f/stop printing

[brian steinberger]

I just purchased the book "way beyond monochrome," and the author is very fond of f/stop printing. I'm wondering how many here use this technique, as opposed to the tradition test strip. Also, for those who are familiar with f/stop printing, but choose the tradition way instead, I'm wondering why. I don't have a large dial timer for my enlarger, rather an audible one. Could I still convert this for f/stop printing if I decide to?

[Tom Hoskinson]

Brian, take a look at this:

http://www.rhdesigns.co.uk/darkroom/html/f-stop_printing.html

RH Designs make some nifty darkroom equipment, BTW

[Doug Howk]

I marked off f/stop intervals on a Gralab timer using glo-lite. Works great for a 1st or 2nd pass. Once I'm close, then switch to time increments for the test strips.

[Henry Ambrose]

Brian,

I'm not sure that "the traditional way" using time units really is "traditional". It seems obvious I suppose to use time units since thats what the timer gives you and stops of the aperture are already figured out for you. But as you welll know thats not how exposure works. How else would you do it other than -stops- knowing how exposure works? Who ever suggested using purely time units in the darkroom?

I've always used stops for exposure in the darkroom just like film in the camera. Its all halving and doubling - really very simple "in your head" math. Starting with a 10 second exposure, a full stop more is 20 seconds, a half stop more than 10 is half way in between 10 and 20 (you do the math). I can't see the need to buy a special timer to do that for me.

And I'm not saying anoyone is wrong for using a special stop timer - I just can't figure out why?

[Jim Noel]

I have always used a metronome and f-stop printing. Between the two all phases of printing become almost automatic.
It has never made sense to me to print using multiples of 2 or 5 or some other number. This method is too irregular and illogical for me.

[brian steinberger]

Jim,

Can you elaborate a little bit about how you use your metronome timer for f-stop printing? That's the kind of timer I have as well.

Henry's response makes alot of sense. So when you make a test strip would you use the following sequence for your test strip... 2sec, 4, 8, 16, 32? Or would you throw half stops in there as well, and make it 2,3,4,6,8,12,16,24,32... etc.?

This is starting to make sense to me and I'm sure once I am comfortable with it, dodging and burning will be much easier to predict, based on the difference of one stop in exposure.

[Henry Ambrose]

Brian,

I seldom make test strips or prints. I just make the first print based on knowing that my film, exposure and development and enlargement size are going to result in - "X seconds at X aperture". Of course this assumes you're not chasing around with a bunch of different films and developers. If I am doing some experimenting and working from SWAG I might make a test print which is small piece of paper that I hold at the subject of interest in the photo. I don't do steps - for me they are a waste of time and paper. If you need five or six different guesses at how your negative will print it might be time to reconsider your process of exposure and development. Or maybe you're shooting in some really tough conditions.

So anyway, I make the first print at 16 seconds at f8 (a standard for me). I run the print all the way through my process and look at it. Taking dry down onto account I look at the whole print to judge what needs to happen next. Usually I'm off one way or the other but the second print hits real close as I've decided its "1/4 stop light" or "1/2 stop dark" and adjusted appropriately.

I use both aperture and time to make adjustments. If the print was one half stop dark I'd most likely close the lens down a half stop leaving the time alone. I like keeping times in the 16-32 seconds range to keep dodges and burns manageable, easier to keep track of and accomplish. When your main times get too short your precision goes away for small adjustments - a 2 second burn is almost impossible for me to do the same time after time unless its a pretty gross move.

If the first print is really close I may make other adjustments like tweaking the contrast and start dodging and burning on the second but I suggest you not do that until you get the hang of this. By the third print I'm almost always "right on" the global exposure having bracketed my way there. And on that journey I've gotten a good read from the negative about how its tones relate to one another on the paper. If I've made a good negative that prints fairly straight, the hard part is over.

[Kirk Gittings]

Henry "I seldom make test strips or prints." "By the third print I'm almost always "right on" the global exposure having bracketed my way there."

What are all those prints getting to a "right on" global exposure if not test prints?

[Henry Ambrose]

Sorry Kirk and anyone else, I probably didn't write what I meant.

What I mean is that my intention is to make a good print right off the bat, first try. Which as I see it is the whole reason to use a meter and test your film and process - intention. What I am not doing is putting a piece of paper through thinking it won't be a print. So I suppose it is a test process? I do correct from that first and each subsequent print but I'm still swinging for the fence everytime. So if we are playing baseball - is a double or a triple or a base on balls a test?

I guess I should call anything thats not a finished fine print a test print but its not how I think about it. What I'm trying to do would be, in woodworking, "cut to the line" and not pare with a chisel to get the joint to fit. Not that it happens that way everytime -- but my intent is to get it right each try.

Or another way to say this might be from target shooting. I won't shoot all 10s but if I shoot each one as if it will be a 10 my score will be good and indicative of my ability to hold. Why pull the trigger if you think its gonna be a 7 out at six o'clock? So between my ears, its a 10 (or an X) everytime! (failing is very common but I keep trying).

I'm the same way making photos. I don't click the shutter if I think its not a picture. Why would I? OK, maybe I do expose some film thinking "this might be good" or "I bet I can blend the sky with this one" but thats as far as I go with it when using a big camera. Now if I'm shooting 35mm I do shoot a lot knowing that somewhere in there is the home run, but I still think "home run" everytime I push the button.

So, in my feeble little mind, as crazy as it sounds, I don't make test prints.
And I still won't even after this confession.
: >))

[Henry Ambrose]

Wow, one Red Hook ESB and I let loose with all that. The simple answer is I don't make test strips or step prints.