bence8810
Well-known
Hi there,
I have just tried my enlarger today for the first time and my prints came out looking without contrast. There are so many variables here and I hope some of you experts could perhaps point me to the right direction.
Enlarger: LPL 3301D
Lens: LPL 50/3.5
Developer: Fuji Papitol (2 components powder) - mixed and used as per the package says
Paper: Fuji KM2 (see attached)
The negative is good for sure as I have developed another shot from it yesterday at a pro darkroom and it came out perfect. Please see attached the two images compared. The little one is the one I printed today at home.
As I don't yet have the filters, I bought and used the graded (2) paper.
I've never used this enlarger before, never used this paper before and never used this developer before. I know, too many variables...
The paper on the right with the good looking print is also fuji but variable Grade and I used filter #2 with it.
Thanks for any pointers.
Ben
I have just tried my enlarger today for the first time and my prints came out looking without contrast. There are so many variables here and I hope some of you experts could perhaps point me to the right direction.
Enlarger: LPL 3301D
Lens: LPL 50/3.5
Developer: Fuji Papitol (2 components powder) - mixed and used as per the package says
Paper: Fuji KM2 (see attached)
The negative is good for sure as I have developed another shot from it yesterday at a pro darkroom and it came out perfect. Please see attached the two images compared. The little one is the one I printed today at home.
As I don't yet have the filters, I bought and used the graded (2) paper.
I've never used this enlarger before, never used this paper before and never used this developer before. I know, too many variables...
The paper on the right with the good looking print is also fuji but variable Grade and I used filter #2 with it.
Thanks for any pointers.
Ben
Attachments
SM_NYC
Newbie
I'm not really used to (or even knew they made) Fuji BW paper. If you're new to BW printing you might want to start with either an RC or Fiber VC glossy paper. Like Ilford. RC is easier to work with but Fiber is considered to give a finer end product, but requires longer drying. Prints also tend to "dry down" especial when working with matte surface papers. Most importantly keep a note book of all you're exposure times for every picture. That will help you keep track of your variables when problem solving.
bucs
Well-known
Hey ben. Nice to know you're printing by yourself already
Goodluck!
Nathan
Goodluck!
Nathan
ray*j*gun
Veteran
Exposure time is something to consider. Do a band test starting with 2 sec up to like 8 sec. As noted use some var contrast paper that is FRESH. If the negs are flat (i know u said the pro printer had good results) use contrast filters. Chemical temperature is also important to proper development of the paper. Time in the tray should be long enough to be sure all the emulsion is developed.
Dwig
Well-known
The left (poor) print looks both overexposed and under developed. This could be just a case of failing to do a proper test print (develop for 2 min. or until there has been no image change for 30 sec to 1 min). It could also be from trying to compensate for a weak developer (improperly mixed, exhausted, old, wrong type, ...).
mwoenv
Well-known
Also make sure you are not getting fogging from small amounts of stray light in the darkroom, from:
- doors and windows
- enlarger light leakage (turn enlarger on in the dark with the lens cap on and observe any light leakage; seal as much as possible using window foam insulation strips)
- reflections off shiny surfaces to your paper (e.g., tiles, glass/metal shower doors, if you have a temporary darkroom in a bathroom)
Also do a safelight test - put a coin on a sheet of paper, expose it to the safelight for 5 minutes at a distance from your safelight to your trays, and develop; you shouldn't see any evidence of exposure.
Since I've made improvements on all of these items, and minimized safelight use, my prints have had good contrast and better whites.
- doors and windows
- enlarger light leakage (turn enlarger on in the dark with the lens cap on and observe any light leakage; seal as much as possible using window foam insulation strips)
- reflections off shiny surfaces to your paper (e.g., tiles, glass/metal shower doors, if you have a temporary darkroom in a bathroom)
Also do a safelight test - put a coin on a sheet of paper, expose it to the safelight for 5 minutes at a distance from your safelight to your trays, and develop; you shouldn't see any evidence of exposure.
Since I've made improvements on all of these items, and minimized safelight use, my prints have had good contrast and better whites.
bence8810
Well-known
Hello,
Thanks for all the explanation.
I am suspicious of the Developer to be honest. Somehow, I never was able to use Powdered developers, not sure what I am doing wrong.
About the safelight, I'll do the test as suggested above, however, I do think it's pretty dark in there, certainly much darker than the pro lab I used the other times.
As for shiny surfaces, now that I have a lot! I am in a bathroom with a mirror and all glossy plastic walls (Japanese usual bathroom). However, the only source of light I have is the safe-light. When I am not enlarging, the enlarger is off and there's no light from anywhere else but the safe light. My darkroom is 100% light sealed otherwise. Did the "sit in for 5 minutes" test with no light and I still couldn't see as far as my own nose.
As for the Exposure, since we have this thread already running. What do you guys do when enlarging to smaller sized paper? I was trying this postcard paper and even on f11 I only needed 1 seconds or below that. The solution is a timer with fractions of the seconds? It is certainly delicate. In the pro lab, I was using 8x10 paper and I had at least 4 seconds on every paper so it was easier managed.
Thanks,
Ben
Thanks for all the explanation.
I am suspicious of the Developer to be honest. Somehow, I never was able to use Powdered developers, not sure what I am doing wrong.
About the safelight, I'll do the test as suggested above, however, I do think it's pretty dark in there, certainly much darker than the pro lab I used the other times.
As for shiny surfaces, now that I have a lot! I am in a bathroom with a mirror and all glossy plastic walls (Japanese usual bathroom). However, the only source of light I have is the safe-light. When I am not enlarging, the enlarger is off and there's no light from anywhere else but the safe light. My darkroom is 100% light sealed otherwise. Did the "sit in for 5 minutes" test with no light and I still couldn't see as far as my own nose.
As for the Exposure, since we have this thread already running. What do you guys do when enlarging to smaller sized paper? I was trying this postcard paper and even on f11 I only needed 1 seconds or below that. The solution is a timer with fractions of the seconds? It is certainly delicate. In the pro lab, I was using 8x10 paper and I had at least 4 seconds on every paper so it was easier managed.
Thanks,
Ben
Ronald M
Veteran
Old fogged paper. Buy from a fast moving store.
Safelight fog.
too short a developing time. RC is 60/90 sec Fiber is 120 to 180 sec
Diluted working strength developer kept more than 4/6 hours even if you ran no prints thru it.
Neg needs higher contrast paper or longer developing time.
A decade ago I did a mail class for someone halfway across the USA. He would print, then send them to me. I would critique and print the same neg. Return mail.
He got to be pretty good. after 6 months.
Safelight fog.
too short a developing time. RC is 60/90 sec Fiber is 120 to 180 sec
Diluted working strength developer kept more than 4/6 hours even if you ran no prints thru it.
Neg needs higher contrast paper or longer developing time.
A decade ago I did a mail class for someone halfway across the USA. He would print, then send them to me. I would critique and print the same neg. Return mail.
He got to be pretty good. after 6 months.
bence8810
Well-known
Hello Ronald,
Thanks for this.
From the above the only think I can imagine is the developer having something funny. It was diluted just before I used it so that couldn't have expired yet. Is there any way to test a developer? It does develop just doesn't re-produce what's on the negative.
As far as the Enlarger goes, there can't possibly be anything wrong with that, right? It is a new machine but I got it through the post so it could have gotten a hit.
Thanks,
Ben
Thanks for this.
From the above the only think I can imagine is the developer having something funny. It was diluted just before I used it so that couldn't have expired yet. Is there any way to test a developer? It does develop just doesn't re-produce what's on the negative.
As far as the Enlarger goes, there can't possibly be anything wrong with that, right? It is a new machine but I got it through the post so it could have gotten a hit.
Thanks,
Ben
x-ray
Veteran
Ben I've been printing for over fifty years and your print look over exposed and under developed.
Do a test strip as mentioned only try to stop your lens down enough to get an exposure longer than 10 seconds. I like something from thirty seconds to one minute for dodging and burning (you'll learn this later).
Develope at 68 f or 20 c with agitation for about 2-1/2 minutes. Longer is ok but use the same time for each print. If the print starts to get dark in the developer before the time is up resist the temptation to pull it early. This will result in muddy flat prints like you're getting and you'll never have any consistency. This is one of the most common errors of beginners.
If the print is still flat go up one grade in paper or filter.
I don't think you're getting fog.
Do make certain your safelight free is the correct one for your paper. Some papers require an amber OC and others a red (I think #10).
Do a test strip as mentioned only try to stop your lens down enough to get an exposure longer than 10 seconds. I like something from thirty seconds to one minute for dodging and burning (you'll learn this later).
Develope at 68 f or 20 c with agitation for about 2-1/2 minutes. Longer is ok but use the same time for each print. If the print starts to get dark in the developer before the time is up resist the temptation to pull it early. This will result in muddy flat prints like you're getting and you'll never have any consistency. This is one of the most common errors of beginners.
If the print is still flat go up one grade in paper or filter.
I don't think you're getting fog.
Do make certain your safelight free is the correct one for your paper. Some papers require an amber OC and others a red (I think #10).
bence8810
Well-known
So it's over exposed and under developed...
I'll give it another go... but I really think I kept it in the Developer long enough. Over exposed is ok, i can perhaps correct it.
One thing you mention which I really like but don't know how to achieve, is to go up to 10 seconds on the expo. I was thinking about dodging / burning and how would I do it in like 0.8 seconds
My setup was already at f11 and my lens only goes to f16. Is f16 still okay? Even on f16 though, I could only gain a second or so...
What does one do to reduce the light? ND filters?
I am very much interested in increasing my enlarging times...
Thanks,
Ben
I'll give it another go... but I really think I kept it in the Developer long enough. Over exposed is ok, i can perhaps correct it.
One thing you mention which I really like but don't know how to achieve, is to go up to 10 seconds on the expo. I was thinking about dodging / burning and how would I do it in like 0.8 seconds
My setup was already at f11 and my lens only goes to f16. Is f16 still okay? Even on f16 though, I could only gain a second or so...
What does one do to reduce the light? ND filters?
I am very much interested in increasing my enlarging times...
Thanks,
Ben
x-ray
Veteran
Wow! .8 seconds? That's way too short. Yes it's ok to stop down to f16. You might get a neutral density filter for under the lens. You need something on the order of an 8x ND filter. I don't know anything about your enlarger but some ND is going to be needed.
On enlargers that use #211 or 212 bulbs you can put a dimmer in the line. I had to do that with my Durst 5x7 enlarger. If you have a step down transformer / power supply with a halogen bulb and a fan you probably can't.
If you didn't develope 2 or more minutes you're pulling it too early. This should be timed not do e visually. I used to teach a darkroom class on the college level and 90% of the students pull too early.
At .8 sec there's no way to get consistent results. Your lamp In The enlarged takes time to come up to intensity and then glows as its shut off.
On enlargers that use #211 or 212 bulbs you can put a dimmer in the line. I had to do that with my Durst 5x7 enlarger. If you have a step down transformer / power supply with a halogen bulb and a fan you probably can't.
If you didn't develope 2 or more minutes you're pulling it too early. This should be timed not do e visually. I used to teach a darkroom class on the college level and 90% of the students pull too early.
At .8 sec there's no way to get consistent results. Your lamp In The enlarged takes time to come up to intensity and then glows as its shut off.
bence8810
Well-known
Hi,
The post is very informative again, thanks so much!
http://www.amazon.co.jp/LPL-引伸電球-引伸機3301D専用電球-100V100W-L5382-1/dp/B001WAJU62
This is all I could find about the lens.
100V 100W
It is the standard lens though for sure as it was brand new just a few days ago when I installed it into the Enlarger.
I wonder where could I find such an ND filter, is it standard? How do others enlarge to such small paper? I don't want to waste bigger paper until I am still learning and mostly messing around rather than delivering results which i'd hang.
Thanks,
Ben
The post is very informative again, thanks so much!
http://www.amazon.co.jp/LPL-引伸電球-引伸機3301D専用電球-100V100W-L5382-1/dp/B001WAJU62
This is all I could find about the lens.
100V 100W
It is the standard lens though for sure as it was brand new just a few days ago when I installed it into the Enlarger.
I wonder where could I find such an ND filter, is it standard? How do others enlarge to such small paper? I don't want to waste bigger paper until I am still learning and mostly messing around rather than delivering results which i'd hang.
Thanks,
Ben
bence8810
Well-known
Another thing that just popped into my head is my lack of experience with powder developers.
I did make sure the A bag completely dissolved before I added in B and waited for that to clear as well. At the end, I got a transparent liquid that was warm so I covered it and let it cool. Once cold, I poured it into the large plastic bottle I have.
It sat there for 3-4 days and finally yesterday when I needed it, I just poured out 325ml of it into a jug and added the same amount of water to get the 1:1 which was mentioned on the package.
What I didn't do is shake the bottle beforehand. Should I have shaken the bottle to re-mix the components? I would imagine once it's mixed it's ready to go but in case I have this wrong, it could have caused my developer to be weaker.
Thanks,
Ben
I did make sure the A bag completely dissolved before I added in B and waited for that to clear as well. At the end, I got a transparent liquid that was warm so I covered it and let it cool. Once cold, I poured it into the large plastic bottle I have.
It sat there for 3-4 days and finally yesterday when I needed it, I just poured out 325ml of it into a jug and added the same amount of water to get the 1:1 which was mentioned on the package.
What I didn't do is shake the bottle beforehand. Should I have shaken the bottle to re-mix the components? I would imagine once it's mixed it's ready to go but in case I have this wrong, it could have caused my developer to be weaker.
Thanks,
Ben
DominikDUK
Well-known
Nope don't shake the bottle beforehand it is not necessary, if anything it introduces oxygen into the mix. If the lamp is too bright get a 75W Opal lamp any filter in front of the lens does degrade the image to a minuscule amount. If you want a smaller print and longer exposure times you can use a longer enlarger lens say an 75mm instead of 50mm lens.
Good luck
Good luck
bence8810
Well-known
This sounds really good, thanks!
My enlarger has a max height of 50cm and it can currently create a print of the size of 8x10" max with a 50mm lens. If I change that to a 75mm, it'll create at max height a print of a size of what? A 4x5?
Sorry if I sound like someone retarded here, I just don't yet see the logic behind this all.
Thanks,
Ben
DominikDUK
Well-known
The longer lens projects a smaller image to get the same size of enlargment from a 75mm lens as you'll get from a 50mm you have to move the enlarger up a bit which requires longer exposure times than with the 50mm lens. The higher the distance between print and enlarger the longer the required exposure time. Also you did say that you didn't want to use a bigger paper yet. As for the differences it is more like a bit over 5x7 (75mm) to 8x10 (50mm). If you want larger prints from your setup you should get the wide angle rodagon 40mm which allows you to make larger prints. You could also transform your enlarger from vertical to horizontal and make even bigger prints.
bence8810
Well-known
Yes, the concept I understand, I am just afraid I won't be able to raise the head enough to get anywhere with the 75mm, which is why I am trying to find out the size of print I could get at max height.
With the 50mm lens it's 8x10 inches. The enlarger is rather small, with a 75mm lens, what is the factor by which my paper size will be reduced from the same height when comparing to a 50mm lens?
Also thanks for the developer thing, I won't shake the bottle. What I'll do is toss it and get a new developer / one that I know and trust. Should have done that from the beginning.
Ben
bence8810
Well-known
Sorry just saw this extra bit you added.
Thanks, it's all clear now
i'll get the 75mm and will look into the 40! The things one learns...
Thanks a lot!
Ben
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
flat is good, right? Mine are always curled