FIBRE PAPER - DRY DOWN

John Sexton believes that dry down is largely a myth. Many other top professionals say the same thing. The key, according to them is that the light you use for inspecting wet prints be at the right level. Also, you shouldn't view wet prints with fluorescent lights because it excites he optical brighteners in many papers and then you wonder where the brilliant whites went when you view the prints under different light sources.

I used to reduce my printing times to compensate for dry down and my Zone VI voltage regulator even has a dry down feature but I haven't used it in years since adjusting my wet print viewing light level to a lower level. If you are experiencing dry down, you may want to try reducing the level of your wet print viewing light. The weak thing about this method, IMO, is that different papers experience more or less dry down so it is really most useful if you only use a couple types of paper...which I do.

John Sexton demonstrated his wet print viewing method in LensWork Extended and he discusses the whole issue of dry down in that video.

IMO, dry down is clearly real but it can be compensated for by using Sexton's method. But either method works. A good experiment to see how much dry down a particular paper experiences is to do what Ansel Adams did. Make a print and tear it in half in the middle of an area of highlight detail - like clouds, white wood, etc. Dry one half in a microwave oven and then hold it up to the wet half of the same print. If you are experiencing dry down, it will be easily seen using this method. You can also use this procedure to quickly determine how much dry down compensation you should use for any particular.

ZoneIII said:

John Sexton believes that dry down is largely a myth. Many other top professionals say the same thing.

Click to expand...

The test is so easy that anyone who wants to test "professionals'" views can try it. Test your favorite paper once and you'll know it for that paper forever, and not have to rely on viewing each print. It becomes mechanical.

I have several hundred prints testing dry-down factors for different papers. I sure can see it. But maybe I'm wrong. The article writing it up is available as a free download on my web site.

Yep, I'm spoiled to the microwave as well---since my darkroom is my kitchen, I haven't far to go.

I always put my fb prints in a filled aquarium on the wall.
No problem with dry down times...

Dry down is certainly not a myth when dealing with platinum prints and carbon prints...but then it affects the shadows as well as highlights in those processes. In my workflow all examination of the wet prints is done in the same light the dry prints are examined under. As far as I can tell, if the paper and/or gelatin shrinks in the drying process, one is going to have dry down. The number of dark particles (platinum, carbon or whatever) per square inch goes up.

Vaughn

I have run thru a "dry down” test to night.
I wonder, is that effect individual, or is it a constant effect for every batch of paper prodused?

I know there are a lot of different, and individual, factors that influence the finale print. But will that make any difference for the dry down effect? I.e. as long I develop the test prints with consistent, will not the difference between the dry and the wet print is a constant factor?

Regards
- OM

OMU said:

I have run thru a "dry down” test to night.
I wonder, is that effect individual, or is it a constant effect for every batch of paper prodused?

I know there are a lot of different, and individual, factors that influence the finale print. But will that make any difference for the dry down effect? I.e. as long I develop the test prints with consistent, will not the difference between the dry and the wet print is a constant factor?

Regards
- OM

Click to expand...

I believe, if I recall correctly, if you read Les McLean's article (on his web site) on dry-down, he mentions that he will test the same brand of paper at least once maybe twice per year. Point being is that if you use the same paper over a long period of time, you should test periodically to see that the batch you currently have is consistent with your prior testing.

Cporter;
Thanks for your answer.
I got -7% for Ilford MG RC and – 9% for Ilford MG FB. I wonder if you took run true a test with the same batch of paper, would you get the same factors?

If it’s an individual factor, each one of us must do the test every time Ilford comes with a knew batch of paper, otherwise Ilford could test it and print it n the datasheet. (And I only ad to program it in to my StopClock….)

Regards
- OM

coiffuring the test strips...

Me too, a morbid fear of percentage calculations persuades me to use a hairdryer on my FB test strips. Takes a little longer, but worth it in my opinion as it gives a "real" visual check. I've also looked at them in the broad daylight of the following day, and judged the exposure time from those conditions, but for me being a night-printer this usually means setting up the darkroom all over again, so it can take two nights to get a good print.... ah, well....

I use kentmere fb paper and I also see a difference between a dried picture and a wet one.
But what also counts is the red light.

when using 'plastic' paper i make a picture look ok. (check under 5000K light).
next day when I look at the print, I often think the highlights are to soft.
So what I do now is a -10% on time after the test strips look ok (dry).

I use two different lights to view my prints. I use a bright light to examine for defects and then a second light that is set for the illumination level that the prints will be displayed under. One cause of dry down can be an overly bright inpection light. Take a light reading of the anticipated illumination for the viewing of the prints. Buy a lamp dimmer so that that level of illumination can be achieved in the darkroom. This by itself went a long way towards solving the problem for me.

I see that you are using a warmtone paper. If your are going to toner in Thiorea with bleach & redevelopment, the bleaching will lighten your whites somewhat. It matbe that bleaching for toning will lighten whites with other toners but I have only worked with the bleach & redevelopment with thiorea. I tone with thiourea as a matter of course but I am using a neutral toned paper.

Hi,

adding to Claires comments I can strongly recommend Ferris bleach and Selenium toner - this combination should certainly be able to transform your dull dried-down prints into something much more interesting. And this process is of course done in full roomlight, so it is relatively easy to control.

This treatment actually requires you to overexpose by 1/4 - 1/2 step, since both the bleaching and toner will brighten the image, so you should have a good starting point.

Treat the print in weak Farmer's bleach (or Ferri) for a short while, move to the washer BEFORE it has brightened to the point you want and wash for 5 minutes. It will brighten somewhat more in the washer until all bleach is washed away. Then let it sit in Selenium toner 1:10 or so. After a few minutes, you should see the print change in appearance and color, where the midtones will turn into a really nice chocolate hue - creating a split tone image that can be very beautiful. Works great with warmtone fiber papers like Ilford WT, so use your dull prints to experiment!

Both Farmer's and Selenium keeps really well in bottles, and are great to have at hand in the darkroom.

/Henrik