After decades in a wet darkroom, two or sometimes one print sufficed. From the beginning of digital printing, the screen image and the histogram let me get the first print right.
After decades in a wet darkroom, two or sometimes one print sufficed. From the beginning of digital printing, the screen image and the histogram let me get the first print right.
Timely topic for me - I am in the 'throes' of printing a large and long-overdue personal project.
Usually 3 sheets of paper will get me to the final print.
I am printing with a Durst Multigraph which gets me close to an acceptable print on the first try. However, I am often dissatisfied with the contrast (totally subjective).
I look at the negative and the contact sheet and decide ahead of time what the mood of the picture should be.
I will cut a sheet of paper lengthwise into thirds (similar to others here).
1-2 test strips to nail down exposure and contrast.
1 full-size print without burning, dodging or dry-down factor.
1-3 final prints, depending on how well I was able to to manage the burning/dodging.
Just for laughs: I was recently interrupted while I was printing. I was working with a negative that required several passes of precise burning-in and some dodging. After the interruption, I returned to the task at hand and when it came time to put the print in the developing tray I discovered that I had no paper in the easel to begin with.
LOL. I have done that more than once...Originally Posted by Renato Tonelli
OK...time for everyone to fess up: now be honest - isn't it mostly the case that when you get really close to "perfection," that their exists a phantom third print, forever elusive, between this "perfect" print and another "perfect" print?
Hi John
I came to the realization there is no such thing as perfection quite some time ago, I print till it feels right and I don't bother with the magic bullets..
Every time!
About ditto.
I use a PM2L color analyzer for metering under the enlarger. When using a box of paper for the first time I hang a Stouffer 21step transparent scale in my 4x5 carrier and make a test print on a strip of paper. If the scale prints with a complete black to white steps I take readings for the extreme ends and selected steps between and note them down with the time and developer on the box lid. Using that data allows me to work on the fine tuning right away instead of looking for the ballpark. Often afterwards I just need to read the neg in the enlarger and get a good print right away.
Only a few since I started to use digital negatives for even Silver Gelatin printing. The advantages of having a curve that allows you to print out your images consistently can't be overstated, sorry traditionalists. With the price of Silver Gelatin doing things "the old way" is simply too expensive anymore.
The amount of paper depends on the picture. What is a constant though is that it takes me a lot of time, even when not using a lot of paper, because I tend to spend a lot of time pouring over each test/work print before I do the next. It has to do both with the fact most of my pictures are very difficult, and my obsessive/perfectionist nature unfortunately.
John Sexton likes to make various "puzzle pieces" at different exposures/contrasts which he can assemble on his wet/squeegee board in order to figure out his burning etc. for subsequent work prints.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks