First darkroom print

[Don_ih]

First of all thank you very much for your advices. All of them counts.

So in resume, lets imagine I'm using fractions of 5 seconds, so in the end I like the exposure achieved at 20 seconds with a filter at grade 2. If I decide I still need to add a bit more contrast I'll just need to add a grade 3 filter, for example? Does this mess with exposure time or only from 4 and 5 filters?

I also read some posts mentioning about split grade printing. It sounds to me something like processing the same file twice in camera raw, one for shadows and other for highlights and then merging them in PS. Does this make sense?

So if my exposure is 20 seconds at grade 2, should I then apply a low grade filter first and then a high one at 10 seconds each? I confess Im a bit confuse with this concept. Im sure it must be something simple, but Im just curious.

Split grade printing is meant to boost contrast by eliminating the muddying of midtones. When you print with a low contrast filter, you have to expose longer to get darker black. In the process, the midtones can get close to black. Very high contrast filtration makes the shadow areas appear first and the midtones can be too bright, and highlights non-existent. You expose the same piece of paper with a high contrast filter for half or three-quarters (I'm being arbitrary) of the time then use a low contrast filter for the remaining time. Or whatever works.

Changing contrast filter from 2 to 3, with Ilford filters, should require no additional time. However, what you were seeing at filtre #2 may have actually not only been too low contrast but also not enough exposure. It's something you need practice to determine. The #5+ Ilford filter requires and additional stop of exposure (or the #4 requires 1 and the #5+ requires 2? You should look it up).

I say you should just jump in and get started.

 

[BGriffin23]

OP: Can you share a picture of that super-portable Zenit enlarger?

I agree - particularly about the fun part.
One caution: for prints, it is best to not re-use Ilfostop or Ilford Rapid Fixer that you have already used for film.
Fixer is designed to be re-used until it is used up. Ilfostop can be reused a bit. But If you are going to re-use chemicals, it is important that you keep the chemicals that have been used on film for film, and chemicals that have been used on prints for prints.

I have be using the same Ilfostop for both film and paper to date.

Sorry to hijack this thread but I have a question of my own: How necessary is the full Ilford filter set? A previous post mentioned you only really need #00 and #5.

 

[Buzz-01]

With the Ilford set you should be good from grade 00 through 3 or 3.5. From 4 onwards you need to add one stop. This is what the filter's manual says:

MULTIGRADE filters are very easy to use: no complicated calculations are needed when changing from one filter to another. The exposure time for filters 00–31/2 is the same; that for filters 4–5 is double.

But this is only true for MGIV RC paper, the new MGRC DeLuxe paper is said to have an increased speed for grades 4 and 5, as can be read on page 2 of this pdf: https://www.ilfordphoto.com/amfile/file/download/file/1954/product/745/

As I don't use Ilford filters I cannot confirm, but this would mean that when using Ilford filters, all grades will have an almost equal sensitivity, eliminating the need to add an extra stop for grade 4 and up.
Anyone who can confirm this from their own experience?

And as for only needing grade 00 and 5, this is true if you only do split-grade printing. When done right, you can get any grade from 00 through 5 with only two filters.

But for convenience and especially when starting out from scratch, I would suggest to get a full filter kit (either Ilford or Foma, depending on your budget). This will allow you to easily learn the difference between grades.
Oh preferrably buy them brand new, since the filters seem to fade over time and I've read that will result in a serious grade shift over time.

 

[MattKing]

So in resume, lets imagine I'm using fractions of 5 seconds, so in the end I like the exposure achieved at 20 seconds with a filter at grade 2. If I decide I still need to add a bit more contrast I'll just need to add a grade 3 filter, for example? Does this mess with exposure time or only from 4 and 5 filters?

The Ilford filters are speed matched on a particular near highlight tone.
Practically, this means that if you have a print with well illuminated Caucasian skin tones, changing the filter from 2 to 3 will yield another print where the skin tones appear unchanged, but the shadows will go darker and, to a smaller extent, the bright highlights go lighter, and the contrast of all the tones (how much each tone is differentiated from the adjacent different tone) is increased.
This means that your second, higher contrast print will be at least close to being right. For that reason, I usually try to get my print contrast right before I do my really finicky fine adjustments - those 1/6 stop adjustments referred to above.
As a beginner, you probably won't need or want to do those final, finicky adjustments. You will get more value out of increasing your experience by getting to a good print, then going to the next negative.
As for split grade printing, it is a really good system whose main benefit is that it permits you to apply different contrasts to different parts of a print. I am of two minds about whether it is a good idea for beginners to start with split grade printing.
Like many people here, I learned without knowing of split grade printing - if it existed when I was learning to work with variable contrast materials, it wasn't well known.
My current recommendation is to learn how to print using a more classic approach, and then consider adding split grade techniques later to improve and refine your techniques.

 

[grain elevator]

Do your research about split grade printing. I had little difficulty getting it when I started, but different minds work in a different ways. Enough has been written about how it's done. If you understand it and it appeals, go for it with just the two filters, if not, start with a full set. However: Split grade will only work well if your enlarger allows changing the filters while remaining stable, so that the two projections remain at the same place, or you'll introduce unsharpness. I suppose under-the-lens filters are the safer bet with a wobbly enlarger.

 

[Luis Filipe]

I finally received my enlarger (Zenith UPA 5), its a beautiful piece of equipment. Looks really well conserved and its fully functional.

It feels a bit unstable as it needs to be assembled from inside the suitcase, but it works for me in terms of room as I don't have many space and have to transform my toilet every time I'll need to print. But I think for starting it's pretty well.

I just need to get a few more stuff and will be ready to start.

 

[BGriffin23]

... as I don't have many space and have to transform my toilet every time I'll need to print.

I feel you.

I finally received my enlarger (Zenith UPA 5), its a beautiful piece of equipment. Looks really well conserved and its fully functional.
I just need to get a few more stuff and will be ready to start.

Exciting! Good luck!

 

[Bikerider]

Ilford MGIV filters - or I guess they now have MGV filters to go with the MGV paper.
Ilford or Foma or Arista (probably Foma?) RC paper. Buy 5x7 or 8x10. You can get the liquid Ilford Multigrade develper - so you only need to mix a batch you use. You can use water or water+indicator stop as the stop bath. You can buy liquid rapid fixer - I use EcoPro when I buy it (I normally mix it). It's about 1 or 1.5 minutes to fix in liquid rapid fix mixed 1:4 with water.
Making prints is my favourite part of film photography and the reason I use film at all.

There is to be no change with the filters MG4 will work just as well with MG5. It is the middle grades are affected differently with making the transition between G1/G2 and Gd3 being more equal.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Thanks very much.

About the chemicals can I just use the stop and fixer I use for developing? Ilfostop and Rapid Fixer?

The lens thats coming with it its a Will Wetzler Wilton 1: 3.5/50. Its seems something plastic according to my research.

The rest Ill have to find out when trying. So does it make any sense saying that the smaller i do my print the easier will be to avoid those issues you mentioned?

Yes, You can use the same stop and fixer brand but, don't use the same working solution for both; especially don't process film in chemicals you used to process prints before; the other way around is ok.

 

[Luis Filipe]

Just found something funny(or not) about this enlarger(Zenith UPA 5). This comes in a suitcase where you need to insert the column and the actual suitcase base is where the light is projected.
It seems that this function only works for auto-focus and for larger prints you have to rotate the column 180º and project the light on something lower.
Well the thing is that I cannot keep the projection in focus when pulling the enlarger head up from about a third of the column, even after doing all this:

The auto-focus mechanism is pre-set at the
factory. To be sure that the assembly has not
received any damage in transit it should be
checked as follows:-
1. Rack the enlarger head down as far as it
will go using the control knob (18), fixing it
in place with the locking knob (16).
2. Rack manual focus control (3) down as far
as it will go, locking it in this position with
knob (C—fig. 3).
3. Press the front of the negative carrier down
to enable a strip of negatives to be inserted
with the emulsion (matt) side facing
towards the baseboard. Release pressure
on the carrier switch on the lamp using the
on/off switch (21). Move the red swing filter
(2) to one side, making certain the cap has
been removed from the lens.
4. With the column set In its lowest position in
the support flange (22), and with a sheet of
paper on the baseboard to simulate the
photographic paper, the lens should now
focus correctly.
5. If the image Is found to be out of focus this
can be corrected as follows: turn the
adjusting screw (A—fig 2) in either direction
to obtain the sharpest focus. Before
attempting to turn the adjusting screw, first
loosen the locking screw (8-419 2) situated
directly below it. After correct focus has
been obtained, tighten up the locking screw
(B—fig 2) once more, then release the head
locking knob (16) and rack enlarger head,
using control knob (18), to the top of the
column. Now check that the lens is still in
focus, bearing in mind that with the
increased magnification the image will
obviously appear grainier.

When turning the column 180º I can keep the projection in focus for bigger enlargements but only if using a much lower base, like the floor. Its seems that I can only focus moving the enlarger head up to a third of the column on both sides.

Am I missing anything really silly here or does it sounds like its faulty?

 

[mehguy]

If you are on a budget for filters, there is a seller on ebay that selling NOS Varycon Filters. They were made by Efke, a now defunct manufacturer of film and paper. I'd recommend these over the Foma set since they're speed corrected and are the same price. Only issue is they don't have the half grade increments like the Ilford, but neither does the Foma set. I use mine with Foma paper and they work great. I'd grab a set before they sell out, but there seems to be plenty of stock available and the sold counter has barely moved from when I bought my set a couple of years ago.

And the seller is taking offers too, so it might even end up being a little cheaper

 

[Luis Filipe]

If you are on a budget for filters, there is a seller on ebay that selling NOS Varycon Filters. They were made by Efke, a now defunct manufacturer of film and paper. I'd recommend these over the Foma set since they're speed corrected and are the same price. Only issue is they don't have the half grade increments like the Ilford, but neither does the Foma set. I use mine with Foma paper and they work great. I'd grab a set before they sell out, but there seems to be plenty of stock available and the sold counter has barely moved from when I bought my set a couple of years ago.

And the seller is taking offers too, so it might even end up being a little cheaper

I would have to cut them down as my enlarger takes 6x6 filters.

Do I need to increase time exposure if adding a grade with these ones? I have understood that not all filters works as the Ilford ones.

 

[mehguy]

I would have to cut them down as my enlarger takes 6x6 filters.

Do I need to increase time exposure if adding a grade with these ones? I have understood that not all filters works as the Ilford ones.

These filters will be too small then for your enlarger. These are 3 1/2 by 3 1/2 inches. They work the same as the Ilford ones. Times for 0-3 are the same but when going to a higher contrast like 4 or 5 you need to double.

 

[ParkerSmithPhoto]

As I'm starting from scratch which type of paper and developer you would recommend and also any specific brand to buy a set of filters (the drawer holds 6x6 filters)?

Your choice of developers isn't terribly significant. I use Ilford MG developer because it's almost always in stock when I order; Dektol often isn't. The Ilford is a very convenient liquid.

Suggest you use Ilford rapid fix and odorless stop bath as well.

The MOST IMPORTANT thing starting out is to use RC paper. It's inexpensive and will get you up to speed much quicker than if you have to worry about washing and flattening fiber prints.

Also, START SMALL. It's unreal how many people want to start snapping off 16x20 prints when they are just starting. It's just that much more expensive and time consuming. Get a box of 5x7 or 8x10 RC and you'll great.

 

[Luis Filipe]

If you are on a budget for filters, there is a seller on ebay that selling NOS Varycon Filters. They were made by Efke, a now defunct manufacturer of film and paper. I'd recommend these over the Foma set since they're speed corrected and are the same price. Only issue is they don't have the half grade increments like the Ilford, but neither does the Foma set. I use mine with Foma paper and they work great. I'd grab a set before they sell out, but there seems to be plenty of stock available and the sold counter has barely moved from when I bought my set a couple of years ago.

And the seller is taking offers too, so it might even end up being a little cheaper

These filters will be too small then for your enlarger. These are 3 1/2 by 3 1/2 inches. They work the same as the Ilford ones. Times for 0-3 are the same but when going to a higher contrast like 4 or 5 you need to double.

I mean 6x6cm.

Then it sound great. The only down side seems to be not having half grades, but might be another way to compensate that?

