Extreme Contrast with MG Classic

[Thomas Bertilsson]

I'll add one more possibility: Bleach and redevelop the negative in a staining developer. I do this all the time to up contrast on weak negatives. The procedure is to use a rehalogenating bleach of potassium ferricyanide and potassium bromide. Bleach the negative to completion and then redevelop it in a staining developer like PMK or Pyrocat. The silver image is redeveloped along with the stain image that adds extra contrast. Everything can be done in room light.

Best,

Doremus

Doremus,

My experience with Pyro staining developers is that sometimes with variable contrast papers I actually get less contrast due to the stain. Would your technique above possibly be more meant for use with Graded papers? I've used papers like Kentmere Bromide and Fotokemika Emaks with Pyrocat-MC and PMK negatives and saw a marked contrast increase using those developers, but noticed the opposite when printing the same negatives with papers like Ilford MGIV and MG Classic.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

The pyro technique would be more ideal with graded papers, but it should work well with VC papers. Depending on the film, PMK tends to produce a mask that has a greenish element to it, and also inherently seems to produce a long shoulder. Neither of those characteristics are necessarily ideal for this process, but there are other staining developer options which might work better. One is WD2H, which is designed specifically for expansion.

The process can also be repeated, which further increases contrast. I've never tried it, but it should work well.

The color makes sense, thinking about how VC paper is constructed with its combination of emulsions and their light sensitivity.
The Pyrocat negatives tend to have a brown stain, not at all as green as with PMK.

 

[Doremus Scudder]

At the risk of hijacking the thread: Since we're debunking myths here, I think the old, "pyro stain produces less contrast on VC papers" myth should go too. Maybe there's a graduated contrast effect with no filter, but think about it a minute, a green stain under magenta light passes even less light than a neutral-colored negative would. If anything, there should be more contrast in the denser areas of the negative with the stain than without it. The effect is, since magenta light has no green component, to pass blue only, but even less of it.

Try this mental experiment: take a #2 contrast filter and make a print. Make the same print with a # 5 filter (it'll be contrastier). Then sandwich the #2 filter (representing pyro stain) together with a #5 filter and make a print. It's going to end up matching the print made with just the #5 filter but will take more exposure.

Strong magenta filtration with a pyro stain should result in the same, or even more, contrast as a negative without stain. The problem is, there is no easy way to design a test to show this. VC papers don't respond the same way as graded papers, stained negs don't have the same distribution of tones as non-stained, etc.

I used to believe that the stain had a contrast-reducing effect and went round and round about it with Nicholas Linden till he finally convinced me that there is no way to definitively show that this is true.

Best,

Doremus

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

At the risk of hijacking the thread: Since we're debunking myths here, I think the old, "pyro stain produces less contrast on VC papers" myth should go too. Maybe there's a graduated contrast effect with no filter, but think about it a minute, a green stain under magenta light passes even less light than a neutral-colored negative would. If anything, there should be more contrast in the denser areas of the negative with the stain than without it. The effect is, since magenta light has no green component, to pass blue only, but even less of it.

Try this mental experiment: take a #2 contrast filter and make a print. Make the same print with a # 5 filter (it'll be contrastier). Then sandwich the #2 filter (representing pyro stain) together with a #5 filter and make a print. It's going to end up matching the print made with just the #5 filter but will take more exposure.

Strong magenta filtration with a pyro stain should result in the same, or even more, contrast as a negative without stain. The problem is, there is no easy way to design a test to show this. VC papers don't respond the same way as graded papers, stained negs don't have the same distribution of tones as non-stained, etc.

I used to believe that the stain had a contrast-reducing effect and went round and round about it with Nicholas Linden till he finally convinced me that there is no way to definitively show that this is true.

Best,

Doremus

I can only tell you what I noticed in my prints, which is why I asked.

 

[silvergelatin]

Dokumol at 1+4 dilution?

This actually helped a bit. I've been waiting for my next shipment of Dokumol, and found an old unopened bottle today hidden away in the corner. I drained out 500ml from my Nova and added in straight concentrate. Got a good contrast boost from that. Not huge, but made a nice difference. I'll be ditching 1+6 going forward and mixing 1L into 1 gallon of working solution. Expensive this way, but worth it.

Has anyone tried doing a quick pre-dev dip in a tray of straight concentrate? Would it in theory give the shadows a head start, or affect all tones equally?

 

[Doc W]

I just bought a box of the Ilford Classic FB paper, and am liking the results so far. I have a few images for which I'd like to get an abnormally high, very graphic contrast. Grade 5 isn't doing it. I'm using a Leica Focomat and Dokumol developer, so that should already be pretty hard. I'm looking for the quickest and easiest way to squeeze out an extra grade or so.

I've read on here about benzotriazole. Would that work with this particular developer and paper? I've also tried bleaching, but I can never quite get the bleach to confine its action to the highlights. I've used straight PF on a partly washed print, and the shadows came up as well. Maybe too much TF-4 left in the paper? I'd rather spike the developer, as it is much simpler, if it will work.

Thanks!

If you already up to the highest grade you can get with that paper, I think you should just try another paper. Ilford Classic (and the older MGIV) does not let you get really high contrast (comparatively speaking) . Another paper would be the short route, and likely less frustrating.

 

[David Allen]

The description of Dokumol is more akin to a developer that produces great gradation. You might wish to seek out a paper developer with stronger contrast.

Dokumol at 1 + 6 is a very contrasty and hard working developer. With most fibre papers you will get the best results developing between 3.5 - 4.5 minutes.

If that does not give you enough contrast you can try progressively adding small amounts of Caustic Soda to the Dokumol. HOWEVER, you need to be extremely careful using Caustic Soda as it is corrosive.

Bests,

David.
www.dsallen.de

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

The description of Dokumol is more akin to a developer that produces great gradation. You might wish to seek out a paper developer with stronger contrast.

Dokumol at 1 + 6 is a very contrasty and hard working developer. With most fibre papers you will get the best results developing between 3.5 - 4.5 minutes.

If that does not give you enough contrast you can try progressively adding small amounts of Caustic Soda to the Dokumol. HOWEVER, you need to be extremely careful using Caustic Soda as it is corrosive.

Bests,

David.
www.dsallen.de

Yes, it looks as though this description I found on Freestyle's web site is not representative of what the developer actually does. I apologize if my misinformation caused confusion. Just for the record.

 

[David Allen]

Did the OP find a solution I wonder?

David.
www.dsallen.de

 

[silvergelatin]

Did the OP find a solution I wonder?

David.
www.dsallen.de

Stronger Dokumol dilution has helped. I'm going to experiment with rephotographing a bit as well. That kind of opens up a whole new creative avenue that can be great or terrible. I'll find out soon.

 

[M Carter]

Man, I'd say give lith a try before permanently altering the neg. If you want to tone down the lith effect, do room temp and a pretty dilute mix. (Of course, the paper has to be lithable to go there...)