Darkroom Printing - Lifted Blacks?

[SLVR]

So after being introduced to darkroom printing some time ago I've recently been able to build a darkroom again of my own for printing.

I did a couple prints recently and after looking at them days later, dry, in daylight I'm noticing that my blacks aren't really black. They are more of a grey. The print has a decent amount of contrast, and when I was printing I almost thought that it was a little dark but after drying decided it was ok.

Paper is Ilford MC RC Glossy fresh from the store. I don't have a scanner that can scan prints so I'm unsure how to show an example.

But It almost looks like a characteristic of the paper? That blacks just don't seem to get a deep inky black that people seem to rave about with glossy papers.

 

[cowanw]

If you develop a print and just use stop, then wash it, and turn on the lights. Then put a corner back in the developer and see what your maximum black can be.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Are you using contrast filters when making the print? Pretty hard to guess at what the issue may be without any details...

 

[Vaughn]

You might need to find a way to standardize how you view prints while you are printing. If one is judging print exposure and contrast under low light conditions, one can get fooled into thinking that one has sufficent blacks.

The opposite is also true -- our students would walk out of the darkroom to check their test strips or prints before their eyes had time to adjust to the bright light. With their pupils wide open, their first impression would be that the print was too light. They would zip back into the darkroom, add a little time, then wonder why their dry prints were too dark (beyond normal dry-down).

I also agree with the above idea -- give a piece of photo paper full exposure and development to see what a full black is like with that paper. In fact, it is nice to take a ~2"x4" piece, cover half and expose it to max black. Fully process it, and keep it handy to judge the black and the white of you prints.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

That's a good point, Vaughn. I use a two light system in my darkroom for that reason. The second light being at about the right intensity as my living room.

 

[MattKing]

Glossy, RC paper is quite shiny. You may actually be seeing some surface sheen, which will tend to reduce how black the blacks appear.

I tend to use glossy RC only for particular subjects. I use Pearl or lustre more frequently. But whatever the surface, the viewing conditions matter a lot.

 

[MattKing]

Glossy, RC paper is quite shiny. You may actually be seeing some surface sheen, which will tend to reduce how black the blacks appear.

I tend to use glossy RC only for particular subjects. I use Pearl or lustre more frequently. But whatever the surface, the viewing conditions matter a lot.

 

[piu58]

My usual way for making a print is first determining the standard exposure time. That is the timer for whicht the unexposed film just gives a deep black. If that film doensn't give black you don't have it anywhere. I use the contrast filter to balance the highlights out then. The standard exposure time is far less sensitive to filter changing than the highlights. In the last step I concentrate more at the highlights because they are more meaningful for the image.

If you have problems with finding a contrast filter which gives acceptable highlights (using the standard exposure time) your film is underexposed.

 

[SLVR]

I ended up getting a reply via PM from a member that made me question how far gone my developer may have gone. I've had the developer for about a couple months now and its yellowed.

I'm going to mix up a fresh batch and see how it goes.

I'm printing with MC filters, and my prints look good under light when I'm printing. Just under strong light the blacks seem to grey up.

I'll give a new developer a spin and see how it holds up.

 

[tedr1]

RC glossy paper is capable of good solid black, that is one of the advantages of a glossy paper.

For best results I use Ilford developer and mix fresh for each session, once mixed it doesn't keep. Developer concentrate and powder can be kept for a while, manufacturers publish guidelines on conditions and times which should be observed.

 

[Leigh B]

Are you developing for a full 2 minutes?

Short development times will reduce the achievable Dmax.

- Leigh

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I ended up getting a reply via PM from a member that made me question how far gone my developer may have gone. I've had the developer for about a couple months now and its yellowed.

I'm going to mix up a fresh batch and see how it goes.

I'm printing with MC filters, and my prints look good under light when I'm printing. Just under strong light the blacks seem to grey up.

I'll give a new developer a spin and see how it holds up.

If you are talking abut the "stock", then that is most likely the issue.

 

[Ron789]

I've had the developer for about a couple months now and its yellowed.

I'm going to mix up a fresh batch and see how it goes.

I'm printing with MC filters, and my prints look good under light when I'm printing. Just under strong light the blacks seem to grey up.

I'll give a new developer a spin and see how it holds up.

Developer stock solution should be OK for a couple of months when stored in dark glass bottles with minimal air and well closed. Developer working solution deteriorates very rapidly, even when stored between use in dark glass, well-closed bottles. I never keep a working solution for more then 2 days; the difference between a 2 days old developer and a fresh one is clearly noticeable.

 

[M Carter]

I use Ilford RC pearl or matte for tests and contact sheets. I find it just never has the "oomph" in the blacks that fiber has.

I'd get an idea of the max blacks your negs will produce with it. If you have a clear frame of the film you're using (developed but no image, just clear, like from the start of the roll) test strip that and find the time for max black. Then at the same enlarger height and focus, print an image from the roll at that max black time. Your print should look decent and just need tweaks, not rescue. Correcting bad negs by holding back time means you're cheating yourself of the max blacks the film and paper are capable of.

 

[Doremus Scudder]

Lots of possible culprits and solutions here.

If the print looks good in the darkroom but weak under stronger lighting, then you simply need to evaluate your prints under brighter light. In weak light, your eye will drop shadows to black. I evaluate my prints under what I consider to be ideal display lighting. Since you mention that the print is weaker in stronger light, I imagine this is your problem, or at least part of it. Using a better light to evaluate with will result in your changing your enlarging exposure time and possibly the contrast setting as well.

Exhausted developer will result in weak blacks. You should be able to see these in the darkroom, however, unless your evaluation lighting there is too weak...

Likewise with underdeveloping or underexposing prints. You should be able to see what's going on in the darkroom.

FWIW, I find most people just starting out who are unhappy with the blacks in their prints are underexposing their film. If you end up with weak blacks and have to use high contrast settings, this is likely the case. Underdeveloping is similar, but less of a problem.

Best,

Doremus