In my view, this discussion really misses the point.
If one needs additional contrast in the image, it should have been manifested in the negative. I try to get the contrast needed close by managing development in the negative, and then use variable contrast paper to fine tune the contrast in the paper.
sadly, sometimes we aren't that lucky ...Originally Posted by neil poulsen
If you use a weaker-than-standard dilution of developer, then you'll need a longer time to achieve the same result as with a stronger dilution and less time. Making sure you have enough development time for Dmax to be achieved in the print and for the curve shape to reach its final shape is really important when using diluted developers. Three to four minutes is not at all too much.
The OP is still wrestling with the basics, but this refinement shouldn't be ignored. It's often worth doing a few tests just to make sure one is developing for long enough. Simple enough to do, develop a few prints longer than standard and see if there are any improvements that can't be attributed to the paper speed being increased by developing longer. Find a time that does the job and use that as your standard.
Neil,
I think the OP is wrestling with the variables and uncertainties in how paper contrast works (filtration, developer and developing time, filters vs dichroic heads, calibration for speed matching, etc.) and not so concerned with negative development at this juncture.
But, you make a good point, one which I mention a lot too: if your negatives are consistently to flat or too contrasty, you need to adjust your negative development.
Being a Zone System user, I was trained to match the negative development to the subject luminance range for each scene, targeting a consistent overall density range on the negative that would print well on grade 2 paper. I no longer do this nearly as religiously, since I've found that extreme contraction developments often leave mid-tones without needed separation and extreme expansions result in more grain than I would like. Using VC papers and the local contrast controls available with split-printing techniques allows a much larger target for overall negative density range these days.
Still, hitting that window is important. As is proper exposure. I think the largest jump in improvement for most beginners in black-and-white photography is finding a metering strategy and personal film speed that delivers adequately-exposed negatives and then finding development schemes that give them negatives that print well at intermediate grades/contrast settings.
Best,
Doremus
We all make mistakes and occasionally negatives are more difficult to print than they might otherwise be, but altering print development time is at best a poor control. There are plenty of other more effective and repeatable controls. Developing prints should be trivial. Follow the directions and voila.
I also wonder what criteria people use when they say increased development time increases contrast…
I know ! terrible negatives are a great way to learn how to print.
Contrast IS to a distinct extent controlled by length of development. I depend on that fact every session. But premium papers tend to have more development time flexibility than lesser papers. I NEVER standardize on a single development time, but always determine it in relation to the specific image itself. It might go anywhere from one and a half minutes up to four or so. Two or three minutes is the most common. Of course, final image color and toning properties can be potentially affected, especially if the printing time is too short. But one has to experiment to determine their own boundaries; and that can indeed vary negative to negative. So test strips are always recommended.
I am not stating this in competition with what VC papers provide, but as a valuable supplemental tool, regardless of whether the paper is VC or actual graded. It can fine-tune the image contrast and final tone in a manner just changing the light balance can't.
Ive been self taught with the support of horenstiens little brown book of black and white photography, 3rd edition. Yes i have found factual errors in it on my own. And various bits i can get from online forums. However the internet forums are not the greatest as there is a massive tendency to either delete my accoutn when i ask something that a moderator considers "every one knows it, its on a cereal box" or doesnt under stand. Or i just get pages of responses about D min when i ask something simple like "why does delta 400 always seem to lead to blown highlights when taking photographs in extremely bright scenes or scenes with massive differences between highlisghts and low lights?"
It's in the negative development + metering... Overdevelopment of the neg will start to block up the highlight region (where there is the most light/chem activity) and make it difficult to easily print the full range of the print together...
The testing phase of your journey will be to find the EI speed of your film (usually film is more exposed at a lower speed), but given slight underdevelopment that opens the highlight region and makes it much easier to print the entire range of the neg with a normal grade of paper + development, and much less burning/dodging...
The next step is calibration...
Steve K
The best thing to do is start with the manufacturers' directions. Set your meter to the film speed indicated by the maker (usually ISO - at least for Kodak/Ilford/Fuji), meter carefully, develop based on the directions, print by eye using test strips/prints, develop the paper based on the directions, and don't be afraid to work on your prints. Then, with time/practice, based on results, perhaps change your meter setting and lengthen or shorten film development time.
It is not more complicated than that. You don't need snake oil chemicals, arbitrary pre-emptive tests, re-invented wheels or other miscellaneous nonsense.
I dont have alot of time to play around with my equipment or my cameras..
I shoot my film at box speed, i develop per manufacturers recommendations or what are considered the best options on mass development chart.
Ive never tried playing around with under developing negatives, i havent tried doing any old developer formulas, i havent tried do alot of things because i cant get consistent results with the film im using at this time, or with my printing means.
IVe only managed to shoot 50 foot of delta 400 this year, and ALOT of it was fried due to being shot outside, in high light, high contrasty scenes. Scenes of grapes on grape leaves hanging on the vine.. the prints.. i can get a slightly fuzzy image of the grape stem to print out with texture, and a partial outline of grape leaves, but anything that was in bright light is just PAPER...
sure, i could flop down a sheet of 11x14, do a print on it, take it off, trim off the white, do a new print on a fresh sheet of paper, put the cut up portion on the stem and leaf outline of second print, and burn the hell out of the high lights with a 1 filter... but is that actually going to solve anything for us?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks