To OP:
Getting easily printable negs is dependant on various factors. Primarily your neg development, your subject metering and your enlarger filtration.
Let me explain further. Assuming you are using roll film then each of your subjects will likely have different subject brightness range. Some will be very similar and some may be several stops different but they are all on the same roll of film. Say you have one image which is a 5 stop range and another which is an 8 stop range which is not unusual. Well the highlight and shadow densities on the resulting negs will be different so they will require different print times.
If it were possible to make it happen that the highlight or shadow densities were always the same on all negatives then printing times would be the same(or close) or would they? Well no they wouldn't, especially if the shadow densities were always same. If highlight densities are all the same then things become much easier. The reason why is a little complex to get your head around and is dependant on several factors. Firstly your light meter is trying to put the exposure somewhere in the middle of the curve but is assuming the curve covers a 7 1/3 stop subject brightness range which is the average but does not match a 5 stop or an 8 stop or some other subject brightness range. So unless your subject brightness range is 7 1/3 stops then the result will not be in the middle of the curve and will be further from the middle of the curve the longer or shorter the subject brightness range is from the average of 7 1/3 stops.
This is where a spot meter and properly calibrated film dev combined with print calibration comes into play as it allows you to be much more precise with metering to ensure that your shadow or highlight negative densities are fairly consistent.
Now is it better to make negative shadow densities consistent or negative highlight densities the same. Well my argument is that it is better to make highlight densities the same. Arguments rage over this but here is why I think consistent highlight densities are the better target...
Enlarger filtration when using Y+M or Ilford filters are designed to be speed matched. This means a specific negative density will remain the same print tone when printed even when you are changing contrast settings. Negative densities above or below that negative density will get lighter or darker as you change contrast settings. This is tricky becasue the speed point of your enlarger filtration is unknown to you without doing some involved testing to find it. My durst L1200 has a speed point on Ilford papers of a middle grey but I have tested other enalrgers and their speed points are at a different negative density and mostly the different grade settings are not speed matched very well anyway. This is where ilford filters come into play because they are very well speed matched across all grades on a known highlight density. I have never come across any enlarger which is speed matched on a shadow density. This last point is important because if you work out a print time for a shadow area then when you change contrast setting the print time will always need to be changed. However, if you use Ilford filters and do your taking subject light metering on a highlight value (zone 7 or 8 in zone terms) then you will have consistent negative highlight densities which are close to the speed match point of your Ilford contrast filters. This means you can set print time on the highlight and change print contrast to adjust shadow tone and contrast without having to adjust print time nearly as much as you would if you were using a shadow area for your subject light metering. The result is much easier printing with far more consistent print times.
I have set out in the following method a basic practical test procedure for doing this which is based on Adams zone system but will require a spot meter to be able to do it with some repeatable accuracy. People will argue about this and start throwing in different procedures to confuse you so you will have to take your pick but following works very well. The only caveat to it is that for a subject brightness range of more than 10 stops you resort to metering a shadow instead of a highlight just to get everything on film but the vast majority of subjects will be less than 10 stop SBR so I wouldn't worry about that too much.
To sum up, using ilford filters and paper combined with a spot meter and metering a highlight value of around zone 7 or 8 will produce very easily printable negatives if you have calibrated using following method which refers to Adams book "The Negative".
Zone System - Find EI and dev time without resorting to sensitometry In Adams book "The Negative" he shows on page 50 a series of zone patches which are photographs of a piece of hardboard. This quick methodology gives you a suggested starting point telling you how to work out your EI and dev time for the zone system without resorting to sensitometry.
So Look at Adams The Negative on page 50, read what it says and reproduce those test patches yourself and actually print them for the visual proof. This print test is very important and should always be done on fresh (new) paper and not some old stuff that has been lying around for years.
As a starting point use half the film ISO speed, use a standard developer and reduce the recommended dev time by 30%. You may need to tweak that but start at 30% reduction of recommended dev time.
When you do your printing of the test patches, use the zone 1 negative to determine print time. Produce a test strip from it until you find the step which produces the first perceptibly lighter than black step (after dry down). Then use that time to produce each of zone 0 thru 10 patches.
Notes:
- Put camera about 6 feet from a piece hardboard (or textured wall such as rough rendering or possibly brick wall but we are looking for some texture in it) so hardboard fills the frame. And focus on hardboard accurately. Hardboard must be evenly illuminated and texture in it visible. Light must stay constant during the test which should be done in daylight.
- Meter hardboard and close down 5 stops and expose. Then open up 1 stop and expose. Repeat until you have exposed at all zones upto and including zone 10. So you will have 11 negatives zone 0 thru zone 10.
- Paper max black obtained in a normal print is not as black as the paper will actually go if you over print it. It is for this reason you MUST NOT use the zone 0 negative to work out print time for each patch. Adams uses zone 5 negative to get print time. I strongly recommend using zone 1 negative (We are not trying to reproduce a gray card on zone 5 by doing this test so don't try). You print a test strip of the zone 1 neg from black to showing tone in one second increments and then after dry down you find the first exposure which is just perceptibly visible compared to black exposures. The time for that exposure is what you will use to print all the patches.
- When you print each patch you really should use the exact same print exposures you used in the test strip of the zone 1 neg. e.g if you used 8 1 second exposures to find the step then you should use 8 1 second expsoures to print each patch.
- I would print the patches using your preferred paper and developer and use NO FILTRATION. However, you may find its better to use your Y+M grade 2 setting if you are not intending to use Ilford filters for printing later on. I strongly recommend the use of Ilford filters for ease of printing.
- If you find the zone 10 patch print has some tone in it then you will need to increase your neg dev by another 10% next time. If you find your zone 9 neg has no tone in the print, then you will need to reduce your neg dev by another 10% next time, so by 40% of manufacturers recommended time.
- When inspecting your negs, the zone 0 neg should have a small tad of density above fb+fog density. If it does not have density above fb+fog then reduce your EI by another 1/3 stop next time. So if you were using 400 film and started with 200, then use 160 next time.
- That just about covers it. You'll learn a lot by doing this. Not only what your EI is but also confirm your development time is correct for a 10 stop SBR range as the zone system teaches. And be able to see that what is being taught in the Zone System is actually happening. i.e. full textural detail in zone 3 and zone 7 etc.
- What you need to know is that the typical closed subject (no sky) is less than a 10 Stop SBR, maybe only 5 to 7 stops of SBR. However it is simple to increase printing contrast to produce a print with some bite in it from a slightly soft negative. Much simpler than trying to take contrast out of an overly hard negative, so 10 stops range is good as it covers most scenarios even though it may give slightly soft negs depending on SBR.
- The beauty of doing this totally practical evaluation is that it is calibrating to your meter, lens and shutter all in one go so you don't have to worry about any of the usual stuff that people like to throw in to complicate things such as flare and densitometry. Also, for the vast majority of your shots you will have some lens extension and focussing from 6 feet will include that in your calibration so you don't have to consider it when out in the field. If you do happen to focus further away when you are out in the field then you will get a tad of extra exposure which won't harm at all and in fact gives a small safety margin to guard against underexpsoing zone 0.
- When in the field with your trusty spot meter, meter and expsoe for a highlight and not a shadow. Use a zone 7 or 8 highlight. Only meter and expose for a shadow if the subject brightness range is greater than 10 stops. Doing this will make your printing much easier allowing you to increase print contrast without fear of blocking shadows, epsecially if you are using Ilford print contrast filters.
- Finally, when printing a neg you do a test strip across a negative highlight (zone 7 or 8) that you metered when taking the shot and set print time for that tone in the print.
This methodolgy is particulaly good for roll film users. It does really require a spot meter but you can get by with an incident meter.
Go enjoy and don't let the people with their sensitometry agendas ruin your day. None of it is necessary if you follow this practical evaluation methodolgy to finding EI and dev time for zone system.
OK so if you want to go down the sensitometry route then you can but not without a densitometer and it won't make your photography any better or more accurate than the above. And remember what John Sexton is quoted as saying: "It's a zone system and NOT a pinpoint system".
I'm aware that the light source affects exposure so changing that could change exposure.. Only difference was paper.
