begginer having trouble printing

bence8810 · Feb 17, 2016

One more suggestion - just remembered as I started out a year ago I had really flat prints and it ended up being my enlarger lens. I assume you already checked your lens but if you haven't, take it off and shine a bright light through it. Mine was milky white from the fog, never seen something like that before.

Ben

Ko.Fe. · Feb 17, 2016

I like OP's photos as is!

I also have old little Kodak Brownie safe light which was given to me. I'm using it with orange-yellow dome and purple-red lamp from dollar store. It gives me very bright light, but it is safe.

jsmithphoto1 · Feb 17, 2016

Here is a little tip that I picked up a few years ago. When you expose and develop, under safelight, your print should look overdeveloped. If your print looks okay under safelight, you can safely assume it's too underexposed when viewing with white light. Also, it should take (as everyone else said) 1-2 minutes to develop. You can test this by exposing different times and just develop in the trays and watch it. A rough guestimate would be when it stops "developing" (keep in mind it never stops developing, I am mainly talking speed at which the black appears), you have your exposure time and if it was a flop or not.

Caveat: I reflect my safelight from the white ceiling. There is a total of 10 watts OC reflecting from the ceiling. I've never had trouble with this light on any Arista papers. The only muddy issue I've ever had was using super-super old AGFA papers. Again, super old lol.

rpavich · Feb 17, 2016

Gerald C Koch said:
I always suspect that beginners pull their prints too soon before they have a chance to build sufficient contrast. This has been discussed on several threads. Search for "development to completion." Don't watch the clock but do watch the print. For most subjects you need to get the print partially out of the linear portion of the H&D curve and onto the shoulder. Only then will you get good blacks.

There is at least one video of Edward Weston showing a student how to make a print. There is no clock in the darkroom. Weston is however carefully watching the print develop.

Thanks for saying this, I might be guilty of this also. I'm a newbie to the darkroom and this is certainly possible for me.

Rick A · Feb 17, 2016

davie123 said:
Here is my Safelight. It has a red 15 watt bulb in it with a dimmer.

I was using an orange Safelight fixture as you said it was blowing out my prints. Switched to this little one someone gave me

That is NOT a safe light. This is a decent safe light:
http://www.freestylephoto.biz/12185-Premier-Safelight-5x7-Red

removed account4 · Feb 17, 2016

APUGuser19 said:
Use the Kodak recommended 1 1/2 mins at 68-70 degrees with 1:2 dilution. Adjust everything else to this standard. This is the "anchor" of the entire process.

perfect ..

sorry davie123 for giving you the wrong development time !
i was always taught 1 min, and it has been the time i've used
for decades. i'd go by what kodak ( and appuguser19 ) say, not me.
good luck with the new safe light !

john

Wayne · Feb 17, 2016

jnanian said:
perfect ..

sorry davie123 for giving you the wrong development time !
i was always taught 1 min, and it has been the time i've used
for decades. i'd go by what kodak ( and appuguser19 ) say, not me.
good luck with the new safe light !

john

Were you taught with RC paper maybe?

Rick A · Feb 17, 2016

Wayne said:
Were you taught with RC paper maybe?

Maybe, like many others I know, he confused the "minimum one minute" Kodak recommended with only developing for that time.

removed account4 · Feb 17, 2016

Wayne said:
Were you taught with RC paper maybe?

yep RC paper it was kokak rc [ and sprint dev ] .. prints still look good, full scale &c ..
then when i started printing commercially, the person i worked for
had tray rockers, also had me use dektol 1:1 and 1 min development times .. ( 2 min for fb )
i guess my instructors and boss corrupted me, i never read the actual instructions
for the print times on the bottle or bag ( since it all worked out fine ) ...
and like a good internet blowhard i passed on the wrong info !

Wayne · Feb 17, 2016

The great thing about the net is there's always another blowhard standing ready to correct you.

I was taught 2 minutes in Dektol 1:2. My world was shaken when I found there was actually some flexibility allowed.

removed account4 · Feb 17, 2016

Wayne said:
The great thing about the net is there's always another blowhard standing ready to correct you.

I was taught 2 minutes in Dektol 1:2. My world was shaken when I found there was actually some flexibility allowed.

from one blowhard to another, thanks!

i didn't know anything about flexibility being allowed
and i am still grappling with this idea. ..

rpavich · Feb 18, 2016

APUGuser19 said:
I've gone 2 minutes lots of times just to ensure total development. But I always found a minute and a half did the same thing, and couldn't tell any difference. Besides, why give another 30 seconds of safelight exposure and chemical fog?

After reading this thread I started wondering if I was shortchanging my developing by leaving it in only one minute so I did a test.
I exposed a 4 x 6 print, then tore it in half and put half in the developer, and then waited one minute and then dropped the other half in. One half of the paper got one minute and one got two minutes.
After drying and such I could detect no differences. POSSIBLY I saw some contrast difference in the two minute shot but I'm not sure if that was my imagination.

davie123 · Feb 19, 2016

I think you all helped me solve it! . I Ordered a new safelight from freestyle it arrived today. Followed your instructions about the two minute development time used a #3 filter. I have a print! The details and contrast started to come through. I tried the suggested method last night with a DVD and my old safelight and sure enough I was seeing blue and green like I was looking at 3d glasses . got my first image not perfect but a breakthrough thank you guys what an awesome group.

jimjm · Feb 19, 2016

rpavich said:
After reading this thread I started wondering if I was shortchanging my developing by leaving it in only one minute so I did a test.
I exposed a 4 x 6 print, then tore it in half and put half in the developer, and then waited one minute and then dropped the other half in. One half of the paper got one minute and one got two minutes.
After drying and such I could detect no differences. POSSIBLY I saw some contrast difference in the two minute shot but I'm not sure if that was my imagination.

Do some research on the what actually happens when a print is developed before deciding to ignore manufacturer's recommendations and shortchange yourself.

Generally, the highlights (bright areas) of a print are the last to develop fully. If you have an image with subtle detail in the highlights, you risk losing these just because you want to save 30 sec? Just because you can't see the difference in a tiny 4x6 print of one negative which may or may not have a full range of tones to begin with, doesn't mean this will hold true for all negatives, especially "high-key" images.

Also, an additional 30 sec exposure to a proper safelight (not just a red lightbulb) will make no difference, Also, WTF is "chemical fog", and 30 extra sec is not going to make one bit of difference either.

Get a good book on darkroom processes and learn the basics. Stick to the manufacturer's recommendations, use the proper equipment and be CONSISTENT. I learned how to develop and print when I was 12, with a couple of books from the school library and the instructions on the package. There's a lot of B.S. and wrong information out there on the internet.

winger · Feb 19, 2016

APUGuser19 said:
I've gone 2 minutes lots of times just to ensure total development. But I always found a minute and a half did the same thing, and couldn't tell any difference. Besides, why give another 30 seconds of safelight exposure and chemical fog?

I always start by reading the instructions. For Ilford multigrade developer and Ilford paper, it says 1 minute for RC and 2 minutes for fiber. I've been doing it this way with great results for over a decade. Part of the key for good darkroom results is to be CONSISTENT. The prints are in the tray face down so any extra safelight exposure is minimal. And if 30 seconds mattered as far as safelight exposure, then my safelights would not be safe.

jsmithphoto1 · Feb 19, 2016

Very proud of you and for you! Welcome to the wild and wunderbar world of analog photography! Where variables unite and nothing goes as planned JK. (it's a joke, people )

removed account4 · Feb 19, 2016

winger said:
I always start by reading the instructions. For Ilford multigrade developer and Ilford paper, it says 1 minute for RC and 2 minutes for fiber. I've been doing it this way with great results for over a decade. Part of the key for good darkroom results is to be CONSISTENT. The prints are in the tray face down so any extra safelight exposure is minimal. And if 30 seconds mattered as far as safelight exposure, then my safelights would not be safe.

hi bethe:

i never leave them face down because i want to see how they are comming up in the tray.
maybe i am lucky that my safelights have never caused trouble but i wouldn't ever leave it facedown ..
its always been flip it ( or if i am doing multiples, have them back to back and face to face and shuffle the groups of prints )
and make sure the tray is rocking. the just plopping the print in the tray and leaving it there is what i have found to be the biggest mistake
people new to print developing make. the print does the equivilant of "stand develop" and is sometimes splotchy and the contrast is all screwed up,
parts are developed more than others, there was an air bubble on the paper ( or under the paper ) ... and it comes out bad
when i was working for a busy portrait studio, we had tray rockers, they were noisy, and corroded ( and actually broke when i worked there after 50+ years of use 10 hours a day 5-6 days a week )
they were a huge help when dealing with consistant tray agitation .. it was just the flipping over 5 or 6 times and watching to see when the image appeared.
of course there are as many ways to process a print and develop film as there are people doing it, and in the end if someone is happy with their results that is great.
and as you said, consistency is key // so it is a huge YMMV

Ken Nadvornick · Feb 19, 2016

davie123 said:
I tried the suggested method last night with a DVD and my old safelight and sure enough I was seeing blue and green like I was looking at 3d glasses.

MattKing · Feb 19, 2016

APUGuser19 said:
Magenta isn't a color.

I'm reporting you to Ron Mowrey!

To the OP - congratulations, and have fun.

Sirius Glass · Feb 19, 2016

APUGuser19 said:
... Magenta isn't a color ...

Where is the two letter troll and the dreaded Kodachrome has been deleted thread?

begginer having trouble printing

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency