Contamination?

Marco B

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 13, 2005
Messages
2,736
Location
The Netherla
Format
Multi Format
Anthony J. Martinez said:
The scan murdered the highlights, but side by side the prints are quite different. Ended up using a 3.5 contrast filter, and it worked well. Thanks guys.
Click to expand...

Good to hear you finally got a result to your liking. Despite the scan not doing it justice, it still looks like an improvement.

One last tip: try to make a maximum black reference of each paper type you have by simply deliberately exposing a piece of photo paper under normal room light and putting it through the development. It can help to judge the contrast while printing, and determine if you really achieved / used the total range of contrast and maximum black in your print.
 
OP
OP

Anthony J. Martinez

Member
Joined
May 3, 2011
Messages
57
Location
Houston, TX
Format
Medium Format
I actually did that by accident during one of my darkroom days. I pulled a sheet out, set it on the easel, got distracted by something. Turned on the white light. Talked on the phone for a minute, and then realized what I'd done. That box of paper is finished now, but for the last 15 sheets or so I had references for both white and black.

Thanks again for all the help.
 

Mike Wilde

Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2006
Messages
2,903
Location
Misissauaga
Format
Multi Format
By the way, I think the expired filters that you have might be the first generation ones. They came with a calculator dial, to figure the exposure change for swapping filters.

The second (current) generation has neutral density built in that allows one exposure for 00-3.5, and twice the exposure for 4.0-5.0.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…