Darkroom Printing without a Dark Room

[Ziven]

I think that not all film photography lovers could have a dedicated room or basement or garage for them to build a darkroom. Only a few cities have a public darkroom for film photographers to develop their work. And for beginners, the preconception of difficulties in a darkroom can be a little bit intimidating.

So I am thinking to build a self-contained printing system that does not require a lot of space nor a dark room to operate. It is not for super professional work, but it should be able to print decent quality photos in a decent size (not too big due to the space limitation). And simplify some processes while preserves the fundamental crafts, provide a user-friendly experience for beginners.

So what do you think of the idea? Would you buy one if you don't have the room to build a darkroom? Would you buy one if you a beginner? Which parts in the processes do you think are most interesting to play with? What size do you usually print?

 

[Paul Howell]

Find a Vivitar Day Lab for a starting point, coupled with a table top paper processor very doable.

 

[Ziven]

Find a Vivitar Day Lab for a starting point, coupled with a table top paper processor very doable.

Hi Paul
Thank you for your reply. I have seen something like Vivitar a while ago but I didn't know Day Lab. I looked it up online, are they all printing on instant film only?

 

[Vaughn]

I contact print using alt processes. Still working on building a darkroom so I do all my work right now in the bathroom (light-tight) and kitchen -- dark enough for platinum printing.

 

[Paul Howell]

It was designed for instant film, but could used as a starting point for printing from negatives.

 

[pentaxuser]

I am unclear at to the relevance of the pool questions to the thread's title which seem to be asking whether darkroom printing is possible without a darkroom

Can the OP or others help me here? Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[Ziven]

It was designed for instant film, but could used as a starting point for printing from negatives.

Yes, it is a good start point. Thank you for your information. And would you be interested in this type of product?

 

[Ziven]

I am unclear at to the relevance of the pool questions to the thread's title which seem to be asking whether darkroom printing is possible without a darkroom

Can the OP or others help me here? Thanks

pentaxuser

Hi pentaxuser,
I am sorry for the confusions. The purpose of the thread is to see if people would be interested in some products that enable people to print images with traditional method (not instant film) without a darkroom like Paul mentioned the Day Lab

Ziven

 

[pentaxuser]

Hi pentaxuser,
I am sorry for the confusions. The purpose of the thread is to see if people would be interested in some products that enable people to print images with traditional method (not instant film) without a darkroom like Paul mentioned the Day Lab

Ziven

Thanks for the reply. So this would be either silver gelatin darkroom prints on such as Ilford paper as an example and/or RA4 colour prints that a person could do home without either a darkroom and the accompanying equipment such as an enlarger, timer. safelight etc?

This is intriguing. I appreciate that this may be a new process about which for commercial reasons you cannot reveal much more but can you at least put some "flesh on the very bare bones" you mention and say whether your idea is still embryonic or about to be launched i.e. what might the timescale be from this APUG poll to the sale of the process?

For instance, if this poll starts the process then I assume that fruition is a long way off but I may be wrong in making this assumption

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[Paul Howell]

Yes, it is a good start point. Thank you for your information. And would you be interested in this type of product?

No I have a small but complete darkroom, 2 enlarger set up. I seem to recall a design for a enlarger in either Modern or Popular photography in the early 70's, that used a electronic flash unit, built from a basic enlarger that is in a light tight box, sort of like a very large changing bad with sleeves, I think the box was made out of plywood and was large enough for a print stabilizer. A flash was used as you cannot really burn or dodge, prints were lighted or darkened by stopping down the enlarger lens. Rather than a print stabilizer maybe just make the box large enough for a 8X10 film drum then process the print in room light. Use plastic instead for plywood. Might work.

 

[Ziven]

Thanks for the reply. So this would be either silver gelatin darkroom prints on such as Ilford paper as an example and/or RA4 colour prints that a person could do home without either a darkroom and the accompanying equipment such as an enlarger, timer. safelight etc?

This is intriguing. I appreciate that this may be a new process about which for commercial reasons you cannot reveal much more but can you at least put some "flesh on the very bare bones" you mention and say whether your idea is still embryonic or about to be launched i.e. what might the timescale be from this APUG poll to the sale of the process?

For instance, if this poll starts the process then I assume that fruition is a long way off but I may be wrong in making this assumption

Thanks

pentaxuser

Yes, Pentaxuser, your understanding is correct and the basic chemical and optical principles that apply to the darkroom printing processes won't change that much. What I want to do is to alter how people operate or interact with the processes for the purpose of lowering the environment requirements.

For the time schedule, it is safe to say it is 30-40% of the process. I have some ideas and mock-ups and I am reaching out for different perspectives and opinions and feedbacks from you guys. I will upload some images to show what I got for now. And yes, it is still a long way off.

Thank you for your reply~

 

[removed account4]

doing darkroom work without a darkroom ?
a daylight tank already does that ..

 

[Luckless]

I've been toying with the idea of a building a 'dark box' based on laboratory glove boxes, but with redlight viewing slots rather than the usual large clear glass sides, in such a way that it would function as enlarger and developing station for maybe 8x10s. I'm still working out how best to do the layout, but the goal of the design would be that it should all fold/pack up into a compact little container/light safe for paper, and somewhere to store trays/grads/etc, and then the whole thing can get shoved on a shelf or used as an end table when I don't actually need it.

 

[calebarchie]

Yes, Pentaxuser, your understanding is correct and the basic chemical and optical principles that apply to the darkroom printing processes won't change that much. What I want to do is to alter how people operate or interact with the processes for the purpose of lowering the environment requirements.

For the time schedule, it is safe to say it is 30-40% of the process. I have some ideas and mock-ups and I am reaching out for different perspectives and opinions and feedbacks from you guys. I will upload some images to show what I got for now. And yes, it is still a long way off.

Thank you for your reply~

You mean like <0.1% of the process?

 

[ac12]

Put an enlarger on a cart and wheel it into the bathroom.

I used my parent's kitchen (at night) until my mother got my father to make us a darkroom, to get us and the chemicals out of the kitchen.
After I moved out, I used a darkened bedroom at 3 apartments (printed at night) and the inside bathroom at another one. So it can be done.

 

[mshchem]

I had a darkroom we had a streetlight out in front of the house. Pre LED (sodium vapor) took me a while to figure out that that made a lot better safelight than my Kodak Beehives. Remember just because your eyes have amazing lenses that can focus light. It doesn't mean that it will fog film. Obviously when you load film and color materials it needs to be pretty darn dark. If having a "real" darkroom is an excuse, you need a better excuse.
OP sorry not for me, but Good Luck.
Mike

 

[paul ron]

I just love the magic of it all. But seeing the image come to life with each rock of the tray is like seeing santa working on his gizmos n gagets.

 

[Alan Johnson]

Back in the 80s there was,IIRC, a covered enlarger making 10x8 prints from 35 mm called the Pentax Daylab 300. not to be confused with the Polaroid Daylab. Here is a pic of one currently for sale, they are very rare now.
https://www.gumtree.com/p/non-digit...al-for-a-student-doing-photography/1196658548

 

[Ziven]

doing darkroom work without a darkroom ?
a daylight tank already does that ..

The daylight tank you mentioned, is it for developing film? But I am aiming enlargement of the photo in the darkroom though.

 

[Ziven]

Back in the 80s there was,IIRC, a covered enlarger making 10x8 prints from 35 mm called the Pentax Daylab 300. not to be confused with the Polaroid Daylab. Here is a pic of one currently for sale, they are very rare now.
https://www.gumtree.com/p/non-digit...al-for-a-student-doing-photography/1196658548

Thank you for providing the link. It is rare now and I try to find images or video that explain how it actually works but I could not find any. I do find an article that explains the processes without any images. Do you know who might know more details about it?

 

[bdial]

I think the idea with the daylab was that there was a hood enclosing the enlarger, with enough room for a rotary processing drum, and I presume a paper-safe of some sort. Along with some sort of filtered viewing hood and openings for your arms. You'd make the exposure, put the paper in the drum, which you then removed from the hood to process in daylight.
I expect it would be a bit cumbersome and slow, but workable.

Before I got my darkroom into full operation, I processed the paper in a print drum, I really missed watching the image come up and being able to monitor the development process. Processing that way also slows you down, because every test has to run completely through, where if you can watch the development, and something is way off, you can ditch that attempt without going through stop and fix.

I think the approach I'd take if I had to work in a fully temporary but economical dark space without mods on windows in whatever room would be some sort of tent/temporary shelter big enough to house the photographer, an enlarger, a supply of paper and stacked trays or a Nova style slot processor. You could probably do it in a footprint of 5x5 feet, or possibly a little smaller.

For a non-economical approach I'd look at the machines used for printing in mini-labs. Or else, just print with alt processes that don't require so much darkness.

 

[calebarchie]

I think the idea with the daylab was that there was a hood enclosing the enlarger, with enough room for a rotary processing drum, and I presume a paper-safe of some sort. Along with some sort of filtered viewing hood and openings for your arms. You'd make the exposure, put the paper in the drum, which you then removed from the hood to process in daylight.
I expect it would be a bit cumbersome and slow, but workable.

Before I got my darkroom into full operation, I processed the paper in a print drum, I really missed watching the image come up and being able to monitor the development process. Processing that way also slows you down, because every test has to run completely through, where if you can watch the development, and something is way off, you can ditch that attempt without going through stop and fix.

I think the approach I'd take if I had to work in a fully temporary but economical dark space without mods on windows in whatever room would be some sort of tent/temporary shelter big enough to house the photographer, an enlarger, a supply of paper and stacked trays or a Nova style slot processor. You could probably do it in a footprint of 5x5 feet, or possibly a little smaller.

For a non-economical approach I'd look at the machines used for printing in mini-labs. Or else, just print with alt processes that don't require so much darkness.

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

Said daylab contraption didn't sell well in its time - what makes you think it will be any better now?

 

[wiltw]

In my bachelor days, I had a 2BR apartment. I would use darkroom 'blackout' curtains to cover the window opening as a secondary barrier to light, with just a couple of sheets of foamcore cut to fit the window opening next to the glass as the initial barrier for light. This worked well enough to use for enlarging color prints...and then I would load the print into a Jobo drum tank and then do the rest of the task in an unmodified bathroom (well, OK, I placed a board over the bathtub to serve as a table for my Jobo processor). This worked well enough for me to print color prints in an ordinary BR even during midday!

 

[bsdunek]

Put an enlarger on a cart and wheel it into the bathroom.

I used my parent's kitchen (at night) until my mother got my father to make us a darkroom, to get us and the chemicals out of the kitchen.
After I moved out, I used a darkened bedroom at 3 apartments (printed at night) and the inside bathroom at another one. So it can be done.

I did the same for a while. I had one of those microwave carts - held my enlarger, paper safe and timer. I made a styrofoam piece that fit tightly in the bathroom window to block the light - printed mostly after dark anyway, so, no problem. Set my trays up on the bathroom counter and washed prints in the bathtub. Worked for me for several years until I got my darkroom built.

 

[Bill Burk]

I voted "adjusting the enlarger" as a protest vote. Actually I hate that more than anything else except "scanning" and scanning's not on the ballot.

I hate adjusting the enlarger so much that I have labels on the negative stage with inches called out for each format. Whatever format I am enlarging... the head goes to where the easel and negative are that many inches apart. Period. And I try to stick with one format at a time when making prints. And I hate when the urge or goal of a session forces me to change lenses and heights... ugh.