Add contrast to Ilford Gallery paper #2

[norm123]

Hi all

I just read in this forum how to reduce contrast with a graded paper (diluted bromide ferricyanide solution). In my case, I have some Ilford Gallery #2. My target development routine is to reach a easy printable negative at 2.5 on VC paper. Sometime, a bit more. So, how to get more contrast on Gallery #2: temperature of developer, pre-bath in something.

Any tips are welcomed

Norm

 

[Gerald C Koch]

1. Use Dektol 1+1 and add extra potassium bromide.

2. Add small amounts of hydroquinone to your working strength developer.

3. Use a "variable" contrast developer like Kodak D-64. Developers of this type consist of two or more solutions which are mixed in varying proportions to give some variation in paper grade. However you would have to mix your own as they are not commercially available,

 

[Bill Burk]

1. Use Dektol 1+1 and add extra potassium bromide.

This makes sense, potassium bromide keeps the highlights whiter than they might otherwise be. So you can print darker overall.

You can also burn and dodge to make it seem like your negative has more density range.

I stock Grade 2 and Grade 3 Galerie. I understand if that's a dilemma for you. But since I also aim for "Grade 2.5" I know what you are seeing. Any negative of mine will lean one way or the other, it's usually pretty obvious to me what Grade to print on.

 

[norm123]

Thank you all

Goods tips.

Regards

 

[norm123]

This makes sense, potassium bromide keeps the highlights whiter than they might otherwise be. So you can print darker overall.

You can also burn and dodge to make it seem like your negative has more density range.

I stock Grade 2 and Grade 3 Galerie. I understand if that's a dilemma for you. But since I also aim for "Grade 2.5" I know what you are seeing. Any negative of mine will lean one way or the other, it's usually pretty obvious to me what Grade to print on.

Thank you all

Goods tips.

Is Dr. Beers Developer an option?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...ormulary_02_0120_Dr_Beer_s_Developer_for.html


Regards

 

[Ian Grant]

I used to make up and use Ilfprd ID-14 which was a "Press" contrast developer. I did work out a PQ variation This used to give me about an extra Grade boost with Ilfobrom, the Galerie grades were slightly wider but still more than half a grade.

Ilford ID-14 Contrast Developer

Metol 1.5g
Sodium Sulphite (anhyd) 75g
Hydroquinone 12.5g
Sodium Carbonate (anhyd) 37.5g
Potassium Bromide 2g
Water to 1 litre

Use Full Strength.


I'd guess ID-19 (D19b) would have replaced this, the PQ version was ID-72


Ilford ID-72 Contrast Developer - for Xray films & paper

Sodium Sulphite (anhyd) 72g
Hydroquinone 12.5g
Sodium Carbonate (anhyd) 48g
Phenidone 0.22g
Potassium Bromide 4g
Benzotriazole 0.1g or 10ml IBT (10% Benzotriazole soln)
Water to 1 litre

Use Full Strength.


Dropping the Phenidone to 0.13g and increasing the Hydroquinone to 12.5g would give slightly more contrast.

Ian

 

[DREW WILEY]

With a premium paper like this you can develop it somewhat longer, or at greater developer concentration to get more density built up, hence
higher contrast. There are also "nuclear option" techniques when simply chemical approaches don't work, like creating a contrast increase
unsharp mask (a double-negative technique requiring some experience). But really, the easiest approach is simply to buy some Grade 3 paper.

 

[Marco Buonocore]

1. Use Dektol 1+1 and add extra potassium bromide.

2. Add small amounts of hydroquinone to your working strength developer.

3. Use a "variable" contrast developer like Kodak D-64. Developers of this type consist of two or more solutions which are mixed in varying proportions to give some variation in paper grade. However you would have to mix your own as they are not commercially available,

How much potassium bromide would you add to a litre of working strength Dektol? Thanks!

 

[RobC]

buy grade 3 paper and use selectol soft developer.

And in fact I read somewhere way back that many prefer grade 3 because of the shorter toe and shoulder of the paper meaning you get better shadow and highlight separation if your negative fits it.

 

[piu58]

> many prefer grade 3 because of the shorter toe and shoulder of the paper

Yes, me. On occasion I use some small amount of white light to get the contrast softer.

 

[Roger Cole]

buy grade 3 paper and use selectol soft developer.

And in fact I read somewhere way back that many prefer grade 3 because of the shorter toe and shoulder of the paper meaning you get better shadow and highlight separation if your negative fits it.

This, if you find yourself buying new paper, want to stick with Gallery and print those "prints on 2.5" negatives.

But the OP already has grade 2. Some good suggestions here.

 

[Roger Cole]

> many prefer grade 3 because of the shorter toe and shoulder of the paper

Yes, me. On occasion I use some small amount of white light to get the contrast softer.

With Gallery?

Galleryis a graded paper. You should already be using white light.

 

[Doremus Scudder]

With Gallery?

Galleryis a graded paper. You should already be using white light.

He's talking about flashing paper with an overall exposure to "white" light (i.e., non-image light) Roger, not about filtration for VC papers.

FWIW, using a grade 3 paper for the straighter toe and then flashing is kind of defeating the purpose, since flashing reduces separation and contrast in the toe... That said, flashing is a good tool for some images.

Best,

Doremus

 

[Roger Cole]

He's talking about flashing paper with an overall exposure to "white" light (i.e., non-image light) Roger, not about filtration for VC papers.

FWIW, using a grade 3 paper for the straighter toe and then flashing is kind of defeating the purpose, since flashing reduces separation and contrast in the toe... That said, flashing is a good tool for some images.

Best,

Doremus

Ah, I see. I actually thought about mentioning flashing as a way to reduce contrast if you had grade 3, but didn't because, well, the OP has grade 2 he wants to increase in contrast, not decrease, and secondly Selectol Soft seems a better way of doing that, at least most of the time, if that's your only goal. Could it help to raise some shadow detail off the toe?

EDIT: Well duh, of course the toe is the highlights.

 

[RobC]

Nope, the toe on paper is the highlights. The shadows are on the shoulder.

The difference is that selectol soft or maybe waterbath development will adjust overall contrast whereas flashing will only reduce the contrast in the highlights(toe of the paper) unless you over do it which isn't recommended.
And I would selectively flash only the highlights you need to otherwise there is a danger of killing the micro contrast throughout the print.

 

[Roger Cole]

Nope, the toe on paper is the highlights. The shadows are on the shoulder.

The difference is that selectol soft or maybe waterbath development will adjust overall contrast whereas flashing will only reduce the contrast in the highlights(toe of the paper) unless you over do it which isn't recommended.
And I would selectively flash only the highlights you need to otherwise there is a danger of killing the micro contrast throughout the print.

D'oh! That's what I get for posting so late. Nevermind.

 

[RobC]

I made the exact same mistake when posting a another forum a few days ago. Just wasn't thinking straight and posted in auto mode as usually talking about film curves.

 

[Roger Cole]

What's worse is that I have actually selectively flashed - removed the negative and burned lightly - highlight areas before. But it's been a long time and, well, I've slept since then...

 

[Rafal Lukawiecki]

Call me heretic, but in my experience, a few years ago, I have found Galerie 3 to behave a little like Multigrade paper in the sense that it did respond to changes in exposing light filtration. See my thread from 2010: (there was a url link here which no longer exists)

If that somewhat odd characteristic is still present in your batch of this paper, you should be able to get half a grade change of contrast by changing the enlarging light colour, adding or removing yellow/magenta (or green/blue) filtration. If that paper formulation has changed, that won't work, but it would take you only 5 minutes to test. Since I no longer use Galerie, may I politely ask that you post back here if you tried this out? I am curious, thank you.

 

[RobC]

coming back to OPs original question. What developer, dilution and temp are you using. Just changing to another developer may give more contrast. They ain't all equal by any means. Increasing developer strength and temp may do it.
You need to experiment or otherwise buy specialist high contrast developers.
Lith developer may do it at the right dilution but thats a bit extreme. However, for only a half grade I think you should be able to get that either with your current developer at a stronger dilution or another normal developer which just happens to give a tad more contrast naturally.

Or maybe above filtration suggestion will work for you but I'm assuming you are using white light. Putting in filtration is more likely to reduce contrast than increase it I would have thought but you never know until you try these things out.

 

[Roger Cole]

I'll be...I spelled it "Galerie" in my earlier posts but my browser kept flagging that as a misspelling and I haven't used it in years so I changed it to "Gallery." Turns out I was right. Must be one of those different sides of the pond things. My spellchecker will also flag "colour" and "armour" etc.

And the easiest thing is to just buy some grade 3 or course - but not the cheapest.

 

[RobC]

Ilford in their wisdom named their inkjet paper Galerie too just to confuse everyone so strictly speaking it should be ILFOBROM GALERIE FB but since this is APUG I think everyone knows what Galerie means. At least I hope they do.

 

[piu58]

> He's talking about flashing paper with an overall exposure to "white" light (i.e., non-image light)

Thank you for that correction. English is not my native language.

 

[Ian Grant]

This would only work if there are multiple emulsion layers of differeing speed, each with a different spectral sensitivity. This is typically how VC papers work, however a graded paper could, in theory, also have more that one emulsion layer.

VC papers only have only one emulsion layer, it's a blend of two or three emulsions. Some graded papers can show a very small contrast shift depending on the filtration used, it's how Renwick at Ilford realised VC papers could be possible.

Ilford and Dupont had close links before WWII, Dupont supplied Ilford with film base. Renwick (of Ilford) was seconded to the Dupont Research Department before returning to Ilford as head of Research. Ilford had to delay the introduction of Multigrade due to the War, they were controlled by the British Air Ministry, so Dupont's Varigam was launched first but was essentially the same paper made under licence.

Ian

 

[Rafal Lukawiecki]

Guys, the difference I was getting on Galerie 3 by varying the green/blue component was anything but subtle. Please have a look at the scan enclosed in post #11 of the thread linked below, it is the same neg on the same uncut sheet processed at once. The only difference was the illuminant colour. Of course, this could have been all a mistake, old batch etc etc, hence I am keen to know if this is still the case with the current lots.

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)