Contacts vs. Enlargements

kq6up · Oct 4, 2011

Thomas Bertilsson said:
I hate tray developing too, so I quit using sheets. But eventually I think you get used to it. I recommend bringing music. Loud good music. Makes it happen much faster.

I have a special doo dad to soup six 4x5 sheets at a time in daylight in a paterson tank. I am now shooting 8x10, and can do one sheet at a time in a color print drum. However, I am forced to do tray if I have more than one sheet.

Chris

kq6up · Oct 31, 2011

Ok, I am back with results. IE50 is still the best speed, and I arrived at a developing time of 20'30" for 1:50 Rodinal. I agitate by shuffling through the stack once per minute per the technique detailed in A. Adams the negative. I have two sheets left that I am going to soup @ 1:25 for 10'15", and compare the tonality. I generally develop at 75F, so I can multiply a factor of .72 to the dev time. This makes it a little more bearable sitting in the dark -- along with Jimi Hendrix "Live at Monterrey".

I get a good contact print from these negs with no contrast filter. However, I like the tone a little better if I dev N-1, and compensate with a filter. The difference is VERY subtle, it has a more antique look to it, and the N processed negative starts to look really linear (like TMAX).

Regards,
Chris Maness

c6h6o3 · Oct 31, 2011

What yields better shadow detail is exposure and in my experience nothing else does that. What increases or reduces highlight density at a given exposure is development. So my advice to you is to expose more and develop less.

Thomas Bertilsson · Oct 31, 2011

kq6up said:
Ok, I am back with results. IE50 is still the best speed, and I arrived at a developing time of 20'30" for 1:50 Rodinal. I agitate by shuffling through the stack once per minute per the technique detailed in A. Adams the negative. I have two sheets left that I am going to soup @ 1:25 for 10'15", and compare the tonality. I generally develop at 75F, so I can multiply a factor of .72 to the dev time. This makes it a little more bearable sitting in the dark -- along with Jimi Hendrix "Live at Monterrey".

I get a good contact print from these negs with no contrast filter. However, I like the tone a little better if I dev N-1, and compensate with a filter. The difference is VERY subtle, it has a more antique look to it, and the N processed negative starts to look really linear (like TMAX).

Regards,
Chris Maness

Excellent. Sounds like you found your way with it, and that's all that really matters.

I just figured out how to shoot Tri-X and using PMK developer, and I am nowhere near the times recommended anywhere else. It just goes to prove how important SOME individual testing is in order to make prints that we're happy with.

Good work!

Jed Freudenthal · Nov 1, 2011

kq6up said:
Does printing via contact have a different tonal response curve with the same film/paper/developer than enlarging? I have great results with Fomapan 100 and Rodinal with roll film. However, when I contact print my 8x10's the dark shadows look really muddy. The overall contrast seem to be ok, but the local contrast in the dark areas are murky. I am afraid if I soup it longer I will just blow the highlights.

Would rating the film at a lower speed solve this? The 100 speed I rate the film is perfect for the roll film. The sheet film version of Fomapan 100 (Arista EDU Ultra) behaves like a totally different film so far. I am thinking at EI100 most of the shadows are falling in the toe. Maybe rate it at EI50 or even EI25?

I have over exposed this film by forgetting to stop down (by 5 stops) and pull N-1 and they scan much better. I have not tried to print these as the overall contrast seems to be too low. I think I will try tonight as I might be surprised by the result. Maybe I will have to print at a higher grade, but the local contrast might be more tame.

Thanks,
Chris Maness

Examine the 8x10" negatives with a magnifying glass in the shadows. Is it still murky? Or is it thin with small black specks? If this is the case, the explanation is an optical effect. Better optics in the 8x10" situation. And the better optics will result in a poor image as a result of the optical quality of our eyes. The solution is then to develop in such a way that the detailed information disappears. Or decrease the exposure to get rid of the details in the shadow. However, in this case, you are not using the advantage of 8x10".

Jed

baachitraka · Jun 25, 2012

Thomas Bertilsson said:
I too have found that Foma 100 is best used at EI 50, and using Rodinal you may wish to start using 1+50 dilution to make sure you get sufficiently long developing times. That would actually help your shadow detail as well, whether they are contact printed or projected.

- Thomas

Indeed, Fomapan 100: A week ago I was shooting http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kehlsteinhaus on top of the mountain. Light was sunny 16 and with K2 I was shooting 1/250 @f/8, developed with Rodinal 1+50 for 15 mins with 3 inversions @ every 5th minute. I can print without a filter on a VC paper + dodging.

kq6up · Jun 25, 2012

baachitraka said:
Indeed, Fomapan 100: A week ago I was shooting http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kehlsteinhaus on top of the mountain. Light was sunny 16 and with K2 I was shooting 1/250 @f/8, developed with Rodinal 1+50 for 15 mins with 3 inversions @ every 5th minute. I can print without a filter on a VC paper + dodging.

The EI50 rating of Fomapan only refers to the cut sheet film (4x5", 8x10" etc..). I have found that the roll version of this film is very sensitive to over exposure. Try exposing at box speed (ISO100), and cutting back agitation at the same time increasing dev time. I agitate for the first 30 seconds and only one inversion per minute. Dev time at 1+49 dilution @20degC would be 10.75 minutes (10'45"). This works VERY well for me. Much better grain structure than heavy agitation.

Good Luck,
Chris Maness

baachitraka · Jun 25, 2012

kq6up said:
The EI50 rating of Fomapan only refers to the cut sheet film (4x5", 8x10" etc..). I have found that the roll version of this film is very sensitive to over exposure. Try exposing at box speed (ISO100), and cutting back agitation at the same time increasing dev time. I agitate for the first 30 seconds and only one inversion per minute. Dev time at 1+49 dilution @20degC would be 10.75 minutes (10'45"). This works VERY well for me. Much better grain structure than heavy agitation.

Good Luck,
Chris Maness

There is a correction in my previous post. I will go with Thomas regarding the shadow details since my agitation scheme is based on

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

...but, I was shooting at box speed with correction factor for K2(Yellow Filter) applied. So the EI was @50.

Contacts vs. Enlargements

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency