PDA

View Full Version : Printing Pyrocat Hd negatives on VC paper



Robert Oliver
31-Dec-2013, 15:14
I've been processing negatives in Pyrocat HD for a while now and have had great results with scanning.

Last night I tried printing one of the Pyrocat negs on VC paper for the first time... And had some frustration. The negative is a scene with a bright area of ice crystals in the foreground and mostly middle to dark tones in the background. The negative was processed using minimal agitation, but might have been over developed. In hindsight I should have started with a simpler scene. Without filtration, my blacks to mid tones looked great, but the highlights were lifeless and flat. Having trouble getting detail in ice crystals to show up.

I'm using a Durst 138s with condenser head and a diffusion gel between bottom condenser and the negative stage. The bulb is one of the original durst globes, I thinks it's the weakest one. My negative was fp4+ rated at 80 and processed at 70 degrees for 17 minutes with agitation for the first minute and at 3 minute intervals.

I read an online discussion between Jay de Fehr and Sandy King about Pyrocat and VC printing. I would say the discussion gave me equal amounts of clarity and confusion. I tried Jay's suggestion of using a magenta filter to offset the built in yellow filter caused by the image stain. My print using this technique (3.5 multigrade filter) was fairly successful but a bit contrasty for my taste, will probably reprint with a 3.

I also experimented with a form of split grade printing, which came close but didn't result in a successful print.

Now I have to figure out what to do regarding processing the second negative of the scene... I think I should give the neg a little less processing time or switch to 1:1:150 dilution, assuming extra stain in the highlights is causing all of my problems. I'm figuring out that I may have over-developed my negs. Pretty sure i didn't over-expose. The way understand n+ processing just causes lack of contrast issues in highlights.

Printing time was 80 seconds at f8 with a 3.5 Multigrade filter. I either need a brighter bulb or I need to ditch the 1/2 stop diffusion gel.

Guess its time to invest in a sensitometer... Or think about switching back to a non-staining developer.

The attached contact sheet was made 1 Multigrade filter.

Confused by all of this? Me too!

Henry Ambrose
31-Dec-2013, 17:08
Add some sodium sulfite to the developer - and you get no stain.
There's a thread here about this, maybe the same one you refer to above:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?21293-Which-Pyro-Dev-for-Enlarging-4x5-on-VC-Paper

Jim Fitzgerald
31-Dec-2013, 17:18
Robert, wish I could help. When I develop with Pyrocat HD and minimal I use 1:1:150 and develop by inspection using the same agitation. Looking at this scene I am convinced that carbon printing is the way to go for me. This would most likely be a one and done print for me with crisp snow detail and texture along with deep shadows and a bonus of relief. Nice image and good luck.

jp
31-Dec-2013, 17:40
I think it's very likely overdeveloped based on the time you quoted. I use 11-12 minutes with fp4+, and do 1 inversion at 1 minute intervals. You shouldn't need to derate the film to 80 either. I shoot it 100, but everyone's gotta figure out what works for them.

You might get a little bit of highlight detail when the paper dries down completely. Otherwise, it doesn't look terrible to burn the snow area a little more.

Andrew O'Neill
31-Dec-2013, 17:44
You probably should give less time in the developer. 17 minutes at 70F is quite long, for me, anyways. Try knocking time down about 25%. Pyrocat-HD negatives can print beautifully on VC papers.

Richard Wasserman
31-Dec-2013, 18:01
Just to confuse things a bit more, I rate FP4 at 80-100 depending on my mood (I think 80 or 100 are pretty much the same thing), and develop in Pyrocat for 18 minutes at 72º agitating every 3 minutes for an average scene. I think everyone needs to test and determine their own best practices. I like the way FP4/Pyrocat prints when the negatives are a bit contrasty and need the equivalent of a #1.5 filter or so with VC papers. Don't give up on it, it is a beautiful combination.

Erik Larsen
31-Dec-2013, 18:17
If I were printing this and having difficulty I would get the shadows/mid tones the way I want and then burn the snow using a higher filter to avoid a dull looking snow. You might have to dodge the snow a bit during your initial shadow/mid tone exposure so it doesn't go dull on you. From the look of things, it doesn't look like too difficult a task to dodge/burn this composition? For what it's worth, I rate fp4 at 80 and develop for 8 minutes in an expert drum on a roller base - but I use pyrocat M, not hd....
I think you'll be able to tame this negative although you'll probably have to donate a little paper to appease the trash can gods while you experiment:)

Robert Oliver
31-Dec-2013, 20:17
Thanks for the suggestions all,

I made a pretty hefty donation to the garbage gods last night making an 11x14 I was somewhat happy with...

My next try was going to be as Erik suggested, try burning in the snow with a #5 vc filter.

Looking at the negative again, I might have gotten all of the ice detail I am going to get out of it. Maybe N or N+1 development for the 2nd neg would give a bit more life to the ice. My cell phone snap of the scene has mass detail in the ice... Might even switch to my trusty old d76 or hc110 at N.

My normal process time for fp4+ is 9:30 with agitation once every 60 sec, but I added around 50% more for minimal agitation and 25% more for vc paper (as per sandy's recommendation on pyrocat-hd.com)

Here is the ice from last nights 11x14 print... Starting to think minimal agitation is where I went wrong, there is plenty of shadow detail, just no highlight detail in this neg.

ic-racer
31-Dec-2013, 20:33
Print it as if it had no stain. The stain does not change your ability to influence print contrast on VC paper using standard techniques.

David Schaller
31-Dec-2013, 21:28
Thanks for the suggestions all,

I made a pretty hefty donation to the garbage gods last night making an 11x14 I was somewhat happy with...

My next try was going to be as Erik suggested, try burning in the snow with a #5 vc filter.
Looking at the negative again, I might have gotten all of the ice detail I am going to get out of it. Maybe N or N+1 development for the 2nd neg would give a bit more life to the ice. My cell phone snap of the scene has mass detail in the ice... Might even switch to my trusty old d76 or hc110 at N.

My normal process time for fp4+ is 9:30 with agitation once every 60 sec, but I added around 50% more for minimal agitation and 25% more for vc paper (as per sandy's recommendation on pyrocat-hd.com)

Here is the ice from last nights 11x14 print... Starting to think minimal agitation is where I went wrong, there is plenty of shadow detail, just no highlight detail in this neg.

That seems too long to me. I shoot FP4 at 100 with Pyrocat. My N development with Pyrocat HD at 70 degrees is just 11 minutes, and mostly I would do N-1 or less with that scene. With silver printing I am always going to give less development to the negative, then punch up the contrast in the print, if necessary. I do minimal agitation, once per minute.

Robert Oliver
1-Jan-2014, 23:43
I processed the other negative in D-76 today for N. This neg has a ton more detail in the ice, while still holding detail in the shadows. Printed pretty darn easy without a filter and print times were down where they should be at about 20 seconds at f11 (I did burn in the ice using a higher contrast filter)

I am realizing my mistake was using minimal agitation on a scene that was lacking contrast to begin with. Not sure what I was thinking. Should have processed first Pyrocat HD batch at N or N+1.

I guess that's why we shoot 2 of each scene!!!!

Steve Sherman
2-Jan-2014, 04:56
I processed the other negative in D-76 today for N. This neg has a ton more detail in the ice, while still holding detail in the shadows. Printed pretty darn easy without a filter and print times were down where they should be at about 20 seconds at f11 (I did burn in the ice using a higher contrast filter)

I am realizing my mistake was using minimal agitation on a scene that was lacking contrast to begin with. Not sure what I was thinking. Should have processed first Pyrocat HD batch at N or N+1.

I guess that's why we shoot 2 of each scene!!!!

Hello Robert,
Certainly everyone is different in their preferences with regard to film development and final print result.

That said, the only way I have developed film since 2004 is using a form of Extreme Minimal Agitation development, I can assure you the single best advantage is using EMA development where the inherent contrast in the scene is low. In fact, the process has the unique ability to control contrast in either direction more effectively than any process I have ever seen, hence the only way I D film. Trust me, the types of scene contrast I pursue are extremes, in both directions.

