De Vere 504 & split-grade printing?

[Daniela]

Hi,
in order to not resurrect a thread with broken links, I'd appreciate some clarifications on using this enlarger to split-grade print black and white (I found this new-to-me lab that's open during the summer and they only have these enlargers).

So, Ilford recommends setting the controls like this for my paper:

Source: https://www.ilfordphoto.com/amfile/file/download/file/1824/product/1696/

I usually do split-grade printing with 2 and 4 1/2, so I assume I'd just proceed to make a test trip for each grade as usual and then combine them for the final print. Is there anything else I should keep in mind?

Thanks!

 

[cowanw]

This is a really interesting question. I will test it out and get back.

 

[ic-racer]

You would dial in maximum yellow for one exposure, then dial that out and dial in maximum magenta for the other exposure.

A lot of twiddling dials for me. I combine the filtration into a single exposure based on the exact same table you posted.

 

[cowanw]

I have been thinking more about this.
Firstly your work flow using Grade 2 and grade 4.5 means you have chosen to never need a less than grade 2. That's OK. Your negatives must tend to be perfectly developed and exposed or tend to the soft side. Hence your printing is either perfect grade 2 or tends to the hard side.
The table you put up implies that the time exposure for your prints for e.g. your grade 2 - 41Y/32M print is exposed for one set number of seconds; set for the darkness/lightness you want at the grade of print that you want.
However I would be very surprised if your split-grade printing always (or indeed ever) resulted in the exact same exposure time for your soft (grade 2) exposure and your hard (grade 4 1/2) exposure.
Every print requires a certain amount of blue light and a certain amount of green light to reach your best grade. (In the subtractive system, you do this by removing blue and green light with the yellow and magenta filters). By starting your soft split-grade printing at grade 2 you are delivering the required green light and some of the blue at an exposure time that is correct for the green light and highlights; when you then add blue light at grade 4 1/2, you are adding the rest of the blue at a different exposure time that is best for the shadows. Roughly speaking.
Back to your question. You are, I think, assuming that you can take the times from your split-grade test strips and somehow convert them to Kodak filter settings, as per your Dual Filter Chart, which can then be used at a single exposure time.
My experience says no, you cannot.
PS Some say it makes a difference if your split-grade low grade exposure is "0" or higher (like your "2") due to the papers exposure characteristics. My science mind says how you add the green and blue light to the required totals desired is immaterial. but I may be wrong on this. One world class printer says I am.

 

[MattKing]

PS Some say it makes a difference if your split-grade low grade exposure is "0" or higher (like your "2") due to the papers exposure characteristics. My science mind says how you add the green and blue light to the required totals desired is immaterial. but I may be wrong on this. One world class printer says I am.

FWIW, the result may end up being the same, but many find that with most negatives, it is easier and quicker to get there if one starts with a "1" or a "2", rather than a "0".

 

[Daniela]

You would dial in maximum yellow for one exposure, then dial that out and dial in maximum magenta for the other exposure.

A lot of twiddling dials for me. I combine the filtration into a single exposure based on the exact same table you posted.

Thank you!

 

[Daniela]

Firstly your work flow using Grade 2 and grade 4.5 means you have chosen to never need a less than grade 2. That's OK. Your negatives must tend to be perfectly developed and exposed or tend to the soft side. Hence your printing is either perfect grade 2 or tends to the hard side.

My use of the #2 filter evolved naturally as using the 0 one seemed to never give me good results. As for getting the same exposure times with each filter, you're right, that rarely happens...is that supposed to be something to aim for?

Back to your question. You are, I think, assuming that you can take the times from your split-grade test strips and somehow convert them to Kodak filter settings, as per your Dual Filter Chart, which can then be used at a single exposure time.
My experience says no, you cannot.

Yes, that is my assumption. Thank you for your detailed explanation; with it, I went back to the Ilford sheet and read the emulsion coating part with a new understanding So, I guess that your advice would be to just stick with the equivalent of a one-filter one exposure?

 

[Daniela]

FWIW, the result may end up being the same, but many find that with most negatives, it is easier and quicker to get there if one starts with a "1" or a "2", rather than a "0".

Yes, that's the case for me for the most part.

 

[cowanw]

My use of the #2 filter evolved naturally as using the 0 one seemed to never give me good results. As for getting the same exposure times with each filter, you're right, that rarely happens...is that supposed to be something to aim for?


Yes, that is my assumption. Thank you for your detailed explanation; with it, I went back to the Ilford sheet and read the emulsion coating part with a new understanding So, I guess that your advice would be to just stick with the equivalent of a one-filter one exposure?

Everybody's work flow is different and each is valid (mostly). So starting with grade 2 instead of grade 00, 0, or 1 is fine. And no, getting the two exposures the same time is never the goal and never should be the goal.

I have six working enlargers. Some work only with Blue/Green split-printing; most work with the Yellow/Magenta combo.
The De Vere 504 is just like the one you use and I do use it with the dual filter settings chart your have above, for ease of use.
I could just as easily use Split-printing. Because I have to use both work flows, depending on the enlarger, I have got a pretty good practical understanding of the process which allows me to switch back and forth between additive and subtractive processes.
But until one had the time and experience, I would favour doing just one work flow (in your case split-printing) until such time as you wanted to expand your understanding and experience as a personal goal.
Split-printing is a great way to really learn to really understand the effects of blue and green and time, whether splitting yellow/magenta or blue/green.
Single filter Yellow/Magenta or Dual colour filter settings may be easier and allows for just as good results, possibly without having to be aware of the underlying concepts.

​

 

[Daniela]

Had the chance to use this enlarger today and it was a lot more straightforward than I imagined. I did forgo split-grade printing because I was short on time, but I was glad to have learned something new. I also skipped using the chart above in favor of the one that was posted by the lab next to the enlarger and it worked just fine.
Thanks for your help!

 

[koraks]

I'd just proceed to make a test trip for each grade as usual and then combine them for the final print.

No, it doesn't work that way.

You make a test strip on either the lowest or the highest grade. I'd recommend the lowest grade. Select the time that gives the highlights you want.
Expose a second strip at the lowest grade and at the time you just selected. Now print on that same strip (without moving it on the baseboard) a test series on the highest grade. Select the time that gives the shadows that you want - the highlights should be where you want them now anyway.
Now expose a full sheet/image with the selected times for the lowest resp. highest grade.

 

[Daniela]

Thank you, @koraks . I haven't see the process described that way before and it seems like doing it that way would make the process a bit more efficient. I'll give it a try next time!

 

[L Gebhardt]

You can still use under the lens filters with a color head. That’s much easier than turning dials on the head when printing split grade, at least for me.

 

[koraks]

it seems like doing it that way would make the process a bit more efficient.

It's not just that. If you do two separate strips, each with just the high and the low grade, respectively, your final print where you combine both exposures won't come out well.

 

[Daniela]

You can still use under the lens filters with a color head. That’s much easier than turning dials on the head when printing split grade, at least for me.

Yes, it's just that filters were not available at this new lab. I look forward to my regular lab opening back after the summer so I can go back to my regular equipment.

 

[Daniela]

It's not just that. If you do two separate strips, each with just the high and the low grade, respectively, your final print where you combine both exposures won't come out well.

That's how I've been doing it all along, though... If that works with a black and white enlarger head, why wouldn't it work with this type too?

 

[koraks]

If that works with a black and white enlarger head, why wouldn't it work with this type too?

Well, I'm surprised that it works for you. It never worked well for me because there is a slight interaction between the high and low contrast exposures that shifted the result a bit from where I anticipated it. But if it works for you, then it should work on any kind of head, regardless of the type.

 

[pentaxuser]

No, it doesn't work that way.

You make a test strip on either the lowest or the highest grade. I'd recommend the lowest grade. Select the time that gives the highlights you want.
Expose a second strip at the lowest grade and at the time you just selected. Now print on that same strip (without moving it on the baseboard) a test series on the highest grade. Select the time that gives the shadows that you want - the highlights should be where you want them now anyway.
Now expose a full sheet/image with the selected times for the lowest resp. highest grade.

koraks, I think I have followed what you said which is : 1. Make a test strip at the lowest grade, say grade 0, with various times and from that select the strip that gives you the highlights you want and make a note of the time for those highlights, say 8 seconds
2. Make a second test strip but this time for the whole piece of paper at the time selected from the test strip at grade 0 so you now have a mini print for the highlights only
3. Using that mini print you do a series of different exposures, say 4, on it using the highest grade, say 5, and from this you will have hopefully one strip out of the four exposures that gives you the shadows you want, say this is 10 seconds. This will not affect the highlights so that time will remain the same 8 seconds already chosen in step 1

4 Now using the print size that you want for the finished print, you use the selected times for grade 0 and grade 5 which are 8 seconds at grade 0 and 10 seconds at grade 5

Is that the correct interpretation of what you wrote?

I just became a bit puzzled at what you last sentence meant when you said :" Now expose a full sheet for the selected times for the lowest resp. highest grade" I am unsure what the word resp. means

Does "resp." mean grade so that the last sentence means selected times for lowest grade and for the highest grade?

If so this makes sense to me

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[koraks]

Is that the correct interpretation of what you wrote?

With all respect, my post explained in about 4 lines quite clearly what I meant. It seems Daniela understood it.

I am unsure what the word resp. means

Google Search

www.google.com

 

[pentaxuser]

With all respect, my post explained in about 4 lines quite clearly what I meant. It seems Daniela understood it.

Google Search

www.google.com

Yes she may have but I was concerned that I may have missed something in your explanation and I was genuinely puzzled by your final sentence on "lowest resp. highest grade. Goodness knows that I must use phrases if not whole sentences that puzzle others. So rather than ask for a further explanation or ask that you expand on what you have said I thought I was being helpful in setting out what I thought you said so then if it was the same all you needed to do was to reply Yes

I had no other motive in doing what I did

Whenever I see something that I think I have understood on Photrio but want to be sure I have understood, then I see no other way to be sure than ask for clarification from the respondent as I did in respect of you, the respondent

Have I cleared up to your satisfaction now that I was not motivated by anything other than a need to be sure and if I have then a simple Yes to this question and to my earlier one on whether I had fully understood what I think you had explained will be fine

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[koraks]

It's all good; we all have our ways. I did not suspect some ulterior motive.

 

[pentaxuser]

It's all good; we all have our ways. I did not suspect some ulterior motive.

Thanks. So can I take it that my thoughts expressed as bullets points on your explanation to Daniela were correct?

pentaxuser

 

[Daniela]

Well, I'm surprised that it works for you. It never worked well for me because there is a slight interaction between the high and low contrast exposures that shifted the result a bit from where I anticipated it. But if it works for you, then it should work on any kind of head, regardless of the type.

It works, but I do have to make little adjustments afterwards. That's why I mentioned that your way may make the process more efficient. I'm interested in seeing how images may differ, so I'll be happy to try both side by side and report back Thank you!

 

[MattKing]

In case you haven't seen it before, many people have found this Les McLean article on split grade printing very helpful: https://www.lesmcleanphotography.com/articles.php?page=full&article=21

 

[pentaxuser]

It works, but I do have to make little adjustments afterwards. That's why I mentioned that your way may make the process more efficient. I'm interested in seeing how images may differ, so I'll be happy to try both side by side and report back Thank you!

Yes I have been looking at 2 Ilford videos on the subject and the one by an llford Master Printer( a title conferred on the person by Ilford) called Dave Butcher. As has been mentioned he starts with grade 0 but near completion he changes this to grade 1 as he decides that in the case of his negatives grade 0 doesn't give him the overall grade contrast needed in this case so he moves to grade 1. However to get the blacks he requires he simply increases his time at grade 5 but sticks with grade 5

So using only grade 0 or 00 is not set in stone as far as Dave Butcher is concerned nor is it as far as Lina Bessanova is concerned

What may distinguish the "Ilford Way" from others is the beginning of the process where both Ilford presenters, Dave Butcher and Rachel Brewster both say that your first test print should be made at grade 2.5 from which you choose the best exposure. From this test print at grade 2.5 you divide that best time in half and use half of the time at 0 or 00 and half at grade 5

Rachel Brewsters is the more recent of the two videos. It is the shorter and more simple one and probably deliberately so. It looks as if Ilford has decided that short but clear videos are what its new and younger darkroom audience requires

This whole thread has caused me to look at various videos including a Greg Davis one and it seems to me they are all slight variations on a common method.

All will work but it may be that testing exposure on a grade 2.5 and dividing this exposure in half for grade 00,0 or 1 and half for grade 5 may be something to explore

As an aside it wasn't clear to me what differed between koraks method and Daniela. Both require the use of grades 0 and 5, choosing the best exposure from grade 0 and then from grade 5 and making the grade 5 exposure on top of the chosen mini-print exposure grade 0

The end result is the same in that you get to the chosen split grade print

pentaxuser