Printing Ilford MG Classic and Cooltone with a Zone VI VC enlarger

[Edward Pierce]

I have a Zone VI Type II VC enlarger. To achieve a “normal” or “grade 2” print with a normal full scale negative on Ilford Cooltone or Classic, I have to turn the contrast controls almost all the way to soft. Looking at the data sheets for these papers, I can see why; they are indeed higher than normal contrast.

This problem is only with these two papers. Ilford Warmtone, Adox MCC, Foma 111 and Oriental all work fine.

Turning the contrast controls almost all the way to soft isn’t great. Very small adjustments of the hard light results in big jumps in contrast. I think the controls work best near the middle of their range.

This is with D-72 developer. Back when I used Dektol I had the same issue.

My workaround has been to develop in Ansco 120 (similar to Selectol Soft), either alone or as a divided developer with D-72. Using a softer developer, I can keep my contrast controls near the middle of their range with these papers.

Wondering if a anyone else has encountered this issue, and how you deal with it.

[cowanw]

The one thing you can do is close your fstop by 1 and then double your time, which will increase your ranges.
My controls are broken in so far as varying the intensity of the blue and green lights. Thus I am required to use split light controls, for example today- 10 time units of green and separately 2 units of blue (about Grade 1 1/2). When I first started I used a graded Stouffer negative to graph grades by time units of each colour. Now I just eyeball the negative and estimate the separate green and blue exposures and then adjust to correct effect. I work between f8 and f11 to allow for enough range for fine tuning of the blue units.
I think the split grade technique here, while perhaps a bigger pain, yields a better understanding and good control; over the issue you have.

Grade/ Blue Green /Stouffer steps (21)

5/ 100% 0% /5.5 steps

4.5/ 80% 20%

4/ 76% 24% /6 steps

3.5/ 52% 48%

3/ 43% 57% /8 steps

2.5/ 35% 65%

2/ 28% 72% /9 steps

1.5/ 22% 78%

1/ 18% 82% /10 steps

0.5/ 12% 88%

0/ 8% 92% /11.5 steps

00.5/ 3% 97%

00/ 0% 100% /13.5 steps

[cowanw]

PS I totally get what you are talking about. The blue in the Zone vi system seems very "actinic". When I run the green light, my time units are a beep every 2 seconds; when I run blue, I get a beep every second and if I accidently run both colours I get 3 beeps to the second. The result tends to an overwhelmingly weighted blue light effect.

[Michael R]

I don’t have that type of head but I agree with the recommendation above to perhaps go for a min/max split exposure approach if you find it difficult to dial in small intermediate adjustments. This will work best with longer exposure times - a feature of the reformulated Ilford papers is that they are faster overall, as well as faster to wavelengths in the violet/blue range (relative to say Ilford Warmtone for example). This is indicated by both the wedge spectrograms and ISO paper speeds particularly under high contrast filtration of tungsten light.

The grade spacing of the new papers is different so typically you need to dial in lower contrast settings (or use a lower Ilford filter number) in comparison with say Ilford MGIV, which Classic replaces. Classic has a similar contrast range as other papers but Cooltone does indeed have a narrower range, not going as low-contrast.

One relatively simple way to get up to approximately an additional “grade” on the low contrast end is to flash the paper. I would suggest this over the use of so-called low contrast print developers as most contemporary enlarging papers really have their sensitometry largely baked in with respect to development characteristics.

[John Layton]

While I've had good luck with Multigrade Classic in general...I do wish it were a bit less sensitive overall.

[Drew Wiley]

Just ignore all the grade talk. It's more contrast versus less. Why complicate the topic? Neither Cooltone nor MG Classic are graded papers anyway; they represent a contrast continuum, and aren't segmented like an arthropod.

If your ZVI light source doesn't give you enough leverage either way, just use maximum "white light", which will probably be actually blue-green (since no red is needed with paper), and apply a supplemental coated glass filter over the lens, either deep blue or deep green. Yes, that amounts to "split printing";
but even that doesn't have to be all or none. You can use just a part of that practical concept to just tweak certain things if needed.

Is your "beeper" adjustable? I don't use a ZVI cold light, but a big high-output Aristo blue-green one, far more powerful than the ZVI, yet with an accessory ZVI compensating timer which beeps, and don't have any of that problem you describe.

Heck, I often print on MGWT and Cooltone during the same session, in the same developer (130). MGWT needs longer exposure time; but otherwise, no real difference in technique which isn't otherwise image-specific.

[Edward Pierce]

The one thing you can do is close your fstop by 1 and then double your time, which will increase your ranges.
My controls are broken in so far as varying the intensity of the blue and green lights. Thus I am required to use split light controls, for example today- 10 time units of green and separately 2 units of blue (about Grade 1 1/2). When I first started I used a graded Stouffer negative to graph grades by time units of each colour. Now I just eyeball the negative and estimate the separate green and blue exposures and then adjust to correct effect. I work between f8 and f11 to allow for enough range for fine tuning of the blue units.
I think the split grade technique here, while perhaps a bigger pain, yields a better understanding and good control; over the issue you have.

Grade/ Blue Green /Stouffer steps (21)

5/ 100% 0% /5.5 steps

4.5/ 80% 20%

4/ 76% 24% /6 steps

3.5/ 52% 48%

3/ 43% 57% /8 steps

2.5/ 35% 65%

2/ 28% 72% /9 steps

1.5/ 22% 78%

1/ 18% 82% /10 steps

0.5/ 12% 88%

0/ 8% 92% /11.5 steps

00.5/ 3% 97%

00/ 0% 100% /13.5 steps

Yes, switching to split printing was my first impulse, and I did a lot of work that way. It’s not really ideal, for me, as I like to burn with intermediate grades. Figuring this out with split printing is double the work, at least.

Thanks for sharing your data. Mine is similar except that with these papers, less blue light is needed with my setup.

I find it helpful when split printing to use a metronome instead of the Z6 compensating timer. With only the blue light, the timer runs much more slowly than with the green light. So with a blue light exposure I was needing to use the tenths of seconds dial, which I don’t like. But doing this misses out on the timer’s compensating action. Everything’s a trade-off I guess.

At first I thought this must be a malfunction. Now I think it’s just the way it was designed; to give consistent exposures to the light gray areas.

[Edward Pierce]

Just ignore all the grade talk. It's more contrast versus less. Why complicate the topic? Neither Cooltone nor MG Classic are graded papers anyway; they represent a contrast continuum, and aren't segmented like an arthropod.

If your ZVI light source doesn't give you enough leverage either way, just use maximum "white light", which will probably be actually blue-green (since no red is needed with paper), and apply a supplemental coated glass filter over the lens, either deep blue or deep green. Yes, that amounts to "split printing";
but even that doesn't have to be all or none. You can use just a part of that practical concept to just tweak certain things if needed.

Is your "beeper" adjustable? I don't use a ZVI cold light, but a big high-output Aristo blue-green one, far more powerful than the ZVI, yet with an accessory ZVI compensating timer which beeps, and don't have any of that problem you describe.

Heck, I often print on MGWT and Cooltone during the same session, in the same developer (130). MGWT needs longer exposure time; but otherwise, no real difference in technique which isn't otherwise image-specific.

I have not tried a filter. Wouldn’t a green filter work better to reduce contrast?

[Drew Wiley]

Yes, the deeper the green, the lower the contrast.

Any compensating timer SHOULD be running slower with blue light because an equivalent amount of blue filtration is generally quite a bit denser than green filtration. But it might take less blue to get the job done, depending on the specific paper. And that is certainly the case with Classic and Cooltone,
if you split print using a deep blue filter to get the highest contrast. But in this case, you're trying to go the opposite direction, to low contrast.

I rarely do true split printing. Mostly I just use the standard light as is, and then if necessary tweak it a little with a supplementary filter over the lens. That's with my 12 X12 VC cold light. I do all my smaller format work (smaller than 8x10 film) using colorheads instead, which are super-easy to work with when it comes to VC papers. But if necessary, I have an 8x10 colorhead too; but its on a big enlarger in bigger room harder to get comfortably heated this time of year.

[cowanw]

I don't think filters are the solutions here. As you know you have a green light and a blue light. You can't increase the amount of blue light your blue light bulb puts out with a filter that removes non blue light (which is what a blue filter does). Similarly a green filter passes the green light your green light bulb makes. A deeper green does not pass more green if the light is green to start with. It does not make green light more green.
There is no white light and this is not a subtractive system. (as I think you know)

[Michael R]

I think what Drew meant is not that a green filter would add green but that it could attenuate residual blue/violet.

[Drew Wiley]

Yep. That's how it works. I was under the impression that the VI unit has two tube grids, one blue, the other green. But my Aristo V 54 grid has only one grid, outputting blue-green. Either way, you attenuate one or the other color via filtration as needed.

[neil poulsen]

I like the chart provided by cowanw. I'd go with it.

Pick a contrast that you tend to like as a first exposure when printing a negative. Say . . . Grade 2, or a Grade 2.5? Then, if the you need more contrast, go up the chart. If less, go down the chart.

It doesn't matter if "2" is a true Grade 2, or if "2.5" is a true Grade 2.5. It's merely a starting point. Then vary your contrast as needed.

To maybe put this into perspective, I have a Beseler 45s mounted on my Zone VI Type II. My starting point is typically, NO Yellow and NO Magenta. (Cyan is always at zero.) So after testing for an initial exposure, I print with at "neutral" contrast with both Magenta and Yellow set at zero. If I need more contrast, I add some Magenta. If less, then I add some Yellow. (Note that either Yellow or Magenta will be at zero. They won't both be non-zero.) And so on, until I get the exposure, the contrast, and the dodging/burning that way that I like.

I typically finish a print with Magenta being between 2.5 and 3.5.

