Newbie Woes

S

Spleenrippa

Yes, Right There
Local time
3:40 PM
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
417
Spent a couple hours in the darkroom tonight- my first real session since getting everything purchased and setup.

Just wondering if anyone has some tips or ideas as to what would be a good starting point for exposure, dev times, etc.
I'm using a Beseler 23CII. I have 50/80/100 lenses of no particular pedigree :p
Only worried about 135 for the time being. MF can wait a bit.

I seem to be having some luck exposing for 30-40 seconds at f/11 and fixing for ~25 seconds. Most of my tests turned out a bit dull/grey, so I may open it up a stop or two. Does that sound good, or should I increase dev time?

So far, my biggest problem is that many of my tests have a strange pattern across them reminiscent of the glare you get from looking into a window outside or something. This troubles me...

I tried both the 50 and 80, so that rules out the lens.
I also tried two different papers in case the older paper was the culprit. No joy there.

I do not have an easel, but the paper does not seem to really bow much when on the baseboard- this would just result in a picture distortion issue anyway, right?

Could it be an issue with the way the paper is sitting in the tray(s) post exposure? I'm using 11x14 trays and had a couple liters of the applicable fluid in each. I had thought it sufficient to cover the paper...

The tray thing niggles, because I noticed a lack of "strange pattern" on one test print that I held firmly down with tongs. What do you guys think, should I go with smaller trays and/or more fluid? I didn't try earlier because I was burnt out for the night :eek:
 
Exposure time is wahatever it takes to get a good black on the print. Development time is 1 minute with RC paper, 2 min with FB paper, and this is to completion. Don't pull prints out if they get too dark with this time, redo with shorter exposure time.
 
For sure the prints have to be submerged in the developer. I use 600 to 1000ml of developer in 8x10 trays for 8x10 prints. I slide the paper in image side down, then flop it right side up (I like to watch the image forming - it's magic!) and push the paper down to the bottom of the tray, then rock the tray slightly to move the developer around, pushing the paper back down again if it comes to the surface.
 
Is your safelight the proper kind? Kodak OC is good for "normal" b&w paper, but they can degrade. You don't want more than 25 watts. Of course, these problems would fog the paper uniformly...

What sort of filters are you using (if you are using multigrade paper)? Are they in good shape?

I do what FrankS does: about a liter of fluid and I make sure the paper is covered quickly and uniformly. Then I gently moved the tray until completion.

Let us know what happens.
 
Thanks for the replies, guys.
I will try bumping up the exposure time to a minute and then work from there and see if it makes a difference when I put the paper in the tray image-side down.

As for my safelight, it is a box style one with an Ilford 902 OC glass window/filter- which the specs for my Kentmere paper say should be fine.
 
are you doing test strips ? sounds like you are doing full sheet tests...also be sure you are not fogging the paper....at any rate you will figure it out ...above all don't get frustrated and have fun
 
Not exposure time, development time. Have you made a test strip yet? Cover the paper with an opaque material & make exposures in 10 second increments. moving the cover so you have four or five sections. One section should give a close to good exposure and then you adjust for improvement.
 
Landshark said:
Not exposure time, development time. Have you made a test strip yet? Cover the paper with an opaque material & make exposures in 10 second increments. moving the cover so you have four or five sections. One section should give a close to good exposure and then you adjust for improvement.
Click to expand...


Oops. Dev time it is :p
I haven't done any test strips, no. I was just cutting the paper into small sections and doing mini prints. A strip would definitely be more efficient! :eek:

Another question- are enlargers supposed to be entirely light-tight? There is a bit of leakage in my Beseler where the negative carrier sits. I've just been assuming it isn't a big deal since there is so much concentrated/directed light hitting the paper.

Edit: making a note for myself to try out the coin-on-paper-in-safelight fogging test tonight as well, just to be sure.
 
Spleenrippa said:
Oops. Dev time it is :p
I haven't done any test strips, no. I was just cutting the paper into small sections and doing mini prints. A strip would definitely be more efficient! :eek:
Click to expand...

I haven't used test strips in the prescribed manner for a long time. Too frustrating. I simply make a single exposure of the most representative area, make a second one if need be, and then go straight to a proof print. I have found that if I pay attention to the overall level of luminance on the enlarging easel, I can usually estimate the exposure reasonably closely. I try to work to the roughly the same overall level of luminance all the time, adjusting the light level with the aperture and opening up no more than F8.

One way to get on to the appropriate contrast filter, is to follow the method of exposing the paper to control the highlights and adjust the filter contrast to control the blacks.

With respect to chemistry, use Dektol for developer. It does a great job, its cheap and it keeps much longer than most liquid developers.

For fixer, I do use a liquid; Ilford Rapid Fix. This stuff and other similiar nonhardening fixers allow you to use greatly reduced wash times compared to the powdered hardening fixers.
 
I doubt that many experienced printers make test strips, but for the beginner it is a good idea, especially for the initial "dialing in" which is what spleenrippa is doing.
 
Last edited:
If you do the test strips right, you only make one print. It is essentially like bracketing in the camera, but instead you are bracketing the enlarger exposure onto the print. In theory, once you had all of your conditions set (enlarger height, developer, developer temp and time, etc.) your exposure conditions wouldn't change. But, papers vary even within a specific type and especially, so does negative density. So, back when I did wet printing, I always started each print with a test strip and even then, the first one only gives a close approximation. To me, it was always time well invested.

You have some other good suggestions as to the problems you are seeing. Let me also suggest you obtain a copy of the book "Ilford Monochrome Darkroom Practice," or the Ansel Adams book "The Print." These were really helpful to me when I first started printing. Both are out of print but generally available used through Amazon.
 
Test on strips of paper.
It will be quite some time before you "get the hang of it" guesstimating initial exposures.

I use 1000ml in 11x14 tray with no problem, just make sure you don't have half-submerged print, the banding maybe too faint to see until you are out of the darkroom.
 
Hey guys,
I am happy to report that last night's session was a complete success! I finished the night with a couple prints that might not be brilliant, but are certainly good enough to hang here in my computer room :)
A heartfelt thanks to everyone to has helped- photography wouldn't be the same without the folks at RFF!

I ended up with this:
80 lens at f/8, exposing for 6 seconds
1 minute dev :)
stop and fix for 30 seconds or so, I wasn't sure what was really needed. it worked :p
wash!

Now I just need read on how to incorporate filters (ilford and kentmere RC VC) and get some longer exposure times for dodging and burning.
 
That fix time looks a bit short - try 60-90 seconds.

ps. a fixer test is to dip some unexposed film in , see how long it takes to go transparent and double that ( there's no harm in using that same time or longer for paper )
 
Congrats, now you are on the way!

I'm thinking that the weirdness you were seeing on the first few prints was due to too much exposure and pulling the prints out of the developer before development was complete (because it was getting too dark).
 
Stop down to F16 and your exposure time will be 24 secs for the example you gave. I like to have exposures around 30 secs myself, then I have dodging and burning time. VC filters are easy, but they do change exposure time a bit, and for #4 and above, they double it or more
 
Fawley said:
Stop down to F16 and your exposure time will be 24 secs for the example you gave. I like to have exposures around 30 secs myself, then I have dodging and burning time. VC filters are easy, but they do change exposure time a bit, and for #4 and above, they double it or more
Click to expand...

Yeah six seconds is quite quick.

On test strips:

I tried to show my daughter the test strip method, but her teacher at school had already showed her the 11/11 rule.

Once a 16 yo kid has her mind made up about something ...
 
I often make my test strip with a strip of the negative base (that is, the edge of the frame with no image-forming silver) showing. Then, not only do I get a sense of what effect each additional minim of time has, I can also judge how many seconds until I get my first true black. This level of exposure (sometimes called flim base + fog) is the _minimum_ amount of exposure that a given negative/paper/developer combination needs to produce a true black. If the negative is properly exposed and developed, this will be the base exposure for the print and, depending on the subject, may be the only time you need. More often though, there are areas you want to emphasize or de-emphasize in the print and these will require extra exposure with the rest of the print masked by your hands or a piece of cardboard with a hole cut out (e.g. burning) or shielding from the light (dodging). But finding that first true black is going to give you a lot of information about your exposure. The trick is to get the optimum sharpness from your lens (that is, probably stopped down a couple of stops from wide open), while not having the lens introduce its own diffraction (that is, from a stop (opening) that is too small), while preserving an exposure time that allows you to make the manipulations you want. Remember that just as with exposure for film, each stop lets in half as much light as the one before it. So if your first true black shows up at 3 seconds, but that is not enough time to make the manipulations that you want, you can stop down two stops and expose for 12 seconds. Good luck! Your adventure is just beginning.

Ben Marks

[Edit: for context: the purpose of fixing is to change the light-sensitive silver salts in your paper to salts that can be washed out of the emulsion. If you do not fix for long enough, light-sensitive silver will remain in the emulsion and, over time, will react with light and produce gray in your print. Conversely, with a fiber based paper too much fixing can lead to the acid fixer bonding quite firmly to the paper fibers and will lead, over time, to the paper substrate degrading. The trick is to hit the minimum fixing time needed to convert those silver salts without producing a print that will be difficult to wash. Resin based papers (e.g. plastic) won't have this second problem, but over-fixing can still degrade the image you've worked so hard to create.]
 
Last edited:
I've used the same technique - I learned it from a Fred Picker video on printing - use the negative base and chose the time needed to get to the first true black as a starting point
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom