Darkroom dilemma - Can you help?

[barbara ann]

I have committed to producing 12 - 11x14 B&W photos for an exhibit.
I have encountered a problem that I am unable to solve.
Here is what I am working with:
Negatives from IlfordHP5 plus - 400 film
Bessler 23C II enlarger
Ilford Multigrade filters
Ilford IlfoStop bath diluted 1:19
Ilford Multigrade paper developer diluted 1:9
Ilford Rapid fixer diluted 1:9
Ilford MGIV RC Delux Pearl 11x14 paper (Which I've had for more than a year. All chemicals are new.)

I have 4x6 prints from a commercial lab that I am essentially trying to reproduce in my darkroom.
No matter how I change filter, exposure time, f-stop the images
are an overall grey with little or no contrast. Here are two examples:




If anyone can tell me what I'm doing incorrectly, I will be very grateful!
barbara ann

 

[Ian Grant]

I'd check your safe-light, you don't say what type/colour you're using but that can affect the contrast, it may be too close. PAper keeps at least 7 years under normal conditions (no excessive heat) so it shouldn't be an issue.

Ian

 

[Jon Shiu]

One thing to check is if you are getting fog from an unsafe safelight. Also, what contrast filter are you using?

Jon

 

[Michael Wesik]

If all else fails and you can't seem to dial in your image with a single filter you might try splitting your filtration. I would start with a base exposure in the range of grade 1 and 2, and use that filtration to print in your highlights with some detail while keeping the print light, say between 60%-80% density. Then I would add grade 5 to taste.

 

[Bob Carnie]

Before anything - I would try to process one sheet with no exposure lights completely out and see if your paper is pure white after process. if not its fogged paper

 

[jeffreyg]

One way to see if it is your safe-light would be to get some ruby-lith and cover the safe-light. If that does the trick you will know that's the problem. If it doesn't help try a new box of paper. Make sure your chemical dilutions are correct and check for other light leaks in the darkroom.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

 

[Hilo]

Did you use an easel? If yes, the paper that was under the blades should be white.

How long was your paper out under the enlarger, before you developed?

Have a critical look at your enlarger, in the total dark. Turn it on and see if somewhere light comes out.

How old was the developer? Had you used it before?

 

[ParkerSmithPhoto]

Check your safelight first. Once you are sure that it's safe, then try a print with a Grade 5 filter and see what happens. The one of the girl with her hands on her face looks fairly close already. The other image looks like it may have been a little underexposed and underdeveloped.

Might want to shoot the negs on a light box and post a pic. Hard to believe a Grade 5 won't do the trick. You can also intensify the negs in selenium 1:2.

 

[ToddB]

Looks like fogged paper to me too.

Todd

 

[Saganich]

I had similar results from old paper. Wouldn't trust paper more than 2 years in storage. Easily checked just develop some without exposure. The one shot looks about right for a test print. If exposure time is longer that usual perhap the negs are over exposed and/or over developed, which would cause similar frustration.

 

[bdial]

My experience with MGIV is that it's pretty stable, but fogging ether from handling or age is possible.
I'm with most of the other comments. I'd check for paper fogging first.
With the safelight off;
Cut an unexposed sheet in half, mark one or both
Process one half as usual, develop for your usual time, stop, fix
Put the other half directly in fix for the normal fix time.
Compare the two, they should look the same. The paper is fogged if the developed half has any tone compared to the fixed one.

If you're good there, do a safelight test.

 

[pentaxuser]

Are the two middle prints those from the lab for comparison or are they all your attempts? I can see nothing wrong with your chemical processing based on your description of it.

pentaxuser

 

[mklw1954]

Other things that can fog your paper and reduce contrast and whites in your prints, besides the safelight, are a lot of stray light from the enlarger (typically around the negative stage in the 23CII)) and reflected light off walls, tiles, and glass/metal shower doors onto your easel if you are working in a bathroom darkroom. 3/8" window insulation can be used to block stray light from the enlarger and hanging blankets or sheets over shower doors can eliminate reflected light.

