| Author |
Message |
    
Jon Spencer-Smith (Jon1983)
New member (<5 postings)
Username: Jon1983
Post Number: 1
Registered: 12-2005
| | Posted on Friday, December 23, 2005 - 2:22 am: | 
|
Hi there,
New to the forum, Studied photography at college 6 years ago and have been a keen photographer for a while.
My question is about darkroom processing. I have recently made a temporary darkroom out of my kitchen as i bought BUCKET loads of darkroom equipment (including a little LPL3301d enlarger) a week ago from a friend who had it for ages and never did anything with it...all for the tidy sum of only £15! I have just finished processing (using a tumble cannister my first in 6 years roll of 35mm HP5. It came out brilliantly and was sooo excited! It has just reminded me of the fun of 'doing it yourself!'
although I am ok with the Film side, processing the prints is another thing, - i know the process in principle (and have some notes from college) but am basically doing it all from memory...my real question is that i am printing 10x8 and using 10x8 trays and really want to know what of chemical solution to put in each tray. Now that might sound like a funny one, but I only have 500ml bottles of dev/stop/fix and dont want to waste any by making too much up when only printing a few. (hope this all makes sense!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)
I know what proportions of stock and water to mix up, but just need to know what is a adequate coverage (in millimetres) i need in a 10x8 trays.
Hope someone can help.
the only mathematical way i can see do work it out is just to pour a load of water into a 10x8 tray till i think it will cover a print fully and then pour it back into a measuring cyllinder and see how much it reads, then make up that amount using the relevant chemical/water ratio.
-but is there set measures for set sizes of trays? This was something that we never learnt in college as all the trays were already filled whenever we did darkroom lessons.
Many thanks to whoever reads and/or replies!
Jon
And merry Christmas! |
Alexander Rosser (Lcl999)
New member (<5 postings)
Username: Lcl999
Post Number: 1
Registered: 08-2005
| | Posted on Friday, December 23, 2005 - 7:57 am: |
|
500ml is quite sufficient for an 8x10 tray.
There is a knack to immersing the paper in the developer. 1) Lift the tray to about 30degrees. to 45 if possible. The developer will all be stacked up at the end. 2) Start lowering the tray at a rate that will have it flat in three seconds. (Do this a few times without paper and note how the fluid washes across the tray in a wave.) 3) about half a second after you start lowering the tray push the paper into the oncoming wave and drop the paper into the tray. The wave will wash over the paper in one continuous movement. (Don't drop and push simultaneously as the fluid is not yet moving and you will get a tide mark)
All this is critical for developer. If the flow of developer across the paper stops for even a fraction of a second, you will get a tide mark. Stop bath and fixer are not nearly so critical.
btw, for stop bath I just use dilute white vinegar and have never had a problem. Does anyone else do this?
Merry Christmas
Alex |
Jon Spencer-Smith (Jon1983)
New member (<5 postings)
Username: Jon1983
Post Number: 2
Registered: 12-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, December 24, 2005 - 4:17 am: |
|
Hi Alex,
thanks for your helpful post... I took your advice and was up till 2am printing away!
I have heard of using vinegar as stop - although stop is the cheapest out the three and is made up the most diluted aswell using vinegar cant get any cheaper! What white vinegar do you suggest and would you dilute as stop (1+10)?
Many thanks,
Jono |
Alexander Rosser (Lcl)
New member (<5 postings)
Username: Lcl
Post Number: 2
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, December 24, 2005 - 7:00 am: |
|
It's not the cost so much as the convenience. To get photo acetic acid I have to go into town to a specialist photo shop, I can get white vinegar at the local supermarket. Quantity? A shluck or slurp. I don't measure, but it must be about 30 to 50ml to 500ml of water. I don't keep the dilute sol'n.
Re brand. I guess the brands here in Sydney are different from the US where they seem to add sugar to everything. Just read the label and make sure there are no "flavours" added. Cheapest are usually the purest.
Alex |
Jon Spencer-Smith (Jon1983)
New member (<5 postings)
Username: Jon1983
Post Number: 3
Registered: 12-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, December 24, 2005 - 2:49 pm: |
|
Hi Alex,
Im actually in England so we probably have much the same stuff as you Aussie's. I'll probably experiment with a supermarket's own brand cheapo vinegar, i think ur right though, cheaper probably means mor base ingreadients than tarted-up Sarsons etc! Also, while I'm here, printed up some negs last night and a few of them came out really grainy - what is the main cause for this? I'm hoping it is poor negs (i think they were taken with a very old camera) Also i was alwyas told at college to start off with grade2 when printing- i printed f5.6 g2 /12 secs. -after doing a test strip....but should i do a test strip first Without any grade filters to get the correct exposure, then another test strip at constant exp. but change the filter each strip to find a perfect grade?
I have looked at my notes from college and it seems like 1 is soft and milky and 5 at the other end of the scale is 'arty' looking-very high contrast btwn blks and whites and more grainy..., but i'm getting grainy at grade2 so im confused!!
J |
Gareth Davies (Garethd)
New member (<5 postings)
Username: Garethd
Post Number: 1
Registered: 12-2005
| | Posted on Monday, December 26, 2005 - 4:24 pm: |
|
Hi Jon
I have just joined the forum (initially for the medium format discussion groups) and have just come across the darkroom forum.
Yes there are still some of us out here doing the wet stuff and enjoying it as never before (in these digital days people seem to now regard me as a magician as well as a photographer!).
In answer to your most recent question:
Graininess is caused by a number of factors. Commonly, the faster the film speed, the more grainy the film and vice versa. However, graininess does seem to have a "here in one picture, gone in the next picture" thing to it and it can be sometimes a bit of a mystery! Underexposed shots (in the camera) usually end up more grainy than over-exposed shots. Pushed film can be very grainy.
With regards test strips, I tend to use relatively big bits of paper (2.5 x 7") to give me a decent test - smaller strips don't generally give a big enough section of the original to tell you very much. Generally I will expose this at a guessed time at nearly the smallest apperture at grade 2 (according the the filters or filter dial) and see what I get. The results will tell me roughly how close I am in terms of under/over exposure and whether I need it harder or softer (higher paper grade setting or lower). If I have nearly hit the mark the first time I will be pretty confident to make adjustments and go ahead and do a final print. If I'm a long way off, I'll do another strip. It is really this basic. After practice you will soon get a feel as to what looks right according to the thickness of the negative, contrast etc and get things going quite quickly.
I do not use expensive gear but do get stuff published and have sold work. A good lens is key (especially with 35mm work) but this needn't cost the earth. My enlarger is an old Polish 6x6 condenser model built like a tank but with no frills. I do not have an enlarger timer and have for so many years been using an electronic metronome that I don't think I could use anything more complicated! My darkroom is my bedroom with just some good black out blinds.
Keep it up! You have a really rewarding hobby that migt even earn you some dosh. Us "magicians" are hard to find these days ...
Gareth |
Bob Edge (Bobedge3149)
Member ( <10 postings)
Username: Bobedge3149
Post Number: 9
Registered: 11-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 04, 2006 - 12:11 pm: |
|
Hi John,
Good to see there is someone else here in the UK who has not gone digital.
This is how I go about making a print.
First I make test strips of the highlight area of the print (dark part of negative), at grade 2. When I have found a suitable time I then make test strips all at this time, of the shadow detail but at different grades (with the newer Ilford filters you have to double the time for grade 4 & above, with older filters or non Ilford ones this may be different). I can then tell which grade gives me the correct tones in the shadow areas.
I then make a print with the time that gave me good highlights, and grade which gave good shadow detail. It is then a case of estimating what small adjustments to time & grade, if any will give a really good final print, with a full range of tones from almost white, to almost black.
It sounds a little complicated & messy, but with a little practice & patience it is really easy, and is a good methodical way to work. You soon learn how grade, and time affect the qualities of the print. Beffore using this method my prints always seemed to be very grey with very little tonal range.
Bob... |
Florian Divis (Flo)
Member ( <10 postings)
Username: Flo
Post Number: 10
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 04, 2006 - 2:55 pm: |
|
Hi everybody
The last few answers weren't really for the thread but I'll bring in my experiance on the latter subject nonetheless.
Last April I attended a workshop by german fine-printer Andreas Weidner and I learned massive things about grades. This is how I work since this workshop (and it works perfect):
First of all: you need a good neg for a good print. A negative that has all shades of information without necessity to hold off or burn in excessively (keyword zonesystem).
I then work on a colour enlarger with setting y 130 (which is probably around grade 0). As does Bob I start with making test strips of the important highlight area and the work progressively to the grade that suits the image by adjusting first the yellow parameter (from 130 downwards to 0). If the image is still not hard enough I put in magenta (starting by 0 upwards) which is not necessary usually.
The moment I have found the right grade for my highlight I hold off (if possible) the parts of the image that would become too dark, spliting time if necessary.
Disadvantage to this system is: you need a lot of paper and the time changes every time you change setting.
Advantage with this (colour) system is the much finer steps you can take.
I agree with Bob. It sounds complicated but works great once you got it.
As regards size of trays I usually try to have one size larger tray than paper and then fill the dev/stop/fix etc. so that I can move the tray without spilling the stuff.
Keep up with analog! It's worth it. |
|
