Hi there,
So i just started using pryo and i have been shooting FP4 rated at 100, and developing it in PMK for 9 minutes, and my negatives are absolute BRICKS. My normal time for a 16x20 print, on a cold head enlarger with an aperture full open at 5.6 is ranging up into the 250 seconds. The negatives themselves look beautiful, the tonal range looks amazing, and even the contacts on rc paper look gorgeous. But for enlargements the amount of time it takes to make a exposure is crazy. Any advice?
Is the problem overall fog, or too much density in the highlights? If overall fog, then there are some steps you can take to minimize it. If there's too much density in the highlights but low base density, then you might try developing less.
To give a better answer, more info would help. What is your processing method? Are you printing on VC paper? What is your light source?
“You often feel tired, not because you've done too much, but because you've done too little of what sparks a light in you.”
― Alexander Den Heijer, Nothing You Don't Already Know
For comparison, I use PMK to develop FP4+. I use BTZS, but my "normal" development time is 9.5 minutes, film rated at 64. Development is in hand rolled tubes, and I get reasonable enlargement exposure times with cold light. Sounds like your fb+f is higher than mine.
What are you enlarging to 16x20.....8x10 or 110?
Since you state that your contact prints look great, the solution is to use a brighter light in your enlarger to reduce the exposure time.
PMK developer imparts a strong yellow stain to a negative. Yellow filters blue light. A cold light emits light from the blue end of the spectrum. It's like adding extra yellow filtration. Cuts down the brightness of the enlarger light source.
A 16x20 enlargement requires the enlarging head to be raised high above the lens board, resulting in a smaller amount of light reaching the paper.
A stronger enlarger light source as well as 135mm enlarging lens, instead of a 150 will help to make the exposure times shorter.
My development is in stainless steel canisters. I develop my film at 70 degress.
When i print I have been using a 90 lens so that i do not have to raise it as high.
Right now i am using Ilford VC fiber.
I dont think its fog, in my contacts i am getting brilliant whites. But the density looks good, its not like the density is so THICK thick i look at it and say wow. It just looks like great overall exposed negatives.
Would a color enlarger head be better, since i can use magenta to control my print?
Another thing i think would be importan to add is my agitation. I agitate constantly for the first 30 seconds. Than every 30 seconds for 5 seconds, and than i let it stand still. At times there seems to be flatter highlights, when i actually make the print, where on a contact the highlights seem perfect, brilliantly white and clear with information in them. I have to end up dialing up in filtration to bring the highlights up. My usual developer is HC-110 Dilution B. But i have seen amazing prints from pyro, and thought i would have to give it a chance. I have a very important project i am starting to shoot, and i need to get my technical stuff wired down, and i really would like to continue with pyro.
I don't see any substantial difference between FP4 in pyro than any of the other films
I have done with this (and there have been plenty of them). Prints very consistently on each of my four enlargers (two have additive colorheads, one subtractive, and one a coldlight). What kind of bulb are you using, or specific light source? The highlights on
FP4 can block up if you overdevelop, but the base fog should not be appreciable.
I rate it at ASA50, and have printed it on all kind of papers, both VC and graded.
A properly exposed and developed pyro-stained negative should look thinner, in my experience, than one developed in a non-staining developer.
“You often feel tired, not because you've done too much, but because you've done too little of what sparks a light in you.”
― Alexander Den Heijer, Nothing You Don't Already Know
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks