Beseler 23CII (cold head) test run=contrasty prints

cinnamon panda · May 28, 2009

I did a test run last night with a few different negatives and all my prints are super contrasty. I'm pretty sure the developer is fine, but need to rule out operator error on the enlarger first before moving to the chemistry, I think.

I feel like I am completely missing something. This is my first time setting up my own enlarger & I'm not the sharpest pencil in the box when it comes to technical things, bleh. I've always used enlargers that were dialed in already.

Any suggestions or something obvious I should know? I'm printing the manual out now.

keeds · May 28, 2009

What paper are you using? Graded or VC?

cinnamon panda · May 28, 2009

Ilford Multigrade Fiber

ann · May 28, 2009

what grade filter did you use?
if the negative has a high contrast level that should be corrected with the development time.

have you been printing these negatives with a condensor head?

it is not unusal for a boost in contrast level when changing from condensor to cold light sources.

it is best to make your negatives match the light type along with the papers your using, (as least IMHO)

ic-racer · May 28, 2009

Aristo head & W45 tube?

cinnamon panda · May 28, 2009

The enlarger didn't come with any filters, so it's just white? light coming through there. I DO think the negs are a bit contrasty & I've never used a cold head before, so that may be it. I was given the enlarger for free, so I'm rolling with it. These are all old negatives and if the cold light source is the issue, then I will have to change the way I expose & process. This is my first time doing it all at home & not relying on photo labs that I worked at over the years.

"Aristo head & W45 tube?"

I'm not sure, I have to look into it. I basically plugged it in and crossed my fingers hoping it would be easy. HA!

ann · May 28, 2009

there are different types of cold light heads.

you will need to use some contrast filters to help bring the negative contrast under control.

for years there has always been this debate about the differences between light source types. generally speaking those people who used cold light sources made the negatives a bit more contrasty to allow for the difference in the light.

for example, i make all my negatives to print under a cold light using a grade 3 paper, (for personal work , i use only graded fiber paper) . if you are using multicontrast paper you will need to add a filter , perhaps grade 2 or even less, it will depend on the negative.

It sounds as if the negatives are either over exposed or over developed which has increased the contrast,

ic-racer · May 28, 2009

cinnamon panda said:
"Aristo head & W45 tube?"

I'm not sure, I have to look into it. I basically plugged it in and crossed my fingers hoping it would be easy. HA!

Frequently, it is printed on the tube. If that is what you have, a 20CC to 40CC Yellow filter will tame it so you can get reasonable steps between the filters in an Ilford MG filter set.

cinnamon panda · May 28, 2009

Thank you for the tips/advice. I dug through some of the paper boxes and actually found the filter set, so (duh) that will be helpful. Ann, I'll try what you suggested tonight.

I also got the lamp house apart, but the tube didn't have any writing & it's so nicely installed I didn't want to pull it out & drop it or something stupid.

I have the original condensor head (heavy!) and am curious on your thoughts about this great light source debate. The previous owner swears by the cold light & I just assumed I'd leave it alone, but now I'm considering swapping it back to 'stock'...I've been browsing some of the threads on this matter but I really have nothing to compare it to. I've always printed on those 3 colorhead enlargers & I'm not sure what light source was used.

All my negs have pretty much been a bit over exposed and contrasty from the get go, due to working in commercial labs & just running my film through the dip & dunk. I got used to over exposing to compensate for their soup being generic. But, on the other hand I am going to start shooting new negatives & finding a comfortable formula for my new home darkroom.

Anscojohn · May 29, 2009

cinnamon panda said:
The enlarger didn't come with any filters, so it's just white? light coming through there. I DO think the negs are a bit contrasty & I've never used a cold head before, so that may be it. I was given the enlarger for free, so I'm rolling with it. These are all old negatives and if the cold light source is the issue, then I will have to change the way I expose & process. This is my first time doing it all at home & not relying on photo labs that I worked at over the years.

"Aristo head & W45 tube?"

I'm not sure, I have to look into it. I basically plugged it in and crossed my fingers hoping it would be easy. HA!

*****
Rule of thumb has always been that a cold-light head will result in less contrast than printing the same neg with a "condensor" head. If your negs are too snappy, as Ann suggests, you'll have to go either to filters; graded paper, or a softer-working paper developer. And, are you sure there is not a filter lurking in the enlarger's filter drawer?

Anscojohn · May 29, 2009

cinnamon panda said:
Thank you for the tips/advice. I dug through some of the paper boxes and actually found the filter set, so (duh) that will be helpful. Ann, I'll try what you suggested tonight.

I also got the lamp house apart, but the tube didn't have any writing & it's so nicely installed I didn't want to pull it out & drop it or something stupid.

I have the original condensor head (heavy!) and am curious on your thoughts about this great light source debate. The previous owner swears by the cold light & I just assumed I'd leave it alone, but now I'm considering swapping it back to 'stock'...I've been browsing some of the threads on this matter but I really have nothing to compare it to. I've always printed on those 3 colorhead enlargers & I'm not sure what light source was used.

All my negs have pretty much been a bit over exposed and contrasty from the get go, due to working in commercial labs & just running my film through the dip & dunk. I got used to over exposing to compensate for their soup being generic. But, on the other hand I am going to start shooting new negatives & finding a comfortable formula for my new home darkroom.

******
Stick with the cold light.

cinnamon panda · May 29, 2009

Anscojohn said:
*****
Rule of thumb has always been that a cold-light head will result in less contrast than printing the same neg with a "condensor" head. If your negs are too snappy, as Ann suggests, you'll have to go either to filters; graded paper, or a softer-working paper developer. And, are you sure there is not a filter lurking in the enlarger's filter drawer?

I took the whole thing apart today and no filter lurking. The filter drawer isn't functional anymore it seems like, with that cold light conversion. I am going to try out Ann's suggestion with the multigrade filters in that little filter holder below the lens. Wish me luck.

Anscojohn · May 29, 2009

cinnamon panda said:
I took the whole thing apart today and no filter lurking. The filter drawer isn't functional anymore it seems like, with that cold light conversion. I am going to try out Ann's suggestion with the multigrade filters in that little filter holder below the lens. Wish me luck.

*****
Yep. That'll work just fine. Try making a test strip which gives you the minimum amount of exposure which gives you a maximum black through the clear film between neg strips. Use that as the exposure for your first print and see what happens. If still too contrasty, repeat the test with a lower filter number.
Trust me, a Beseler with a cold light is a great system. I printed with one at a summer job years ago. A coupla hundred negs a day; and, yes, including the little filters under the lens.

cinnamon panda · May 29, 2009

success!

Beseler 23CII (cold head) test run=contrasty prints

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency