Setting up a darkroom?

[Robert Glieden]

I've only scanned my negatives but am really considering adding an enlarger to my darkroom. This brings up a few questions...

First, I don't want to use selenium. Is it widely accepted that for prints to be considered archival they need to be toned? I understand that selenium can darken blacks and varies with different types of paper but really don't wanna use that stuff... I plan on using Ilford Multigrade Fiber Matte because I can find it locally. I've also heard that this paper may not benefit much from selenium anyway? I do show my work, and once in a great while sell a piece so this is of importance to me.

Second, I'm looking at an Omega D2 (on craigslist). I've read these are workhorses and good etc.... I really am doing this on a shoestring budget and probably can't afford a cold light right away. Is there a thread describing how to diffuse condensers or could you please point me in the right direction? My main concerns with getting an enlarger are scratches, dust and washing.... In that order. I haven't worked in the dark since college (only 3 years ago, but that was a classroom set-up; 35mm and rc paper).

Also, can you use multigrade paper with both cold lights and condensers? I've read threads about this but still am not quite clear on this. Oh yeah, inexpensive safe lights too?

I just want to get things right before I go spending any money,
Thanks,

Rob

[Mark Woods]

Hello Robert,

Cold lights work on multigrade paper. With dirt, dust, scratches, be careful and clean in you methodology. There are print washers that aren't expensive, and you can make your safe lights if you really want to, I use the ones my dad made for his darkroom 60 years ago, and they work fine.

Don't you digital is in. ;-) No one does the photo-chemical thing any more, so the equipment is relatively cheap. (Well, some of us do and love it dearly!) :-)

MW

[David Vickery]

So, whats wrong with selenium toners--Why wouldn't you want to use them? I think they are excellent and wouldn't want to try to print without mine.
There isn't any reason not to use a selenium toner, unless you are in the remarkably strange situation were you would have to mix up your own from dry chemicals.

Tim Rudman produced an excellent book on toning, "The Photographer's Toning book, The Definitive Guide".

The Omega D2 enlargers are some of the best that you can get, for the price and availability of parts and accessories. You can easily convert from condensers to diffusers to cold light.

You can use multi-grade paper with any type of light source that you want to use. The filtration may be different with the different sources but they will all work.

[Toyon]

Selenium in solution is quite safe if you use gloves. In fact it is an essential nutrient in small quantities. The pyro formulations are far more toxic.

[David Karp]

Selenium can make a real difference in your prints. Some developer paper combinations create a print with a greenish cast. The selenium makes that go away, and results in a beautiful print. The concentration of selenium can be very low, 1:20 for example to achieve this result. However, with Ilford papers you need a higher concentration to achieve the subtle change in color and deepening of the shadow tones associated with dilute selenium toning, more like 1:10.

Since you do not want to use selenium toner, you can enhance the archival quality of your prints (and negatives) by treating them with Sistan: http://www.freestylephoto.biz/9427-A...ction-Solution

Sistan does not have an impact on the tone of the image.

I have no experience with cold lights. A great book regarding darkroom work is the late Barry Thornton's "The Edge of Darkness."

[Andrew O'Neill]

First, I don't want to use selenium. Is it widely accepted that for prints to be considered archival they need to be toned? I understand that selenium can darken blacks and varies with different types of paper but really don't wanna use that stuff... I plan on using Ilford Multigrade Fiber Matte because I can find it locally. I've also heard that this paper may not benefit much from selenium anyway? I do show my work, and once in a great while sell a piece so this is of importance to me.

Second, I'm looking at an Omega D2 (on craigslist). I've read these are workhorses and good etc.... I really am doing this on a shoestring budget and probably can't afford a cold light right away. Is there a thread describing how to diffuse condensers or could you please point me in the right direction? My main concerns with getting an enlarger are scratches, dust and washing.... In that order. I haven't worked in the dark since college (only 3 years ago, but that was a classroom set-up; 35mm and rc paper).

Also, can you use multigrade paper with both cold lights and condensers? I've read threads about this but still am not quite clear on this. Oh yeah, inexpensive safe lights too?

I've been using KRST for years just like most wet workers here. As far as it not doing wonders to Ilford matte fibre is not true. You get rid of that horrid green tinge and get blacker blacks. Make two identical prints where one gets toned and the other doesn't. You will see how much richer the toned print looks.
Of course the other is the archival benefit which is important if you want your great great great grandkids to see your work

My 4x5 enlarger used to be a condensor type. I took the condensor lenses out and replaced them with a piece of white glass. I now use Aristo heads for both my 4x5 and 8x10 enlargers...I had to do a lot of modifying to make it work.

Yes, you can use Ilford multigrade with both types of enlarging systems. You will have to tailor your negatives for them. Diffusor enlargers require a negative with a longer density range. My negs DR is about 1.35. If you are also scanning your negatives, you will find that thinner negatives scan better than denser negatives. This may influence your choice of systems...or you could develop two negatives, one for diffuser enlarger and one for scanning...

[Brian Ellis]

You don't say why you want to use a cold light but if you're thinking of print quality, there's no inherent advantage to a cold light head as opposed to a condenser as long as you process your negatives appropriately for whichever type you use. All that "soot and chalk" anti-condenser stuff that Ansel Adams and Fred Picker talked about has long since been debunked (though I did use and like a cold light head myself).

I switched to digital printing quite a while ago and no longer print in a darkroom but I did for many years. I used Ilford Multigrade FB for much of that time. I never saw any big difference in dMax between selenium toned and untoned prints with that paper but selenium supposedly does increase the life of the print so I used it most of the time. Its toxic nature has been overstated I think, partly because of the strong smell of Kodak RST. But that smell is actually just the ammonia component, the same stuff found in many homes. Use gloves when you're mixing and using RST and you won't have a problem.

If you're using selenium to increase dMax you should do some testing for the appropriate dilution and time. As Fred Newman demonstrated in one of his old BTZS newsletters, there is an optimum dilution and time for all papers. If you leave the print in the toning solution for too long dMax actually decreases. A reflection densitometer of course is ideal for this testing but not many people have them so an eyeball test is better than nothing.

[walter23]

First, I don't want to use selenium. Is it widely accepted that for prints to be considered archival they need to be toned? I understand that selenium can darken blacks and varies with different types of paper but really don't wanna use that stuff...

Why not selenium? Health? In small quantities its a nutrient, and there are a few selenium shampoos which are fairly safe (for treating dandruff and a few skin conditions). I worried a bit about the stuff at first but it's fairly easy to take precautions against getting it on you, and it really does make for nice deep blacks in your prints. You have to use it in ventilation; the ammonium (or some related compound - smells like ammonia anyway) in the solution is quite noxious and you don't want to be breathing it in.

A cheap safe light is fine. Just make sure it's a safe light and not just a red light bulb. Some cheapo red bulbs just don't cut out the right wavelengths. If you want to test a safelight, pull out a small square of paper and put it on a table with a quarter on top of it (in the dark of course). Then turn on your safe light and leave it there for a reasonably long time (longer than you'll typically work with paper under safe light, say 5 to 10 minutes. You can go longer if you want to be really sure.). You can go overboard here and blast it with the safelight at 5" away, but I figure it's better to just be practical and keep the safelight in its normal position (e.g. hanging from the ceiling or on the wall). Develop the paper normally and if you can see the quarter outline you've got a bad safelight.

[Oren Grad]

Is it widely accepted that for prints to be considered archival they need to be toned?

The light selenium toning done by most B&W printers who tone does not provide full protection against attack by atmospheric pollutants. It is possible to protect the image silver fully with selenium, but toning to completion with selenium produces pretty ugly results with every paper on which I've ever tried it.

Sulfide toning does a better job if protecting the image silver is the overriding goal, but in terms of health risks and darkroom logistics it's much nastier than selenium. And it does dramatically change the image appearance.

For my B&W "keepers" I generally use Sistan. Sometimes I'll also do a light to moderate selenium toning if I think the picture will benefit from it and that the extra water consumption and darkroom effort involved is justified.

[Robert Glieden]

Wow, tremendous responses. Thanks all.