Safelights

[Black Lightning]

When I set up my darkroom over 13 years ago I started with a clean slate; an open floorplan basement and no electrical fixtures in the corner where I wanted the darkroom. This allowed me to make a really clean looking minimalist lighting setup. I went to the home improvement supplier and bought a pair of ceiling mount two bulb dome fixtures. I wired the fixtures so that each of the two bulbs can be operated independently. In one socket of each fixture I use a 15 watt white lightbulb and in the other socket I use a 7 1/2 watt red utility lamp. (http://www.acehardwareoutlet.com/ProductDetails.aspx?SKU=3165602) I was planning on using the small red safelight bulbs available at Adorama and B&H for about $20 (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/15766-REG/Delta_35110_Brightlab_Universal_Red_Junior.html) thirteen years ago but on one of my hardware store trips during the construction I found the red utility bulbs which look like the exact same shade of red as the safelight bulbs for $.20 each. I bought a whole bunch of them. I do not remember if I conducted any safelight test back then but most of my darkroom time was spent processing film and printing in color so I rarely used the safelights anyway.

After a ten year vacation from the darkroom and a total restoration of the darkroom last fall I am printing some black and white stuff I've accumulated over the years. I am using Ilford Multigrade RC Paper and Kodak Polycontrast filters. I was having a devil of a time with contrast. All of my negatives seem really contrasty to my eye but I was not getting satisfactory contrast with any filter below # 3 1/2. It was driving me nuts because I do not recall having to so aggressively manage contrast when I was using the school darkroom years ago. I then noticed after cutting some test strips that a few of the test strips and full prints which were all out in the safelight while I was cutting paper was grey where the white border from the easel is.

I did a informal safelight test by exposing a print exactly as one which yielded a nice print and then left the print on the easel. I placed a film processing tank on the exposed paper for five minutes to mask a circle. After another five minutes I added another tank to make another circle for an additional five minutes. I developed the print and I was dumbfounded at what I saw; The circle masked off by the first tank was properly exposed. The rest of the sheet was black, even the circle which got only five minutes of safelight after exposure. My safelights are anything but.

This raises a few questions:

Can red safelights be used with Ilford Multigrade paper?

Are my safelights really unsafe or am I expecting too much out of them in conducting my test?

I came across a safelight test on Kodak's website (http://www.kodak.com/global/en/consumer/products/techInfo/k4/k4TestSafelite.shtml) which seems like it should give me a definitive answer except I can't for the life of me make heads or tails out of what the steps are. Can somebody help me out with interpretation or offer another tried and true method of safelight exposure?

I would like to continue using my nice clean looking light setup. Does anybody sell OC colored safelight bulbs? The light fixtures are not big enough to accommodate the OC Jumbo bulbs available at B&H (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/15767-REG/Delta_35020_Brightlab_OC_Amber_Jumbo_Safelight.html) and Adorama.

[Black Lightning]

Nevermind. Kodak's website explained it. If the lightbulb is not specifically made as a safelight bulb it is probable not safe regardless of how it looks to the naked eye.

Also; the first sign of an unsafe light is poor contrast which manifests itself before fogging of unexposed areas is apparent.

[David de Gruyl]

Red LEDs seem to work fine... (which reminds me, I should do a test. But I am not getting fogging as far as I can see.). LEDs are very narrow color emitters, so they are fairly safe (and MG paper is red safe, as well as OC).

I use red safelight filters on 5x7inch safelights around the darkroom and a red LED headlamp so I can read / write and see fairly well while processing paper. Red is also safe for Ortho and X-Ray films, which I have been known to dabble in.

If you look at the color sensitivity of Ilford MG IV, you can see that sensistivity drops off above about 525 nm and is close to zero above 550 nm. Red is around 620-660nm and Orange is about 605-620nm. So long as white is blocked, either should be safe. That being said, OC (amber) is recommended because humans can see better at the same brightness.

[Jim Jones]

One way to check safelights is to raise the enlarger head with no negative to its maximum height, stop the lens down all the way, and give a sheet of paper exposures of 0, 1/2, 1, 2, 4, 8, and 16 seconds. Then expose strips on that paper under the safelight of 0, 1/2, 1, 2, 4, 8, and 16 minutes at 90 degrees to the first exposures. You may be suprised at the results as I was. Such a test gives quantative results that can be interpolated for flashing paper for highlight control as well as just testing the safelight.

[cyrus]

Any safelight has to be tested and re-tested no matter what.

I have had VERY GOOD experiences with amber LED lights. They pretty much light up my entire darkroom quite well, and yet have zero effect on prints.

[Roger Cole]

I have both amber and red LEDs on order from Superbright LEDs. They shipped a couple of days ago. I figure I'll try them both for safety and if the amber is safe, use those, if not, the red. And I'll have spares. Not only is human vision more sensitive to the amber but you can actually discern some color too and it makes judging contrast easier than red light, even if the latter is brighter.

I've been using a Patterson OC (which looks more red when it's on) safelight over the trays and a Jobo Maxilux LED bounced off the wall by the enlarger, both switched by my timer. I have a Duka 50 sodium, but I'm saving that nearly impossible to replace tube in it for when I get back into color as I know from experience that, used carefully, it's also safe for RA4.

Any experience switching the LED bulbs with timers? The site warns that they are very sensitive to noise spikes and the warranty is void if you use any kind of relay. As inexpensive as they are I figured I'd do it anyway and if it kills them, buy more and then stop doing it. My Maxilux seems to have no problem with it, but then I suppose it's filtered for just such an application.

[jp]

I get red LED screw-in lights from deal extreme. I've got 5 of them on a track light setup plus a big kodak OC 9x12"-ish safelight. No fogging or contrast problems.

[jk0592]

I use the amber OC filter that I bought 40-45 years ago. Time for a thorough test, but I do not see fogging in my prints...

[Kirk Gittings]

I have used all kinds of safelights. I have also found that without thorough and proper testing that you can get subtle fogging that makes your highlights just not feel quite right-but not obviously fogged. For many years I worked in complete darkness as I was comfortable that way from long hours of printing color. When I stopped printing color and got back into safelights for B&W I did some thorough testing for my Thompson's and found I had the doors too open and was getting subtle fogging. I've done it seasonally ever since. And also don't assume that what is safe for one paper is safe for all. The testing just doesn't take that long or much materials and the difference can give your prints cleaner and brighter highlights.

Steve Anchell explains a method similar to my own:

http://www.anchellworkshops.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=33%3Asafelight-test&catid=15%3Aoutput-darkroom-and-lightroom&Itemid=39

[Peter De Smidt]

I'm a fan of red LEDs.

[Hans Berkhout]

I once used the dark red sleeves that fit over fluorescent tubes. Terrible fogging on Oriental Seagul paper (graded)- but it took me a at least a year to realise what was wrong with my prints.

[Black Lightning]

Thank you, everybody, for your responses. I have learned a lot from your replies. Looks like I'm adding a few of the Junior red safelight bulbs to my next B&H order or trip. In the meantime I am going to work in total darkness.

[John Kasaian]

FWIW I've got a mini string of red led Christmas lights I got on clearance awhile back---it gives the place a downright festive atmosphere:)

[Brian Ellis]

Just as an aside, what you did isn't a proper safelight test. Of course if even that simplistic test revealed a problem then a proper test would only have revealed a greater problem. But if in the future you conduct another test you might want to do a little reading to see how to really test a safelight. Ansel Adams' book "The Print" explains how to make such a test, Kodak used to have a lot of information about it too, or just Google "safelight test" and you probably can find the necessary information.

[Peter De Smidt]

http://motion.kodak.com/motion/uploadedFiles/US_plugins_acrobat_en_motion_products_filter_K4_Safelight_1106.pdf

[jp]

My red LED safelights are actually bright enough to photograph in my darkroom with my cameraphone!

80794

I put in a tracklight with LED red-only bulbs on it. (from deal extreme)

No fogging, but I haven't done any serious testing nor have I had any contrast problems.

[Rafal Lukawiecki]

I use red LEDs too, which are amazingly bright, yet they let me pass Kodak test even up to 18 minutes. I would like to stress the importance of doing a proper test, the Kodak one is very quick and informative, even if it takes a few minutes to get it thought through if you have never done it before.

I was working at a friend's darkroom a few weeks ago, helping troubleshoot contrast problems. Casual safelight test results were "ok" but the Kodak test showed significant issues. The OC filters were quite old, and no longer safe.

By the way, my friend also had enlarger light leaks that were affecting contrast—you can test for them using the same approach as the Kodak safelight test, but the exposures are shorter, and you need to place a cap on the lens. I recommend testing for enlarger leaks, after you get your safelight safe, or do the enlarger test with safelights off.

[md99]

Hmmm... I'm looking at a red LED bulb at http://www.superbrightleds.com/moreinfo/small-par-series/par20-bulb-rgb-e27-base-25-degree/418/ with the following emission spectrum claimed. If MG IV is "blind" above 550 I think it should work perfectly.

93298


Red LEDs seem to work fine... (which reminds me, I should do a test. But I am not getting fogging as far as I can see.). LEDs are very narrow color emitters, so they are fairly safe (and MG paper is red safe, as well as OC).

I use red safelight filters on 5x7inch safelights around the darkroom and a red LED headlamp so I can read / write and see fairly well while processing paper. Red is also safe for Ortho and X-Ray films, which I have been known to dabble in.

If you look at the color sensitivity of Ilford MG IV, you can see that sensistivity drops off above about 525 nm and is close to zero above 550 nm. Red is around 620-660nm and Orange is about 605-620nm. So long as white is blocked, either should be safe. That being said, OC (amber) is recommended because humans can see better at the same brightness.

[Brian Ellis]

I agree with Kirk. Just because your prints don't turn shades of gray doesn't necessarily mean your safelight is safe. Fogging from a safelight can take the form of a subtle degradation of the highlights which isn't necessarily all that obvious. I used the method of testing that's described in Ansel Adams' book "The Print," which IIRC seemed easier than Kodak's method.

When I taught a photography course I tested the school's Thomas safelight and found that it wasn't anywhere near "safe." The students apparently didn't think a darkroom should be dark so they opened the doors as far as they would go.

[Robert Bowring]

I have a small darkroom and I used 2 Kodak safelights with OC filters and 15 watt bulbs. A few years ago my prints started looking funny to me and I did the safelight test as per Ansel Adams book. Found out that they were not "safe" when using Oriental VCFB. I replaced the filters with new ones and retested. Better but still not "safe". I then replaced the bulbs with 7 1/2 watt bulbs and tested again. That did the trick. Maybe because my darkroom is small the 15 watt bulbs were just too bright.

[Roger Cole]

I didn't think any bulb could be too bright in those Kodak safelights with their filters. They're quite dim already. (My smart-alack side started to say "practically opaque already.") I'd be looking for LEDs or something - seriously, I don't think I could go back to working under such dim illumination.

[Leigh]

Get a Thomas Duplex safelight and see what you've been missing (pun intended).

We had two of them running vanes open in the darkroom at the photo school where I taught.
I have one in my 8x12 darkroom.

They are bright enough to read the small print on a bottle label anywhere in the room.
They all tested perfectly safe with various VC papers and graded papers.

- Leigh

[Ginette]

Instead of starting a new topic, I will continue in this one.

I wish to give a try to Adox and Foma papers.
Adox MCC safelight recommandations are standard Kodak 0C or Ilford 902.
But it seems it is not the best choice for the Foma Variant III. Theirs recommandations also changed over the years!


05/09
FOMABROM VARIANT III is an ortochromatically sensitized photographic paper.
Therefore, a suitable safelighting differing from that for conventional photographic
papers should be used. Dark-red safelight filters for orthochromatic materials, e.g.
Kodak GBX-2, Ilford 906, Agfa R1, Osram Duka 50, etc. in connection with a 15 Watt
lamp are fully suitable. More comfortable and user friendlier light sources may be
used with orange LED diodes, eventually orange filters however with a safe wave
length band pass over 610 nm. Because of its high speed, FOMABROM VARIANT
III should be exposed to this safelighting only for a time prerequisite to handling.


08/12
FOMABROM VARIANT III is orthochromatic sensibilized photo paper so if you work
with it you should use safety illumination different from common black and white
photo paper. It is routinely processed at indirect safety illumination with wavelength
of 625 nm and higher, corresponding colour of safety illumination is orange or red.
As to its high sensitivity the processed material has to be exposed to such
illumination only for the time necessary for its processing. Length of exposure and a
distance of the processed material from the illumination source should be tested.


625nm is out of the range of Kodak 1 and even the GBX-2. I check a Kodak 2 that I have in my stock and it is frankly really dark, but #2 absorb 640nm.
Maybe I can try red LED. Some members seems to use the this model E27 LED Bulb 8 LED from superbrightleds.com (http://www.superbrightleds.com/moreinfo/g-series-minature/2-watt-g11-globe-bulb-360-degree/440/1477/)
I look at the big auction site for similars and a lot of options are available in the 620-630nm range.
like 3x1W (item 171073011646) or a RED Plant Grow 60 LED 630Nm Lamp (item 281055062408), also LED Bulb Lamp High power 9W 12W 15W (item 221259743075)
Are theses LED too luminous? What is the tungten 15W and 25W equivalent?

For thoses who use LED, do you use it for all your VC papers or do you have multiple mixed traditional safelights and LED?
I have also some Thomas safelights stored. Anyone have technical info on their red filters?

Too much stock, in fact ;) the Thomas, 2 Kodak D 10x12 with OC, Ilford 5x7 with 902 filter and 1A, 3 Kodak 5½ (with a lot of filters) some Kodak 2ways ;) but I don't want to hang all this stuff in the new darkroom. Maybe some differents ones that I can turn ON and OFF instead of changing filters into.
My second darkroom have 12'x16' and ceiling at 8'. The first one is really smaller and I will use it for film development only when the second room will be ready.

[Ginette]

I have also some Thomas safelights stored. Anyone have technical info on their red filters?


For the 625nm requirement, I look at Lee and Rosco websites and both offer the 787 (marius red) and 027 (medium red) than maybe cut in that range.
Is the trans % need to be 0 or 2% is fine?
Here some comparaisons #27 have 11% at 620nm but 33% at 640nm, # 787 have 2% at 620nm and 5% at 640nm.

113921 113922

113923 113924

So is it a good idea to add one of theses red gels to the existing Thomas Safelight Red filters or replace them? Any user make some experiences with gel filters.

[BetterSense]

Guys, just buy some red led bulbs from superbrightleds and stop thinking so hard. Do a kodak safelight test for confirmation if you need to.

[Ginette]

Guys, ... stop thinking so hard.
Generally women think harder! In French, we said "Couper un cheveu en 4" (Cut an hair in 4)


Guys, just buy some red led bulbs from superbrightleds and stop thinking so hard. Do a kodak safelight test for confirmation if you need to.

Yes it can be an option as I check on their website and they accept orders from Canada and ship First Class.

In the mean time I unbox the Thomas safelights I have and I have spair cutted filters : Rosco #22 (dark amber) and Rosco #25 Sunset Red.
I read that the #22 will be good for the first filter. For the doors filter, members said often Rubylith, but I cannot find this appellation in Rosco or Lee filters.

Yes I will run the Kodak safelight tests. I will test some options at the same time with the filters I have : Kodak OC, 2A, a GBX-2 if I found one cheap on eBay and some gels filters on the Thomas.
And maybe LED for the specific paper Foma Variant III, the superbrightleds which peak at 635nm can be the better choice.

Comments will be welcome if you use this paper.

[Leigh]

I read that the #22 will be good for the first filter.
For the doors filter, members said often Rubylith, but I cannot find this appellation in Rosco or Lee filters.
The vane (door) filters are not used at all for black&white printing. For b&w, the vanes should be left fully open unless the light is too bright, in which case close the vanes as desired to attenuate it.

Per the Thomas instruction sheet:

114215 (Click for larger image.)

Rubylith is the trade name of a product made by Ulano Corporation, not by Rosco or Lee.
It's commonly used in the graphic arts industry. Google finds lots of links for it.

- Leigh

[Peter De Smidt]

The guy who developed the Kodak safelight test got rid of his Thomas Duplex. It wasn't safe in his darkroom for his Kodak papers. That's not to say that it'll be a problem for others. I mention it just to stress the need for doing a good test. I use red LEDs.

[Leigh]

The guy who developed the Kodak safelight test got rid of his Thomas Duplex.
I expect he was told to do so by his employer, as a marketing ploy.

I've run mine fully open for over 20 years with no problems whatsoever, on both graded and VC papers.

And yes, I've run various safelight "safety" tests, including leaving partially-blocked paper out for over an hour.

- Leigh

[Ginette]

Ok thanks, I found the reference to the masking film Rubylith. So this one goes in the bottom filter? Or the bottom is the Deep Amber and the Rubylith is use for Ortho material?
So If I wish to test a darker red for the Foma paper, I should put this darker red in the bottom spot instead of the deep amber? Because the Deep Amber + a Deep red will be to dense?

Leigh, do you use Ilford VC? safe with OC or Ilford 902 or SL1. It look it is not the case with the Foma. I ordered a roll so I need to take in account the cutting manipulation time in addition to the developping sequence.
In the past, I use only 1 5x7 size Ilford 902 in my small darkroom 7x12' with mostly Ilford Multigrade and WT, some Agfa, Kodak not really!
New room 12x16 need more lights or a Thomas. But some papers may have specials needs too.

[Bernard_L]

Discussion focused on lamps and filters. Safe/unsafe also depends on paper. Oriental was mentioned. Foma also explicitly state that for their paper amber is not safe, red only. Different VC paper manufacturers will have the green sensitive layer extending more or less to long wavelengths.