Calibrating Analyzer 500, anyone done it?

[Larry Kellogg]

Hello,

Well, I'm trying to calibrate my Analyzer 500
Timer for use with Ilford Multigrade Classic Fibre paper. I went through the instructions but am puzzled by the results.

First, do I need to put head all the way at the top of the column? They say to do that and take a reading at the center of the baseboard. They say to make a test strip and if it is blank, then increase exposure one stop and try again, to get an exposure time between 10-20 seconds.

So, I wound up increasing four stops to get a decent Stouffer test strip printed. I dried them and compared them with the .4 density test trying to figure out how many steps from the center positive or negative to adjust each grade's exposure. The thing is that they say to add the number of stops times 12 to the offsets, which amount to large offsets and bizarre results.

I'm pretty much confused by the whole process and I haven't even attempted the contrast calibration! Help!

Larry


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ic-racer]

Wow it is confusing. Looks like the offsets in the table are 1/12 of a stop.
Since the thing makes the gray scales with step sizes of 1/3, 1/4, 1/6 and 1/12 of a stop you need to know that information to know how many "1/12th stops" you are off. If you did the gray scale in 1/3 stops then you multiply number of steps off by 4 to get the offset in 1/12th stops. If you did the gray scale in 1/12 stops then then you multiply the number of steps off by 1 to get the offset.

 

[Larry Kellogg]

I can change the step size but I was under the impression I should use the Stouffer strip which is in half steps, I believe. Should I just make a test strip instead with a base exposure of 0 and increment in half steps?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[mr rusty]

calibrating an analyser isn't difficult but you have to understand what you are doing. Read the instructions and better still watch the video. http://www.beyondmonochrome.co.uk/main/Media/caluser.m4v

It really is worth getting this right, because one of the pluses of the analyser is being able to store up to 8 different paper calibrations. The process starts with calibrating exposure and then afterwards calibrating contrast.

It is quite a prolonged process and takes care to do it right - get everything prepared and keep everything in order. However, do it right and you do it once! (for each paper)

If using an analyser for the first time, it does take a little skill to interpret the readings and work out where to measure from on the projected image. Main thing I have found is the initial highlight reading that sets exposure should have some detail - if you take it from an area that will be completely white on the printed image you will get a spuriously long exposure.

 

[Larry Kellogg]

Thanks for the link to the video, it's much more helpful than the written instruction manual!

I see that I was confused when thinking I needed to use the Stouffer strip for the exposure calibration when it is only needed for the contrast settings.

I do have a set of seven strips, and exposure time does not matter for the contrast calibration, so I'll try to figure out the contrast numbers from what I have produced.

I suppose though that I should go back and meticulously develop the tiny strips using the same development procedure I use for my prints as contrast can vary depending on that.

I'll also need to reset the unit to factory settings, there must be a way to do that. I believe all paper channels are calibrated to Ilford RC paper.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[mr rusty]

I'll also need to reset the unit to factory settings

I think there is, but it's unecessary. yes, all channels originally set for ilford RC. The settings are in the manual, and you could go through them and reset just a single paper channel before you start, however the offsets that result from calibration are offsets from whatever is in the unit at the time, so the new settings are achieved for the new paper. It doesn't really matter what the start settings are as the offsets change accordingly.

Yes, you should use the same developing techniques you will use for prints, and let them dry down.

 

[Larry Kellogg]

Ah, yes, thanks for pointing that out. I can start from whatever messed up settings I have in channel 1. ;-)

Have you calibrated for the new Ilford classic paper? Have you been happy with the results?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Saganich]

First time I messed it up as well and reset to original to avoid confusion. Then I didn't quite match tiles correctly for the offset and came out with odd results. The third, or more likely the fourth time, I got it right. Hang in there it will be a huge time saver eventually.

 

[mr rusty]

Have you been happy with the results?

No not a paper I have used yet. I tend to use warmtone. Apart from ilford fb wt I use foma 532. My cooltone is kentmere fine print.

 

[Larry Kellogg]

Thanks Saganich. I know it's all going to come together for me! It will definitely save time, something I don't have a lot of in the darkroom.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[mr rusty]

It will definitely save time, something I don't have a lot of in the darkroom

My story too!. Yes it will save time. Having used an analyser for about 3 years now, I reckon about 80% of my prints I am satisfied with first time - measure - expose - print. No test strips! The other 20% are the ones I need to work with - dodge/burn, but I still prefer to use full sheet images. I never, ever make test strips. As I said in an earlier post, it's not a magic bullet - you do have to learn the machine, and how to interpret the measurements you take with what you see projected on the baseboard.

 

[Larry Kellogg]

Exactly. My goal is to banish the test strip and just work with full images, I think you learn much more by looking at a complete print than by trying to decipher narrow test strips.

I've decided that my most satisfying printing sessions involve printing one print each of many different negatives, usually ten to fourteen shots, in my experience. Getting a decent print on the first attempt lets me move on quickly and keeps me from feeling bogged down with one image.

Also, at about $2 a sheet for 11x14 fibre, it is expensive and demoralizing to print five copies of an image only to discover later that it is not worth pursuing further.

After the printing session, I live with the images a while and see which ones feel strong to me. With those, I'm willing to go back and print them again.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Larry Kellogg]

I finally got back to calibrating and printed seven strips, one for each grade.

I have to figure out all the correction factors but I can see why the manual says that grades 4 and 5 require more fine grained steps, 1/12th instead of 1/4th.

I'm not used to the test strip mode on the Analyzers which is different than the regular timers. The Analyzer does seven exposures, starting less than the time, and working up.

I think my big mistake was thinking that the Stouffer strip was needed for exposure calibration but it is only needed for contrast calibration.

I'll get it, just have to keep trying.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Larry Kellogg]

So, I completed the exposure calibration and put in all my offsets. I then ran some test prints, which were ok, but I think could be better.

I then ran some finer calibration exposure test strips, 1/6th of a step for grades 2 and 3, 1/12th steps for grades 4 and 5, as they suggest.

After that, I had the idea to move the contrast settings to the one they suggested for Ilford Multigrade Fibre, as the initial channel setting is for RC.

I then ran the contrast test strips using the Stouffer strip for each grade.

Will I ever converge on the right settings? Am I doing anything wrong?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk