Ortho Plus unsharp masks

[resurgance]

Hi there,

I am new to this forum, having been once a 35mm'er then 6x7, 6x8 now 4x5 with a shiny new Chamonix 4x5, 90mm f8 fujinon SW up front. Totally hooked, loving movements and huge (for me) negs.

For a favourite old steam/diesel sawmill shot with lots of rough sawn timber and machinery shot through a wooden building I tried an unsharp mask. I came to the conclusion through various means that I needed to expose a 4x5 contact onto Ilford Ortho plus with a 100W halogen enlarger (LPL 6700) at 5x7" height for 10sec @ f16, and develop in ID-11 1:1 for 2min rotary. Overexposed underdeveloped. The contrast of mask came out great so I think - I do not use a densitometer, but it was flat, grey, and the resulting image post sandwich was quite impressive, once I tweaked the contrast up a grade and a bit.

It had really big motley grain though, which affected the final image (still sharp and pretty amazing considering). I have never played this much with development etc before, and suspect that the grain was from being severely underdeveloped?

So I was going to try halving the exposure to 5 sec, raising the enlarger head to 8x10 size and increasing dev to 3 min. This I was hoping would be underexposed, overdeveloped, but I am just guessing.
I will work through a bit of a process to find a good combo, but am feeling a little puzzled at exactly how I would go about determining ballpark exposure without densitometer, given that I am just starting to grasp curves and densities anyway.
I do have a 'darkroom automation pyro meter' that apparently can be used for densities and straight light output, and I know that I could somehow determine exposure based on asa 3 for ortho plus - my next move is to use my minolta spot meter on the baseboard pointing up and figure exposure out that way.
Has anyone used the pyro meter, or how could I determine exposure on enlarger semi accurately? I have also a DeVere 504 as my main enlarger, that has a modern enlarger lamps Model 3 LED VC head on it - so unfortunately I don't have a standard setup to copy and paste others times etc.

Feel like a bit of a cowboy, and would appreciate a point in the right direction to join the dots, and get me going down the right path?

Thanks,

[cowanw]

Did you see this?
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/unsharp/
and this
http://www.waybeyondmonochrome.com/WBM2/TOC_files/UnsharpMaskingEd2.pdf

[resurgance]

Hi there, thanks for the reply

Yes thanks, I have scoured all posts, and all sorts of sites but I will narrow it down to one statement and two specific questions,

"Hi there, I am loving 4x5 and learning better practice in the darkroom, great forum you have here, I have been gleaning info for nearly a year, and have finally joined, thanks for having me...."

Questions are;
- Why the motley grain - which I answered myself tonight when after using a totally different exposure, developer and developer time the 'grain' was still there, and I realized that this 'grain' was not grain but acid etched glass a.k.a. anti newton glass that I had lying around in my darkroom (discarded from my Devere after I was still getting flipping newton rings!)

- How does one determine exposure using a densitometer when you only have an exposure index on a graph; To be honest I feel like I should be gleaning this from the books I have - I own 'way beyond monochrome' but am just on the verge of understanding darkroom work from a graph/physics point of view. I am no stranger to the darkroom, but am new to the repeatability through recording results, and really thoroughly understanding all of the fundamentals regarding negative density, best grade control etc. I always just winged it when I was a lot younger, now after a 15 year break I thirst to learn the proper way, but feel like I'm missing some practical steps.

The WBM book mentions a 7.5min dev given an EV of -3.0 on the baseboard - now this to me is interesting, but I have no idea how to get an EV reading, or can I do this with my Minolta SpotF - I doubt it would go into negative EV numbers? any other way?
It does also say that it is easy when you have a densitometer, as a density of 0.3 is 1 stop of exposure - SO I think I need to some up with a 'film speed graph' for using my darkroom automation enlarging meter. Think there's a gonna be some film wasting.

Am I on the right track or is there a better way?

These may be classed as silly questions, but I am itching to discuss this with someone, as I am the only large format guy in my city (that I know of) and so far I have not heard of or met anyone locally where I live that is on the same page.

Thanks

[Larry Gebhardt]

To use a densitometer to help you make your masks you will want to do your tests by contact printing a step wedge. This will tell you what the original density was and how your exposure and development of the mask were. You will then need to extrapolate the results to your film images. Personally I find the densitometer to be useful when you are setting up the process, but not of much help after that.

[Larry Gebhardt]

The Darkroom Automation Pyro meter (http://www.darkroomautomation.com/pem.htm) is very useful (but I don't use the pyro function), and is probably all the densitometer you will need for black and white masking work. It is more of a hassle than a dedicated unit since you need to put the material to read into the negative carrier. And there's no way to read reflected values (for print readings).

[cowanw]

You can try something like this to replace the densitometer for a print. a bit more complicated but cheap.
Especially useful If you contact print a step wedge, with your negative.
https://www.currys.com/product.htm?Product=CW3505&Source=Category&Category=COLOUR_WHEELS_AND_GUIDES

[Drew Wiley]

I think you're making life way more complicated than it needs to be. I'd learn the basics of masking first, if this is the kind of thing you need for your own workflow.
For one thing, masks need to have a very low gamma evenly extending the entire length of the original negative itself. And rotary dev is pretty aggressive. ID-11 or D76 can be made to work, but you're already using such a short dev time that there's not much control. I'd recommend highly dilute HC-110 instead, for example, 1:31 from 1:3 working solution, NOT stock. A good masking film is FP4, though TMX100 is even better. For most black and white printing you rarely want masks with a DMax higher than .30. A simple homemade densitometer adequate for general evaluation consists simply of a couple holes punched in a piece of black cardboard so you can compare the density patch on a step tablet to a small area on your developed mask. Later on you can refine this by plotting curves if you wish; but it sounds like you're really at an early stage of experimentation where you wouldn't know how to interpret the curves anyway. You first need to learn to practical implications of printing with a mask; and simple test strips will do this a lot faster. But in theory, a .30 mask obviously equates to one extra
step in density, so you need to open your enlarging lens one stop more to get your ballpark printing equivalent.

[resurgance]

Thanks for the replies,

I have a darkroom automation exposure meter, and am just grasping the density side of things. Until now I have always printed by feel, but it is material intensive, and I really like the calculated approach, which I am learning.

Larry I have a step wedge negative that I will contact print onto the ortho plus to plot a speed curve.

Drew I agree, I am on the fringe of understanding, but I am keen to learn, and quick to when this interested. I am interested in unsharp masks primarily as quite a lot of my subject matter has a lot of detail, and I love that sharp look for some shots, rough sawn timer in one of the shots is stunning!
I like ortho plus so I can work with it under safelight, I acquired 2 Kindermann LED safelights that are 620nm, safe for ortho film. I also used some fuji microfine stock (I shoot mostly acros) which worked quite well, in a tray - the stock developer has a 10min dev time for acros, so its not a high potency dev like some stock solutions. I was around the 'native' speed of it it to my estimation, and underdeveloping it to produce a very flat low range neg. The DMax figure you gave is handy, I'll work on that! I will keep reading and reading, and hopefully my conscious and subconscious selves will work together and decide that they understand now...~~~!

Back to the darkroom!

[Drew Wiley]

Ortho film is OK unless you want to learn color film masking, which is different in many respects, depending on the specific media. I just use old Kodak curve plotting sheets which I stockpiled eons ago. One could simply xerox them, or get plotting software if that is your inclination. There are some real differences between step tablets and actual film you might use. Be careful with old tablets which have discolored. But I would seriously look at tray rather than drum development for masks. Dilute 1:2 ID-11 is workable, but make sure it has stabilized first. It won't give a perfect curve; but if you do end up with a little bit too much toe, or some residual fog on the mask, you can clear it with about a minute in Farmer's reducer, which is a very nice tool in general for fine-tuning masks by reducing density. I personally find masking work to be fun because there are so many ways to do it. Normally I don't get horribly fussy when making masks for black and white work, but for color work have developed some very precisely repeatable regimens replete with custom math programs and dev temps within 1/10th deg F - and for that kind of thing you do need a good densitometer. But you've already begun your journey, and I hope it's a pleasant one!

[resurgance]

Drew nice work on the colour masks!

I set out with my darkroom with the sole purpose of doing B&W - I can imagine it would be technically a lot harder to achieve great colour prints! working to 1/10th degree sounds challenging. The Farmers reducer is a great suggestion to flatten out slightly dense masks thanks - Does it take out the highlights and shadows equally at the same time?

Last night I made some more masks based on your comment about having a Dmax of 0.3, and I ended up with exactly that, measured with a densitometer that sits on the baseboard - it measures in stops and I took a reference reading from the clear portion of film I created when exposing the contact, and had a hair over 0.9(stops), which I divided my three to give me the overall density. Looking forward to printing tonight. I do not have any registration gear, but just line the 4x5s up on the light table after taping the first one down. Because I am underdeveloping there is still a lot of detail in the highlights of the mask, without the density in the shadows (opposite with positive I am guessing)

The journey has been very pleasant thanks, and I am quite driven to learn which is nice - when I have done it in the past I only worked on small format, and printed RC with no toning, now my two favourite formats are 6x12 and 4x5; I have many photographic subjects/projects in mind, have a well set up permanent darkroom and am making superb (with room for improvement of course) 12x16 and 16x20 FB prints; I have discovered selenium, and drag bleaching with ferri, after admiring the late Barry Thornton's work, discovering masks I could go on for hours....

Back to the darkroom!

[Drew Wiley]

You can register on a lightbox just so much before insanity sets in. It's fine for learning purposes, but if you get seriously into this you'll want to invest in a punch
and matching pin-glass contract frame. You don't need a registered carrier. Technically, Farmer's works on the least dense areas first. But since the whole mask
will have relatively "thin" density, you can also use it for salvaging overall overexposure too. A brief treatment will clear any fog, or 1 to 2 min will tend to cut heavily.
Once you've mastered basic contrast masks you can branch out into supplementary techniques if you like. You can also combine film masking with retouch masking
using pen, pencil, or red dye.

[resurgance]

Any heads up on possible sources of a decent punch and matching pin-glass contact frame? It takes quite a while to line them up, and the tape has 'creep' also I made an image the other night that looked like a bass relief. Not that nice. Cutting the fog with Farmers is gold - In my mind it would enable one to print without increasing contrast?

Had great success tonight with my 0.3 density unsharp mask.... Double weight Ilford FB WT, selenium toned 1:9 for 5min, came out better than I had anticipated. Not sure how to accurately take a photo of it, but I will attempt to post it somehow - Not sure if anyone will connect with the subject matter, but I really like it, and it is the product of all of my learning combined. Really chuffed on using the swing on the 4x5 to use the lens wide open and isolate clutter in the image. Worked really well, and I'm totally hooked on movements!

[rcmartins]

Resurgance,
I have recently started doing masks and got my pin registration from Lynn Radeka (http://www.maskingkits.com/carriers.htm) whose photography I also enjoy and admire. It works wonderfully and in my enlarger, a Durst 138 with a CLS301 color head, it can even be used as a pin registered carrier. So much so that I replaced my Nega138 with it. I know there are other pin registered systems and you might want to look at them too though I haven't had any experience with any other but mine. Lynn is extremely professional.
raul

[Nathan Potter]

Ditto from Lynn Radeka for pin registration system. Also Inglis (sp) has a system. I make my own using SS stock and precision drill rod. If you are using tape to hold the registered pairs you might try polyimide backed tape, the creep is minimal but it is very sticky when new. Also you can fabricate a rig for doing precise alignment (better than pin registration) by employing a precision XY stage with rotation. I have used a micromenter stage calibrated in 2.5 µm increments to align 35 mm masks to chromes. The chrome is fixed and the mask is attached to the stage for alignment. Pin registration is fine for 4X5 film and larger.

For masking I use Tmax 100 usually in D 76 developed in a 4X5 tube with exact agitation. Just make a few sensitometric curves at different exposures and you'll cover the mask density ranges that are likely needed. I might go up to density of 0.6, but as Drew points out seldom does one need more than around 0.3. It is also useful to pull the gamma of the sensitometric curve (a bit like what can be done in PS curves function).

For decent control of the masking process you really need a densitometer or equivalent way to measure the chrome and mask density. A step wedge for film calibration is invaluable.

Nate Potter, Austin TX, Steuben ME.

[Drew Wiley]

The number one rule with registration is avoid acetate based films whenever possible - they aren't dimensionally stable, so will lose register over time or with changes
in humidity. Likewise, when you tape your mask and original together, use mylar of polyester-based tape, not acetate or paper. Sometimes you can get lucky and still
find matched sets of Condit punches and frames, but they do have to be matched and in decent condition. I've seen several nice sets come up for sale in the last year, but you gotta be lucky and know what to look for. These were the best. Otherwise, Radeka or Inglis are made for up to 4x5 use, as already noted. Nathan has pretty much hit on the startup procedure. You plot a family of curves for several exposure and development times. The length of exposure will determine the density, the amt of dev, the gamma, just like in ordinary work. You just want everything a lot lower contrast, and attempt to keep as straight a line as possible,
though in black and white printing, it's not hyper-critical. I like 5-mil mylar, frosted both sides, for diffusion sheets. You can also blacken out small areas on this
using a Sharpie pen etc to simulate a lith mask, then simply wipe if off or edit it with alcohol if needed. If you do go on to high-contrast lith pre-masks later, you
will go insane without a registration punch, because unlike an unsharp mask, these need to be dead on.

[resurgance]

Great recommendation on the Lynn Radeka Registration system! Am looking into taking the plunge at time of writing...

The system has a 3 fold bonus for my darkroom process;

- I have a modern enlarger lamps model 3 VC LED head, and it just sits on top of my DeVere, with an additional 8kg lead weight so the constant weight spring thinks it still has an enormous dichroic head on top... So every time I change the negative I put the VC head to one side and plonk it back on top, not ideal.
Apparently the negative holder that is part of the registration system has a slot, enabling me to fix the head in a permanent fashion to this, and then it accepts the registered holder into the slot, with magnets to locate. I hope I can use this for day to day printing, somehow utilizing material to provide masking for smaller than 4x5 negs?

- I have been getting crazy newton rings, despite having AN glass, proper acid etched stuff from KBH - so I went glassless on top, and tape to hold the neg flat where needed - which was fine, but now I'm getting them from between mask and negative.
Lynn's system appears to have this covered via materials, and physical space etc.

- and last but not least, ease of masking.

Thanks!

[resurgance]

Quite off topic, but regarding newton rings, which at first I thought were from between mask and original negative;
last night I found I was getting them even on negative with no masks - so I used the thin paper that came between my ortho plus to 'pack up' either side of the 6x12 neg that I was printing, and that seemed to stop them from forming. It appeared the weight or point at which the glassless 4x5 mask touched and held the sides of the 6x12 negative was pushing the neg into the bottom glass in such a way that it was causing newton rings. Have had such an issue with them lately, (ever since starting to print with the Devere and bigger than 6x7) and am looking into environmental causes - of which I thought moisture was the main thing - my darkroom is real dry, so was wondering if it was when taping the 6x12 to the bottom glass (At this stage I only have 35mm, 6x7 and 4x5" glassless masks, need to make 6x12) I may be breathing too heavily onto the glass or something like that.

If there is any pointers there, or similar experiences a reply would be much appreciated!

[resurgance]

RCMartins and Nathan Potter, Can you use the Radeka carrier for day to day printing without masks?

It looks like I am able to fix the outer carrier with the slot to my enlarger with VC head on top, without having to remove this again - but what would one do with regards to smaller formats (6x12, 6x8, 6x7, the odd 35mm) without the use of built in sliding masks?

[rcmartins]

RCMartins and Nathan Potter, Can you use the Radeka carrier for day to day printing without masks?

Well, yes, but you will have to make compromises. If you only use, or mainly go for 4x5 then the use of Radeka's pin registration as a negative carrier is not only possible but also fairly practical to use for regular printing (maskless). For smaller formats things become quite less practical simply because you will have to cut the strips. This makes it a bit of a pain not only to enlarge but also to store the enlarged negatives. I am still adjusting my workflow for the medium format but fortunately my preferred medium is the 4x5 negative. But be warned, if you print a significant amount of smaller formats it requires much more fiddling than with a normal carrier.
I have bought the version of pin registration with both the top and bottom glasses having anti-Newton rings etched surface and can attest that they are top quality.
Raul

[resurgance]

Done,

I splashed out, and purchased the complete masking kit/registration carrier from Lynn - thats it! I'm done spending money on darkroom gear! :) well, after the last lot of warmtone FB paper I just bought off ebay.

Lynn also recommended Arista Litho film as an all round mask film (depending on developer used) and 5x7 size to cater for larger than 4x5 negs after taping registration strip to original neg - and I had a pleasant surprise when I found out that the Litho 2 film is only $38 for 100 sheets of 5x7!!
Then realized when I was reading 'beyond monochrome' that Lynn wrote the section on masking for complete control. Very cool.

That book is quite something - I grasp all of the concepts, but am yet to fully understand all of the science, graphs etc. A good book to grow into/sink teeth into.

So as far as the original post goes, I'll have to start from scratch with the Litho film again. Good times.

Thanks all for great info