 

[dpurdy]

Another line of thought... I used to do a fair amount of printing for a woman who shot 35mm black and white and took the film to a lab for processing. The lab did automatic digital printing from film. For awhile the film she brought me was very thin and under processed but the digital prints looked pretty close to perfectly good. The adjustable curve for the digital prints could correct for the under processed film but when I tried to print it on my enlarger they would come out much like your examples. I would end up having to print partly on high contrast bulb only and then try to burn stuff in on a low contrast setting. It was very difficult to make an acceptable print. The woman eventually had to show the lab what was happening and get them to process the film more correctly.
Just a thought.
Dennis

 

[Luis-F-S]

Before anything - I would try to process one sheet with no exposure lights completely out and see if your paper is pure white after process. if not its fogged paper

And then if the paper is white, develop a sheet of unexposed paper that you've had in the enlarging easel for the same time you'd have it if you were printing it. If it's gray, then it's the safelight. If neither of those work, then increase the print contrast.

 

[Bob Carnie]

I forgot to add this point.. I would add put a nickle on the paper , if you see the nickle after process its the safe lights or unwanted light leak in the room somewhere.

And then if the paper is white, develop a sheet of unexposed paper that you've had in the enlarging easel for the same time you'd have it if you were printing it. If it's gray, then it's the safelight. If neither of those work, then increase the print contrast.

 

[Ian Grant]

I forgot to add this point.. I would add put a nickle on the paper , if you see the nickle after process its the safe lights or unwanted light leak in the room somewhere.

I've seen and had an orange-red safe-light that would pass that test but caused low contrast with Multigrade papers, actually I still have it but now only use the specific amber brown variable contrast dome. It's mostly an issue in a small darkroom but hard to pin down. I was lucky because the manufacturer realised there was sometimes an issue and it was in their sales/marketing literature for their then new VC filter. I'd add I was using the same enlargers, safe-light that I'd used in a far bigger enlarger with no issues with MG papers.

Ian

 

[MattKing]

Here is the full-fledged Kodak safelight test: http://wwwca.kodak.com/global/en/consumer/products/techInfo/k4/k4TestSafelite.shtml

It is much better than the simple "nickel" test, because it will also catch near threshold fogging.

 

[cliveh]

What are the negative exposures like? Do they look thin? Also what multigrade filters are you using?

 

[ic-racer]

The images posted are all with the #5 filter, yes? Is the developer fresh?

 

[RobC]

looks like fogging to me too. And if the filters aren't making any difference then I'd suggest your white light lever/setting is permanently open becasue either you've forgotten to close it or its broken in the white light only position. Or alternatively filters are not moving into position.

So its probably a combination of safelight fogging and filters/white light for some reason.

 

[cliveh]

The images posted are all with the #5 filter, yes? Is the developer fresh?

Where does the OP mention filter 5?

 

[pentaxuser]

From the first post the OP appears to be using Ilford MG filters and not a dichroic head so the white light lever should be open, I think. Maybe the question is: If it is an enlarger with dichroic filter but the OP uses Ilford MG filters, what position is the white light lever in?

Maybe the OP needs to help us to help her by responding to our comments and questions?

pentaxuser

 

[RobC]

good point

 

[Rick A]

There seems to be a good bit of supposition in these last few posts. Nowhere does the OP talk of using strictly grade 5 filter, although she did try ALL filters with the same result. She has a 23Cii enlarger, and Ilford MG filter set. Beseler condenser enlargers do not have a "white light only" lever, and do have a filter drawer. The last 23Cii dual dichro head I had didn't have that feature either. She is using one year old paper, with fresh chemicals. Maybe she's not responding is, she is probably in the dark room doing safelight testing, among other tasks that keep us all busy in our day to day lives.