mikepry
Subscriber
This thread sure has enlightened me and this fine tuning has been a real learning experience as well. I'm not falling into the testing vortex, although as sick as it sounds I thoroughly enjoy it. I merely want to get the most out of my materials and make the finest print that I'm capable of making. Having said that here are some things that I stumbled onto along the way....
Started with a printing time of ten minutes under a 400watt metal halide and with one coat could get steps 20 and 21 to merge. Weak Dmax though.
Double coated with 1st coat diluted as discussed and double coated with two full coats and...no difference, but the steps 20 and 21 did not merge???
I assumed that more emulsion would naturally bring printing times down. Not the case. I needed 15min to merge the steps. Now I wonder if I am experiencing solarazation?
Found the coating rod to be substandard and I still maintain that the white fuzzy hairs of the paper taint the densitometers reading. I happened to be in Downtown Chicago on business today and went into Pearl Art and bought a 2" magic brush to compliment the 3" I ordered online (Wow, what a store). I really think that will keep the paper abrasions down.
And Michael M - I'm happy with the 1.42 and will work with that. Your last response was comforting. It is a substantial improvement to what I had and will tweek little things here and there along the way. With all the little variables that come into play here I can say they are nothing compared to the 2 years I spent in an albumen haze...ee gads, talk about a loose cannon!
Started with a printing time of ten minutes under a 400watt metal halide and with one coat could get steps 20 and 21 to merge. Weak Dmax though.
Double coated with 1st coat diluted as discussed and double coated with two full coats and...no difference, but the steps 20 and 21 did not merge???
I assumed that more emulsion would naturally bring printing times down. Not the case. I needed 15min to merge the steps. Now I wonder if I am experiencing solarazation?
Found the coating rod to be substandard and I still maintain that the white fuzzy hairs of the paper taint the densitometers reading. I happened to be in Downtown Chicago on business today and went into Pearl Art and bought a 2" magic brush to compliment the 3" I ordered online (Wow, what a store). I really think that will keep the paper abrasions down.
And Michael M - I'm happy with the 1.42 and will work with that. Your last response was comforting. It is a substantial improvement to what I had and will tweek little things here and there along the way. With all the little variables that come into play here I can say they are nothing compared to the 2 years I spent in an albumen haze...ee gads, talk about a loose cannon!