I do not know how much trial and error you have devoted to the process but it is not something that just magically happens, there is much experimenting and adjusting warranted.

Dare I say I have had more experience using this technique since '04 in combination with MC printing paper than anyone, Sandy King has seen much of my work and can attest to the results that are possible.

A few general rules to follow, EMA forms of development do NOT like over / heavily exposed negatives, I use at or near box speed for FP4, more dependent on how my meter reacts with various situations than the actual speed of the film or contrast in the scene itself. I control huge amounts of contrast or lack of by using time / dilution / as the main means to affect negative density changes while temperature is always constant @ 70 degrees and finally intermittent agitation times are slightly adjusted dependent on the direction the contrast needs to be adjusted. See this link here for a decent discussion on this type development. http://www.apug.org/forums/forum37/24023-semi-stand-description-illustratvie-photo.html

I tend to develop my negatives to a very low contrast index, usually between .9 and 1.10 density above Film Base + Fog. Think of the relationship between film and Multi Contrast paper this way, the extremes of the paper are maximum black and paper base white, these cannot change, they are basically the same no matter what multi contrast paper you use provided you do not have side by side comparisons, (I use and feel that the Ilford Warmtone Multi COntrast paper is the finest currently available today.) THink of the enlarging paper being used as a bellows with the beginning and end of the bellows as D max and Paper Base white. The center section of the bellows equates to the Mid TOnes, with a low contrast negative your resulting printing technique requires expanding the Mid Tones (mid section of bellows) where as an higher contrast negative requires compression of the Mid Tones, again the mid section of the bellows. Prints will always look superior when mid tone contrast is expanded rather than compressed. I use this approach to any scene contrast I make negatives in, so in an ultra high contrast scene I will knowing developed that negative to a lower contrast index fully knowing I am going to use the hardest contrast printing combination I can. On the surface this seems to go against common sense, hopefully I have explained the principles clearly and the reasoning makes sense.

When combining the above method with the capabilities of "Split Contrast Printing" in other words using only the # 0 and # 5 filters to affect contrast and density on the final print the mid tones of the photograph realize their full potential.

For sure, EMA is laborious and time consuming and not for everyone, however, you certainly DID NOT make a mistake using a minimal agitation form of developing your film, rather you have not yet found the combination which will yield the best result.

Cheers!

Cor
2-Jan-2014, 07:27
One thing to keep in mind that the Pyro stain acts as a VC filter itself: a high density area (with a a lot of stain) will print with a lower/flatter density than expected. I use that property when working with IR film, when it's hard/impossible to predict the strength/densities of the high lights. If they are too strong on the negative the stain will tame them, beeing an effective grade 1 (or so) filter. This all within a certain bandwidth off-course. This soft filtering effect can be too much resulting in flat lifeless highlights. If you have some fixed grade paper, give that a try, since this soft filter effect of the stain will not work on fixed grade paper, and your negative will print snappier.

good luck,

Cor

rdenney
2-Jan-2014, 13:13
Just to confuse things a bit more, I rate FP4 at 80-100 depending on my mood (I think 80 or 100 are pretty much the same thing), and develop in Pyrocat for 18 minutes at 72º agitating every 3 minutes for an average scene. I think everyone needs to test and determine their own best practices. I like the way FP4/Pyrocat prints when the negatives are a bit contrasty and need the equivalent of a #1.5 filter or so with VC papers. Don't give up on it, it is a beautiful combination.

Richard, what dilution?

Rick "liking the really long developing time for minimizing unevenness" Denney

Richard Wasserman
2-Jan-2014, 15:25
Sorry—1:1:100


Richard, what dilution?

Rick "liking the really long developing time for minimizing unevenness" Denney

rdenney
2-Jan-2014, 20:07
Sorry—1:1:100

Figgered that, but wanted to be sure.

Rick "with a backlog" Denney

Robert Oliver
2-Jan-2014, 20:14
I diluted a few batches at 1:1:150 for longer processing times and a better compensating effect.

Turned out good... Just haven't printed those negs on VC paper yet.