted by a phone call while measuring the water) developer is a close runner up.
Underexposure should deliver at least traces of grey - I'd estimate 2s@f/11 with a properly exposed negative on a Focomat at normal size to be a 2-5 stop underexposure, where the deep blacks should still end up in the mid to light grey, so we can probably rule that out, unless the negatives have some flaw that makes them near opaque.
Underexposure should deliver at least traces of grey - I'd estimate 2s@f/11 with a properly exposed negative on a Focomat at normal size to be a 2-5 stop underexposure, where the deep blacks should still end up in the mid to light grey, so we can probably rule that out, unless the negatives have some flaw that makes them near opaque.
KenR
Well-known
As I only use the glossy paper, I can't say what matte looks like, but glossy is concave - edges up - on the easel. I generally use 15 sec at f11 so you may have way underexposed. Keep doubling your exposure times and see what you get. I have found that switching from one paper to another means you have to change times completely to print the same neg. Only the relative times of burning and dodging stay apx. the same.