3-hour darkroom session, two good prints

Vonder · Jun 20, 2008

Argh. I know I'm an incompetent boob when it comes to the darkroom. I spent three hours last nigth in my bathroom darkroom trying to get a nice print or two made. Too uncontrasty. Too contrasty. Forgot to stop down the enlarger after focusing, got a really nice dark print. Miscellaneous errors in judgement.

Show of hands please? Am I the only one who spends hours trying to get two prints right?

Barry S · Jun 20, 2008

Are you kidding? If I can get two prints I'm happy with in a three hours, I'm a happy camper. On the occasions when I do make more than six prints in a single session, I usually wish I spent more time and only made a couple. It takes me some time to figure out split-grade printing times and get the dodging and burning right. Unless you're in the darkroom every few days, it takes a lot of time to set up and clean up--let alone printing.

Bill Mobbs · Jun 20, 2008

Yes .........Yesterday spent 4 hours making two copies of just one print. Of course they are wonderful prints. ..................

xtolsniffer · Jun 20, 2008

I usually think one good print in about an hour and a half is doing well, so two in three hours is about right! It takes me about 20 mins to set up for a printing session, and 20 mins to clean up, so that's a bit less than an hour a print, and that would be rushing.

Clay2 · Jun 20, 2008

Sounds about right to me. Getting what you want on the paper is time-consuming.
Colour is a real bear for me. I do Kodachrome slides to Ilfochrome paper with
an Omega B22xl enlarger with filter drawer. I can spend three hours just
getting the filter pack correct. Why not just scan ? Because after all the time
messing around you get a final print with deep pesonal satisfaction, but
that's just me. Best regards,
/Clay

jim appleyard · Jun 20, 2008

Your pace sounds good to me. I've spent whole days in the dark and gotten little to show for it. Sometimes you just go 0-4 at the plate, sometimes better.

jordanstarr · Jun 20, 2008

Not a bad ratio. I've spent 10 hour days in the darkroom before to only have 2 portfolio-worthy prints. By that ratio I should have had about 6. Don't sweat it, without the pain of having an off day you'd never be able to appreciate those days when everythihng just works so smoothly and precisely in your favour. As your quote suggests "nothing worth doing is ever easy".

Michel Hardy-Vallée · Jun 20, 2008

Hey, at least you learned a lot and you ended up with good prints!

I usually split my darkroom sessions between quick and good. Sometimes I just need to have a stack of prints from my last negatives. So I look at my contact sheets, eyeball the exposure based on experience, and process in batch. I have a lot of prints, but they are only "good enough." I use them to judge composition, subject, etc etc. My processing workflow is very consistent now, so I can pretty much print an entire 35mm roll decently without constantly making test strips.

Once I'm over with those, I have another session, where I try to do my best. I usually work with fiber paper then, and do all the careful fiddling I need to.

Dave Miller · Jun 20, 2008

Two in one evening, that's speed, I normally take a week to do one.

Alex Hawley · Jun 20, 2008

Wolfeye said:
Show of hands please? Am I the only one who spends hours trying to get two prints right?

No way! Stuff happens, and sometimes (often) it takes a while. I've spent at least 3 hours on just one print a few times.

PHOTOTONE · Jun 20, 2008

You know, if you print regularly, and use and "learn" one film and developer combination, you can get quite fast, .......but darkroom printing is a skill picked up by frequent repetition. Also, there is a difference between making the "ultimate" print and making satisfactory prints. I used to print a lot of 5x7 b/w RC paper prints from customer 35mm b/w negatives. I could print perhaps 25 prints per hour, but they were only satisfactory, but good enough for reproduction in a company newsletter. I would expose and print and develop in batches of 8 to 10 prints. When I'm doing "fine art" exhibition quality prints for myself, whenever I get an image I am satisfied with, I always make 2 or 3 identical prints. Never know when you might need another (or sell one). If the dodging and burning, etc., is complicated I take notes and keep the notes with the negative for future reprint. Nothing stresses out a darkroom session like using a temporary space and feeling like you are holding up someone else from using the space (bathroom). Much more relaxed if you have a dedicated darkroom.

Simon R Galley · Jun 20, 2008

Its not as easy as it looks......I got pretty good, but I had to, I averaged 1,200 prints per week commercially! : Perhaps I can help, pm me your home address and I will send you the ILFORD Multigrade Manual...should help a little bit....

Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :

dpurdy · Jun 20, 2008

I get in and make work prints of all the stuff that looks like it has potential. Sometimes a test then a print and sometimes just a print no test. Then I use old dead mats and display the prints for awhile in my work space and look at them in different light. Eventually I get tired of some and get an idea of what I want others to look like. Then take the prints back to the darkroom and make a better print using the work print as a reference. When I know exactly what I want I can make a print in less than a half hour. Knowing what you want is the hard part.
Dennis

panastasia · Jun 20, 2008

Wolfeye said:
Argh. I know I'm an incompetent boob when it comes to the darkroom. I spent three hours last nigth in my bathroom darkroom trying to get a nice print or two made. Too uncontrasty. Too contrasty. Forgot to stop down the enlarger after focusing, got a really nice dark print. Miscellaneous errors in judgement.

Show of hands please? Am I the only one who spends hours trying to get two prints right?

I can relate to your experience.

For me it's all about mood, sometimes my mood isn't right and I struggle to finish. I had the same experience when I was building field stone walls - I was younger - if my mood was good I could fly through the process of fitting stones (right brain, spacial stuff) and really impress myself. Then there were days when I couldn't see hardly anything going into place and much time would pass..

CBG · Jun 20, 2008

I'd say the way to get the most great prints as fast as possible is to slow down and just get one really good one at it's own pace.....

C

Davesw · Jun 20, 2008

In my last 4 hour session I got 2 ok prints and one I realy like.(A new record for me) forgot to stop down twice after foucusing!
I am going through paper way to fast. need to improve test strip/VC filter selection prosess.

sausage100uk · Jun 20, 2008

I have yet to get a print i really like, I am struggling with spotty negs and dust on the carrier glass....grrrrrrrrr

MattKing · Jun 20, 2008

This is what the postcard exchange is for. Get one right, and if you are consistent, another 30 or so follow thereafter .

Matt

P.S. Two in a three hour session sounds good to me.

Rob Archer · Jun 20, 2008

I sometimes get a couple of prints that I'm happy with in a evening - but in the cold light of day the next morning........!

I used to bash away in desperation, try this, try that... More recently I've tried to be a bit more methodical and evaluate the print at every step. I've also started making notes on the back of work prints, which (when I can find them!) really helps with repeats.

If I can get 10 -12 good prints and one excellent one in a year I'm satisfied.

Rob

Maris · Jun 20, 2008

I've done worse. Contacting a 8x10 negative once gave me a gelatin-silver that looked so good that I nearly choked on a gasp. And my eyes nearly fell out into the fixer.

But that was not good enough. What if I nudge the contrast? What if there is a better density balance between richness and luminosity? And so on. Twenty five sheets of paper and five hours later I think I'm working in circles so I spread out all 25 photographs and have a seriously hard look.

Yep, number one was the best and everything else was a variation on ok. To save the investment in time, effort and resources I kept the entire set and use it to show people who have never made a photograph the seriously arbitrary connection between camera work (camera play?) and the final picture.

jeroldharter · Jun 20, 2008

I think that is pretty good. If you think about the amount of time looking at a print that is framed and put on the wall, spending 2 weeks to get it just right would be fine. I have about 100 prints on the walls in my office and never remember how long it took once it gets on the wall. However, sometimes I don't spend enough time and put one on the wall that really isn't good enough and regret that I did not spend longer.

In my view, if you can generate one excellent print working in a bathroom darkroom in a month, you should be commended.

2F/2F · Jun 21, 2008

You are actually doing well to get two nice prints in such a short time. Sounds more like bragging than complaining! I would be leery of paying good money to have one of my pix printed if I thought the printer was moving as fast as you did!

Come back and repost your new experiences once you have spent a month's worth of time trying to get contrast masks just right on an expensive series of 16x20 Ilfochrome prints! Then you will understand frustration.....and why on Earth good, hand-made, individually unique analog photos ought command such high prices.

At least you have your own pix to print. It is such a hassle printing other people's film for them. You have no control over what they hand you. It doesn't matter what you *would have, could have, should have* done differently in camera and processing. You've got what you've got, and you've got to make it work with whatever that is. You are expected to be able to turn $hit into gold. Printing other people's screwed up film just stresses how important it is to get your own personal techniques nailed down. It also gives you tons of practice in the most challenging of printing situations, so that when it comes to your own work, it is a breeze, and FUN, like it should be!

So, just keep printing. Do a little every day if you can. You will get *better*, and that is the key; not necessarily *faster*.

Richard Jepsen · Jun 21, 2008

I just returned from the community darkroom I teach at. I spent 3 hours and finished (4) 8x10 prints of the same 645 negative. Each print a variation but good enough to hang. I will let the prints dry at home and decide which one to tone and wash for permanence.

I often can get to a very good print within 15 min if I enlarge to 5x7 and use familiar paper from average negatives. Moving up in size, change paper, or have a negative difficult to print and you slow down.

At the end of the day craft takes time. A few FINE prints in 3 hours is not so bad.

JBrunner · Jun 21, 2008

It can easily take an hour or so to dial in a good print for the first time. More if counting set up. That's why when I get it, I usually print more than one. Not because I can't come back and print more with little difficulty once I have the notes, but to help make me feel a little bit more productive.

Edwardv · Jun 21, 2008

I like to pick 5-10 negatives, run an exposure test with the setting of grade 2, select the best exposure, print from the selected exposure, process and dry. I will look at the test prints determine what needs to be done for the final print. Another thing I do is when I a final print I will take 1 or 2 negatives run a test for later on. I find these methods helps me save time.

3-hour darkroom session, two good prints

Vonder

Barry S

Bill Mobbs

xtolsniffer

Clay2

jim appleyard

jordanstarr

Michel Hardy-Vallée

Membership Council

Dave Miller

Alex Hawley

PHOTOTONE

Simon R Galley

dpurdy

panastasia

CBG

Davesw

sausage100uk

MattKing

Moderator

Rob Archer

Maris

jeroldharter

2F/2F

Richard Jepsen

JBrunner

Moderator

Edwardv

3-hour darkroom session, two good prints

Membership Council

Moderator

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency