B&W Print - Depth of Tone & Colour

Peter Schrager said:

I want to make a public apology to Murray. My overly aggresive tone in my original post was not called for or needed. I for one am going to try his formula-and not so that I can return to make negative comments. ANY and ALL contributions to this site should be welcomed. We all have much to learn-my self included.

Click to expand...

No need to apologize at all Peter!

I didn't find your post aggressive, in fact I found it to be the only one that challenged me in a 'spirited debate' kind of way...besides, nobody else offered to trade prints with me

Anybody who's thinking of trying 12/15 should mix up some Ansco 130 as well (Ansel Adams variation - no hydroquinone) if they haven't done so already, for comparison purposes...they have the same ingredients anyways, only in different proportions. In fact, if you've never mixed your own developer before, you would be nuts to start with 12/15 as it's an unknown, from an unknown schmuck on the net...start with the classic!

Murray

I finally got a day in the darkroom yesterday, and the prints are in the mail

Murray

Hi there,

Some people expressed an interest in seeing some scanned prints that were developed in 12/15. Since this thread fizzled out we got a new computer and a scanner - finally! I now have some work prints in my APUG 'Personal Gallery' if you want to check them out...I'm not very happy with the scans as I'm still learning, but they get the point across.

Murray

The only hesitation I have is this: is life long enough to try all these developers?

One of my favourite paper developers is D-163, which I sometimes home-brew because I've not seen it on sale in camera stores for years. I also like Amidol. But I have to admit that squeezing the last ounce of technical quality out of a print is usually less important than squeezing out the last ounce of aesthetic quality (the latter being a lot more difficult). If a print on MG WT is going to be good, in most cases it will be effectively as good in MG dev as in D-163.

Most of us have limited time to spend on photography, so it's a question of where the time is better applied: trying new materials/chemicals, or taking/printing more pictures. I won't criticise anyone who wants to try new materials/chemicals except to say that it is possible to overdo it.

Cheers,

Roger (www.rogerandfrances.com -- where the latest gallery addition, '1000 motels', is [dare I say it] digital, though the vast majority is 'real' photography.)