[Edward Pierce]

The Zone VI unit has two light grids.

[Edward Pierce]

I don’t have that type of head but I agree with the recommendation above to perhaps go for a min/max split exposure approach if you find it difficult to dial in small intermediate adjustments. This will work best with longer exposure times - a feature of the reformulated Ilford papers is that they are faster overall, as well as faster to wavelengths in the violet/blue range (relative to say Ilford Warmtone for example). This is indicated by both the wedge spectrograms and ISO paper speeds particularly under high contrast filtration of tungsten light.

The grade spacing of the new papers is different so typically you need to dial in lower contrast settings (or use a lower Ilford filter number) in comparison with say Ilford MGIV, which Classic replaces. Classic has a similar contrast range as other papers but Cooltone does indeed have a narrower range, not going as low-contrast.

One relatively simple way to get up to approximately an additional “grade” on the low contrast end is to flash the paper. I would suggest this over the use of so-called low contrast print developers as most contemporary enlarging papers really have their sensitometry largely baked in with respect to development characteristics.

Wow it’s been decades since I’ve done any flashing. I’ll try it.

I am happy to report however that using a soft developer, or divided developer, works quite well. Classic paper developed in Ansco 120, 1+2 for 3 minutes easily reaches a D-Max of 2.15 prior to toning with my setup.

For divided development, I use Ansco 120 1+4 followed by D-72 1+4, for a total of 3 minutes. Varying the time in each changes the contrast differently than changing the enlarger contrast settings. The difference is most notable in the darker areas of the print.

[Drew Wiley]

One problem with going with soft or highly dilute developers and a product like MG Cooltone is that you're not going to achieve a true cold tone print that way, if that is in fact what you're after choosing this particular paper. But MG Classic trends somewhat warmer anyway, so is a different story.

[Edward Pierce]

After continuing to experiment with different developer formulas I finally clenched my teeth, bought some glycin, and tried the Ansco 130 formula. Problem solved! Diluted 1+2 I’m able to get plenty of low contrast range with Ilford Classic.

Surprisingly, this developer is actually less expensive than the other formulas because you can keep using the same batch. Forty years I’ve been dumping my developer after one session. Now I just keep track of the number of prints. If I’ve done the math right, 4 liters of working solution at 1+2 is good for about 130 8x10’s. So far so good

[Larry Gebhardt]

Glad you’ve got it figured out. I love Ansco 130 for the longevity, cost, and the excellent look. I’ve stopped even keeping track of the number of prints. I just do a very quick drain before putting the print in the washer. That carries over about the right amount of developer and I top up at the end of a session.

[esearing]

Aged Ansco/PF 130 turns dark brown. I mix it 1:4 and use it like a softer working developer with Ilford MGFB warmtone. Or as a second pass developer to warm up a print 1:8 for 15-20 minutes after bleaching, but it does not always go as warm as I would like and can stain the paper base.

[cowanw]

I think what Drew meant is not that a green filter would add green but that it could attenuate residual blue/violet.
This was a really good point. It has taken me a bit of time as I was involved in a project with a different enlarger but I finally got to it. I used a Stouffer TP4x5-21 to contact print a set of green exposures to get tone into the deep shadow area. This took 20 units of time. If there was blue in the light and I could filter it out the tones would decrease contrast and move towards the white end. I then exposed an all blue print to bring tone into the highlight region, which required 160 time units. Filtering out any contaminating green would show as increased contrast. I measured the density of the print target with a densitometer.

I used a X-1 green filter and then a number 00 Ilford filter as my minus blue possibilities and a blue glass 1950's viewing filter (made to assess panchromatic scenes for ortho film) and a number 5 Ilford filter as my minus green filters. Clearly my filters are nowhere near as perfect as others may have but The Ilford filters should do something....

In both colours, the Ilford filters took away a stop of exposure but the contrast ranges stayed the same. The glass filters made no changes at all with the baseline prints, in contrast or exposure.
So either the enlarger lights are very good at putting out the blue or the green in isolation or both my glass filters and the Ilford filters allowed the same proportion of contamination that may have been made by the lights, to pass through the filters.

Well, since the Ilford filter have no further filtering effect, there is nothing I can reasonably do anyway, so I will wear my rose filtered glasses and presume the enlarger puts out pure blue and green.

[ASA1000]

I'm just recently back in the darkroom and I find the Classic FB paper is VERY contrast sensitive. I wind up printing with 1 or 1 1/2 filters. I had thought this was due to the LED conversion I did on my enlarger but now, with your post, I am rethinking that!

[cowanw]

I am sure the answer lies in Nicholas Lindan''s PDF
http://www.darkroomautomation.com/support/appnotesgmeasured.pdf
But I have a hard time with graphs ( compared to sentences). In any case, with my negatives, I have always find that a little blue light goes a long way in the shadows but takes 4-5 more stops of it to get to the highlights, which makes an effect on paper tones 7,8, or 9 very unlikely, in real usage.