flashing paper

[Jim Noel]

David Vestal called it 'The Art of Darkroom Photography' for a reason - there are many techniques that can be used to fine tune the final contrast in a print. Flashing is one of them. Flashing can be applied either before or after the base exposure although the results may be slightly different.

In classic flashing, you first remove the negative from the carrier, and then close the lens aperture to reduce the light that is then flashed onto the print. This is a big hassle. An alternate trick is to use a flashing card. A flashing card is simply a sheet of cardboard with a large, rectangular hole in the middle, and a layer of thin (relatively translucent) drawing paper (which is probably hard to find these days) glued over the hole. With a flashing card, you leave the negative in the carrier and you don't change the aperture - but you do move the card during the flashing exposure just in case the drawing paper has a texture that you don't want transferred to the print. The length of the flashing exposure is the one remaining variable.

Obviously, dodging and burning are options, as well as bleaching, rubbing highlights with your finger to cause friction that raises the local temperature and increase localized developer action, water bath development, diluted developers, etc. If you go back to some of the older books, you can read about penciling (using a pencil to carefully add a thin layer of charcoal to increase negative density), or dye-dodging where a tinted dye is applied to the back of the negative to increase local density. These techniques are especially useful with sheet film.

But as David would have noted - these are all experimental techniques. Experienced darkroom workers understand them can use them effectively, but each use involves some degree of trial and error, and it is necessary to keep careful notes if you want to be able to repeat the technique and get similar results in the future.

If a printer doesn't have Vestal's book :The Art of Darkroom Photography" they are (pardon the pun) working in the dark.

[andreios]

If a printer doesn't have Vestal's book :The Art of Darkroom Photography" they are (pardon the pun) working in the dark.

Jim, being something of a book nerd, always looking at different / better ways how to do things, I have looked around, but have only found his "Craft of Photography" and "Art of Black and White Enlarging". Any idea about those books?

[andreios]

Hi Doremus ... yes, great getting multiple grades from Adox Lupex. The gels did not affect contrast with Ilford Galerie or Bromportrait, two other papers I use for contact printing.

Rick, having just bought some Lupex to try out (since Foma is no longer producing Fomalux), I am wondering about these filters - are these just any green / blue filters or some specific ones?
Thank you-

[Rick Olson]

Hello NormaN and Andreios,

The resolution and sharpness of Adox Lupex is unlike anything I have used before. Exceptional paper, but the contrast was too high for me also based on my current film development times. Since all of my large format (5 x 7 and ULF) is contact printed, I revised my negative development process and reduced my times to better fit the contrast of Lupex paper (I primarily use Kodak TMY/Tmax400). To fine tune (reduce) the Lupex paper contrast, I will flash first, then if needed, will go to the green 389 gel. My older negatives developed for Kodak AZO and Lodima are too dense for Lupex and might need flashing then exposure through the green 389 gel. For the rare times I need more contrast, then I will print through the blue gel. These contact printing adjustment hacks have helped greatly to allow more flexibility with this paper.

To increase Lupex contrast - Blue Gel: Rosco Roscolux # 83 Medium Blue Lighting Gel Filter
To reduce Lupex contrast - Green Gel: Rosco Roscolux # 389 Chroma Key Green Lighting Gel Filter

I purchased these in the US at Barn Door Film and Video Lighting:
https://www.filmandvideolighting.com/roro83meblge.html
https://www.filmandvideolighting.com...gel-sheet.html

[NormaN]

Hello NormaN and Andreios,

The resolution and sharpness of Adox Lupex is unlike anything I have used before. Exceptional paper, but the contrast was too high for me also based on my current film development times. Since all of my large format (5 x 7 and ULF) is contact printed, I revised my negative development process and reduced my times to better fit the contrast of Lupex paper (I primarily use Kodak TMY/Tmax400). To fine tune (reduce) the Lupex paper contrast, I will flash first, then if needed, will go to the green 389 gel. My older negatives developed for Kodak AZO and Lodima are too dense for Lupex and might need flashing then exposure through the green 389 gel. For the rare times I need more contrast, then I will print through the blue gel. These contact printing adjustment hacks have helped greatly to allow more flexibility with this paper.

To increase Lupex contrast - Blue Gel: Rosco Roscolux # 83 Medium Blue Lighting Gel Filter
To reduce Lupex contrast - Green Gel: Rosco Roscolux # 389 Chroma Key Green Lighting Gel Filter

I purchased these in the US at Barn Door Film and Video Lighting:
https://www.filmandvideolighting.com/roro83meblge.html
https://www.filmandvideolighting.com...gel-sheet.html

Hi Rick
Ordered the filters last week! I am curious about the result ...
NormaN

[Chester McCheeserton]

Hi Rick
Ordered the filters last week! I am curious about the result ...
NormaN

NormaN - what did you find? I ordered the gels from that link and have not tried the green yet but on a neg where i needed more contrast I tried the blue, my exposure time went from 40 sec to 4 minutes and the contrast was visibly lower with the gel.

[NormaN]

NormaN - what did you find? I ordered the gels from that link and have not tried the green yet but on a neg where i needed more contrast I tried the blue, my exposure time went from 40 sec to 4 minutes and the contrast was visibly lower with the gel.

Time flies so fast....

Thanks for your request and reviving this thread.
I had had few opportunities to produce contact copies in the meantime. However, I can say that one exposure using the green filter reduces the contrast of Adox Lupex. But what is extreme is that the exposure takes much longer: Instead of about 12 seconds, it is about 180 seconds!
In the attached document I have tried to show the differences.

It is a section of a portrait with HP5 8x10 inch (shot with flash), Developer for the Lupex paper used: Adox MCC

Left: Digital “Scan” with DSLR 24MP sensor
Center: 12 seconds without green filter
Right: 180 seconds with green filter.

The two shots on the right are unfortunately not very high quality (mobile phone). They show approximately the differences in contrast. The tonality of the DSLR scan has not been achieved.

Also in the meantime I found a Youtube post (No. 144) by Marco Annaratone, in which he introduces the Adox Lupex paper. At the end he comes to the conclusion that possibly by using green LED light for preflashing (not exposing) his very short preflash times of 0.6 seconds can be brought to a more controllable length.
Unfortunately, the article is in Italian.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNd6nG4oeRI

In an earlier Youtube post (no. 106) he shows the LED light that I find interesting. I was thinking of using this (not cheap) LED light instead of the four 25W bulbs built into my old contact copier...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wYCWJCQn6-Y


May I ask something in the round?
Have any of you done a direct comparison of contact prints on Adox Lupex and Ilford Muligrade?