 

[ParkerSmithPhoto]

I would also suggest NOT going down the split filter rabbit hole. If your negatives are properly exposed and developed, you simply need to select the appropriate filter for your desired contrast and your print will be 90% completed.

 

[mehguy]

I mean 6x6cm.

Then it sound great. The only down side seems to be not having half grades, but might be another way to compensate that?

I guess instead you could try getting a color printing filter set (freestyle photo sells a set), and match the C, Y, and M filters with the values on the datasheet for each contrast grade and the half steps in between. Take this with a grain of salt though. I've never actually tried this or have heard anyone who's used this "method" for controlling contrast. In theory it should work, but perhaps maybe someone more knowledgeable could chime in whether there will be issues with this.

 

[Luis Filipe]

Trying to get back to my previous question (maybe a silly one) does anyone know the reason why I am only able to focus until about a third of the enlarger column from the base? Then if I lift the entire enlarger to a higher position in order to project the negative on a lower surface, like the floor, I can have it larger and on focus quiet well.

Is this optical characteristic or problem?

Shouldn't I be able to achieve larger areas in focus just by taking the enlarger head up instead of the entire base?

To remember that the enlarger its a Zenith UPA 5 and the column is attached in to a suitcase that allows me to rotate the head 180º. The lens its a Will. Wetzlar Wilon 1: 3.5 / 50.

This is happening with 35mm negatives.

 

[BGriffin23]

Trying to get back to my previous question (maybe a silly one) does anyone know the reason why I am only able to focus until about a third of the enlarger column from the base? Then if I lift the entire enlarger to a higher position in order to project the negative on a lower surface, like the floor, I can have it larger and on focus quiet well.

Is this optical characteristic or problem?

Shouldn't I be able to achieve larger areas in focus just by taking the enlarger head up instead of the entire base?

To remember that the enlarger its a Zenith UPA 5 and the column is attached in to a suitcase that allows me to rotate the head 180º. The lens its a Will. Wetzlar Wilon 1: 3.5 / 50.

This is happening with 35mm negatives.

Not quite sure how your enlarger focuses, but mine do so by adjusting the bellows. Does your's have a bellows?

EDIT: Found some pictures of the manual for that enlarger. Picture 2, item # 17 says its the manual focusing wheel.

 

[Luis Filipe]

Not quite sure how your enlarger focuses, but mine do so by adjusting the bellows. Does your's have a bellows?

EDIT: Found some pictures of the manual for that enlarger. Picture 2, item # 17 says its the manual focusing wheel.

What I found meanwhile is that using the suitcase as a base you can only use auto-focus. So it says that with auto-focus only allows a magnification of 2.5x to 8x.

What size is a x8 magnification from a 35mm negative using a 50mm lens? So maybe like this I can check if its is normal.

 

[MattKing]

What size is a x8 magnification from a 35mm negative using a 50mm lens? So maybe like this I can check if its is normal.

8" x 12" = 20 cm x 30 cm.

What I found meanwhile is that using the suitcase as a base you can only use auto-focus. So it says that with auto-focus only allows a magnification of 2.5x to 8x.

Is there a possibility that it is actually saying that auto-focus only works between 2.5x and 8x, and outside that range you must manually focus?

 

[Luis Filipe]

8" x 12" = 20 cm x 30 cm.

Is there a possibility that it is actually saying that auto-focus only works between 2.5x and 8x, and outside that range you must manually focus?

Yes, but with auto-focus I can't get even close to a 7x5 in focus.

Then when turning the head for manual and projecting in a lower base I can get bigger sizes in focus but always with the head till about one third of the column.

 

[Luis Filipe]

Another (probably silly) question...does any timer fit any enlarger?

 

[mehguy]

Another (probably silly) question...does any timer fit any enlarger?

Yes. An enlarger timer just toggles the output of the power outlet with a timer. Really just a light switch but attached to a timer.

 

[MattKing]

Another (probably silly) question...does any timer fit any enlarger?

Mostly.
There are some enlargers/light sources (like the Ilford Multigrade models) that have specialized control boxes that control time and contrast - you can only use those boxes with those enlargers/light sources.
You can also run into timers that are designed for someplace like the UK, which can't be used easily with North American plugs or power.