Contact Prints Without Enlarger?

[jamgolf]

Newbie here. Just starting out with 8x10 with an interest in contact prints without an enlarger. I want to try Lodima or Lupex paper in Amidol developer and work on (eventually) making high-quality contact prints.

What type of light source, shade, reflector, etc. would be suitable for this?
Can I use a softbox for a more diffused/even light?
Does the CRI of the bulb matter?
Should I get bulbs in a few different wattages e.g. 75W, 150W, 300W to experiment?

I am sure there are others who make contact prints in this manner without an enlarger. What are your experiences/advice?

Thanks in advance for your guidance!

[Merg Ross]

An old thread, still relevant:

https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?48264-light-source-for-contact-printing

[jamgolf]

Thanks for pointing me to this ^ thread.

[jamgolf]

Based on information in the other thread any bulb is ok. But I am a bit confused. When using an enlarger, the contrast can be controlled by the 00 to 5 filters (I think they are called filters). Looking at them they are colored filters which I suppose control/filter various parts of the light spectrum. So if I am understanding correctly, essentially the print contrast is controlled by the type of light that paper is exposed to. Why then it does not matter what type of bulb is used for exposing Lodima/Lupex? Would a halogen bulb, vs LED vs fluorescent bulb not yield different levels of contrast?

I am probably making it too complicated but just in general, I am a bit confused that a filter can affect the contrast under an enlarger but the light type does not matter when exposing paper under a bare bulb.

[peter schrager]

use graded paper...a 30 watt bulb you hook up to a pulley for shorter or longer exposures
if you want to use VC paper find yourself a cheap enlarger and use the filters..

[Merg Ross]

Based on information in the other thread any bulb is ok. But I am a bit confused. When using an enlarger, the contrast can be controlled by the 00 to 5 filters (I think they are called filters). Looking at them they are colored filters which I suppose control/filter various parts of the light spectrum. So if I am understanding correctly, essentially the print contrast is controlled by the type of light that paper is exposed to. Why then it does not matter what type of bulb is used for exposing Lodima/Lupex? Would a halogen bulb, vs LED vs fluorescent bulb not yield different levels of contrast?

I am probably making it too complicated but just in general, I am a bit confused that a filter can affect the contrast under an enlarger but the light type does not matter when exposing paper under a bare bulb.

As Peter says, contrast of your contact prints will be varied by using graded paper. Lodima and the old Azo are graded papers, as in numbers #1 to #4, or similar. Higher the number, greater the contrast. You can use variable contrast paper for contact printing, but will need filters, hence the use of enlargers for contact printing. However, there is a vast difference between the two processes. I would opt for the use of a contact paper for contact prints, Lodima while it is still available.

[jamgolf]

Thanks, Merg and Peter. I actually got some Lodima #4. Now just trying to figure out the lighting setup.
I think I'll just have to experiment with different bulbs 30W, 60W, 90W and see how it turns out.

[peter schrager]

for lodima you need at least a 200 watt bulb...!!!!

[tomwilliams]

I will be interested in your results. I make contact prints from 4x5 negatives on Ilford MGRC Multigrade RC Deluxe paper with an ordinary halogen four watt bulb 46" above the print frame, printing time 14 seconds. I haven't worried about the spectral output of the bulb, though as you mention jamgolf, it would seem to be a relevant issue. So far I haven't used a filter, but now have a set of Ilford Multigrade 6"x6" filters that I plan to simply lay on top of the contact frame glass during exposure. Is that a reasonable approach, anyone?

[Daniel Unkefer]

tomwilliams,

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49497411482_1f5123a533_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2ipVaYf)VC Contact Printing Source (https://flic.kr/p/2ipVaYf) by Nokton48 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/18134483@N04/), on Flickr

I saw that Tim Layton built this unit, so followed his lead and I had fun building this. The ulility light was $15 at Home Depot, I removed the clamp mechanism. The box is made from foam core board and masking tape. I put my Multigrade 6x6" #00 & #5 variable contrast filters in cardboard frames, so I can change the filtering out by touch, under the dark safelights.

I tried a 7.5W bulb, amazingly way too bright for RC VC paper. So I ordered ROSCO ND sheets from B&H, in .6 and .3 densities. About a thirty second or longer time is what I am looking for, so I have time for burning and dodging.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49494974031_c184321104_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2ipGFpe)Garden of the Gods 1 (https://flic.kr/p/2ipGFpe) by Nokton48 (https://www.flickr.com/photos/18134483@N04/), on Flickr

My first attempt at split VC contact printing. Basically you do a test strip first #00 Multigrade, determine low contrast time. The expose that part over the entire sheet, then switch to #5 Multigrade and do another full sheet test strip to determine the high contrast time. Finally expose another sheet with the determined low and high contrast times. Harder to explain than to actually do.

https://www.homedepot.com/p/HDX-75-Watt-PVC-Clamp-Light-1102/205504032

The four suspension wires keeps the box level and keeps it from swinging around in the dark.

[Kiwi7475]

I will be interested in your results. I make contact prints from 4x5 negatives on Ilford MGRC Multigrade RC Deluxe paper with an ordinary halogen four watt bulb 46" above the print frame, printing time 14 seconds. I haven't worried about the spectral output of the bulb, though as you mention jamgolf, it would seem to be a relevant issue. So far I haven't used a filter, but now have a set of Ilford Multigrade 6"x6" filters that I plan to simply lay on top of the contact frame glass during exposure. Is that a reasonable approach, anyone?

I would not put the filter on top of the contact frame, it’s one more surface that needs to be really clean, one dust spec and you’ll see it on the print. But placed above, underneath the light it would be diffused and not show up.
At some point in time, long ago, I had something like the post #10 above, with foam core boards and a simple 3w led light at about 4 ft away. Worked perfectly even for 8x10. Of course, a real enlarger is a much nicer tool but you can cobble something really simple together and start practicing your printing and dodge/burning skills!

[Merg Ross]

I would not put the filter on top of the contact frame, it’s one more surface that needs to be really clean, one dust spec and you’ll see it on the print. But placed above, underneath the light it would be diffused and not show up.


Agree. Also, it would make dodging and burning difficult, unless you are making only straight prints. Small contact prints can be real gems!

[jamgolf]

Some really nice ideas and suggestions. Thanks so much everyone for your help.

[bob carnie]

I remember when I hosted the APUG conference in 2006, Michael A Smith was one of our workshop people, I was amazed at how easy it was to set up a single hanging bulb for him in a room with a sink and he was happy with the setup, worked pretty well for him and he knew how to print.

[tomwilliams]

Daniel's idea looks pretty workable to me. Thanks Kiwi7475 and Merg Ross for the reason not to lay the filter on the contact frame.

[Conrad . Marvin]

A question...could one get blue and green led bulbs and do split grade printing?

[Torontoamateur]

Ed Weston used a barebulb suspended over the contact fram, Bout 4 feet above. I saw this in pictures from his darkroom at Wildcat Hill.