Enlarger exposure meter for printing, please explain.

Im starting to knuckle down in the darkroom, can someone explain the use of an exposure meter and is it really of benefit to me or is it a run before you can walk item, Rh designs are quoted in saying dispense with test strips as this meter will give you full tonal range and correct grades.
How effective are they ?

There have been a many attempts to produce a meter that will measure various values from the projected negative image, and suggest a contrast grade and exposure time, and the RH Design product is the most successful yet, however as with most things in this pastime it is not necessary to automate. Some will say that it is better to learn the manual methods first so that you build up an understanding of the principles of printing and darkroom practice. Others will state that there is no need, automate immediately and concentrate on picture taking. It rather depends on your aim. Do you want to produce prints, or do you want to explore all aspects of printing and darkroom practice first?

Dave Miller said:

There have been a many attempts to produce a meter that will measure various values from the projected negative image, and suggest a contrast grade and exposure time, and the RH Design product is the most successful yet, however as with most things in this pastime it is not necessary to automate. Some will say that it is better to learn the manual methods first so that you build up an understanding of the principles of printing and darkroom practice. Others will state that there is no need, automate immediately and concentrate on picture taking. It rather depends on your aim. Do you want to produce prints, or do you want to explore all aspects of printing and darkroom practice first?

Click to expand...

I am doing the test strips around the print for exposure and contrast but having limited time after dinner and before bedtime for the kids time is short and sometimes a tutting wife, who by the way is very supportive, pressure sometimes gets the better of me and mistakes are made, so my query is is it worth the expense or is another toy that may get passed over for the traditional method.

You don't really need an exposure meter. An exposure timer would be a better investment.

If you decide to get one, get the best possible (RH designs, Heiland Splitgrade) or you will get frustrated sooner or later because the darn thing doesn't do what's it's supposed to do.

I started printing with an old Philips meter and threw it out after a week because I got better results with test strips.

G

I use a Gossen Profisix with a Lab attachment primarily for checking the consistency of my enlarger lightsource. Sometimes when opening up the aperture and then re-stopping down again, there can be a small but measurable discrepancy in light levels before and after and these can be noticable in the print. Also, voltage fluctuations affect light output and I can compensate for these. I also use it for checking the relative neg densities on the baseboard. It also comes in handy for giving me a ballpark time to use when test-stripping. Having said all that, I've just taken delivery today of an RH Zonemaster (and Paper Flasher), so I'm sort of hoping it will come in useful especially for work prints, where I must have spent a small fortune over the years on test-strips

Get a RH analyzer. Its the best investment I have made for my darkroom. It doesn't do away with teststrips all together. But it will do them for you in nice f-stop increments.

Jaap Jan

After printing the old fashioned way for more than twelve years, I got an RH Analyzer Pro. It is a wonderful tool, and it will get you 90% of the way, 90% of the time. The remaining 10% you have to know how to fix on your own. Because it works in fstops, not traditional time increments, (you can't set 35 seconds on it, not directly), it is NOT a tool for a beginner. It also helps to know HOW to read a negative, to know where to place the sensor, so it will yield accurate results for each print. Just as a Ferrari is a better sportscar than a Mini Cooper, if your goal is to get from A to B as fast as possible, a large part of your success in doing so will depend on the skill of the operator.

TheFlyingCamera said:

After printing the old fashioned way for more than twelve years, I got an RH Analyzer Pro. It is a wonderful tool, and it will get you 90% of the way, 90% of the time. The remaining 10% you have to know how to fix on your own. Because it works in fstops, not traditional time increments, (you can't set 35 seconds on it, not directly), it is NOT a tool for a beginner. It also helps to know HOW to read a negative, to know where to place the sensor, so it will yield accurate results for each print. Just as a Ferrari is a better sportscar than a Mini Cooper, if your goal is to get from A to B as fast as possible, a large part of your success in doing so will depend on the skill of the operator.

Click to expand...

I agree with what you have said except for one point. You seem to be saying that because the timer works in f-stops, it is not a tool for a beginer. If thats so then I must disagree; I would advocate that everyone starts with this sort of timer, which is very easy to understand, rather than a conventional unit, and have to struggle with the transition later, having grown used to counting elephants. The use of f-stop printing is so natural that any other timing method should not be considered. The question here though was over the use of a light sensor to reduce printing time. As you correctly say the use of an RH Analyzer Pro will speed up the process, and reduce waste; most of the time. My point is that if you don't understand the basics, then the other 10% could leave you in tears.

After printing based on test strips for 40 years or so, I bought an RH Designs Zonemaster II meter, and love it. Once I calibrated it, I get "close" with the first print, and then adjust from there. There is, however, another learning curve involved.

For background purposes, Dusty, different enlarging meters take different approaches. Some simple meters, for example, aim at metering a mid-tone value and exposing accordingly. Like regular exposure meters, the results are often a matter of how good you are at understanding what the meter is telling you.

In contrast, the RH Designs (and similar, more sophisticated meters) use shadow and highlight measurements (via a small probe used on the easel) to suggest the proper contrast grade, and then suggest exposure based on the speed and contrast curve for a specific paper batch stored in the memory of the meter (the "calibration" process).

The concept of "f-stop printing" is simply a matter of thiking of print exposure variations in terms of "stops" - just like you would when exposing the film in the camera. As such, it may be easier to learn as a "beginner" than later.

Thus, I agree that a good meter like those from RH Designs can be helpful, and save time. But, I also agree with Dave - understanding the basics (and, thus, what the meter is telling you) is essential.

The Rh Designs meter is the most successful of a bunch of metering methods for printing. They don't completely solve the printing exposure problem, but they are a way to get a usable work print on the first try most of the time (not always, and not usually a final print).

Most print meters work in about the same way. You select a standard negative and work to get a properly exposed print for a given paper. You then measure a zone VI area (the speed point for papers) and set the meter. That gives you a calibration for that exposure time and that paper. (Actually, you may have to try this a few times before you are happy.) When you change to another negative, you keep the same exposure time, measure a zone VI area, and adjust the aperture for the exposure.

How does the Ilford EM-10 meter fit into this? I seem to remember some (Ralph?) saying they had one and it was a big help. I think it's a lot cheaper than the meters described here, and may not do the same things.

As with most tools, it really, really helps if you first know how to do it without the tool. The meter then becomes an aid, a way to get where you decided to go more quickly.

If you rely too heavily on the meter, especially in the area of selecting the proper paper grade (what's that you say? print the early morning fog scene on #4 paper??), you'll be teaching yourself how to make lousy prints in the least amount of time possible.

I have been printing as a hobbiest for well over 35 years and it seems to me I have a sence of the amount of light hitting the easle reflecting back at me to the point that 90% of the time, I can guess the rough exposure that puts me in the ball park. So it seems if you are printing enough, you will eventually come to a point where most of these gagets will be closet fixtures anyway.

I've often wounderd if a hand held exposure meter wouldn't work as a fairly good guide to exposure? Any thoughts on this?