First time darkroom experience, what am I doing wrong?

[RalphLambrecht]

Hello all. I am having trouble with development of paper in my first attempt to set up a darkroom. I will not get into my camera setup or the film development aspect to this adventure unless someone asks.

I set up my film shiny side up in a Beseler Cadet 35 and adjusted the enlarger to get as sharp looking an image onto the frame created by my easel to fit a 5x7 paper sheet as I could. Then taking out a sheet of Ilford Multigrade 5x7 in red light I expose it to make my very first print with 5, 10, 15 and 20 second strips using a Priority Mail envelope for a mask and dip into a 14:1 solution of Ilford Multigrade paper developer for one minute (I later learn it should have been 90 seconds). My image appears (!!!) and then goes completely black (!!!) over the course of 60 seconds before making successive trips to Ilfostop and Kodafix before finishing up with a wash and hang dry. For the next few minutes I wait in the dark for it to dry hopeful that my first image might somehow reappear...but no. My firsy print is just solid black, not the slightest hint of what it was supposed to have been.

Through four more attempts I try different exposure times in the Beseller until I take the daring move of leaving the print in for less time in the developer (since it appears quite nicely after about 20 seconds before disappearing completely into blackness some time after 50 seconds in all previous tries). On the sixth attempt a very light image appears after developing for 30 seconds and exposure for 3/6/9. For this I used a no-name cheaper alternative brand paper to Ilford called Multitone. Next I go for 5/10/15 and 45 seconds of development (half what Ilford says!) and a darker but still discernible image appears on Ilford Multigrade. FWIW Ilford supplies an instruction sheet with their paper, but I can make no sense of it and it seems to have an enlarger far more sophisticated than my little Beseler in mind. The Multitone needless to say has no instructions of any kind.

Long story short through some more experimentation I reach the following tentative conclusions:

• Ilford Multigrade is best developed for 45 seconds, Multitone for 30. Both of these are way below the 90 seconds Ilford calls for when using a 14:1 solution of their Mutligrade paper developer (temperature is as close to 20°C as I can make it).

• An exact count of seconds in how long your paper sits in the developer is very important to how your image will eventually appear.

• The longer the development time the darker the image.

• The longer the exposure time the higher contrast the image.

The Besseler's lens was set to f/8 and I measured 10" from the bottom of the lens to the top of the paper-holding surface of the easel. The Beseler has a 75W PH140 bulb.

So my questions for the forum are as follows (plus a bonus question at the end):

1. Are my development times correct? Is Ilford's spec of 90 seconds way off? Really what should I expect the development times to be (seems to me to be 20-50 seconds).

2. What is a realistic exposure time?

3. While in the end I did manage to create images of some sort they are quite poor, low to very low contrast and with wavey lines which I suspect to be a result of not being able to insert the paper evenly into each tray. What am I doing wrong? BTW I am inserting the paper into the dev, stop and fix upright while washing is upside down.

Bonus question: My Beseller's film holder doesn't seem to be able to hold flat the end exposure of a short length of film. From everything I've seen online it seems people cut a film roll into 5-exposure strips for easy light table viewing and storage in a binder. The film holder has one side which seems appropriate for 35mm but the other is more like the size of a 120! As such the end of a film strip just hangs down through the larger hole (see pictures below). Is my film holder defective or missing something or is it supposed to look like this? Am I only supposed to use full-length film rolls with the Beseller Cadet?

View attachment 260537 View attachment 260538

Iwould keep the dev time constant and experiment with the exposure time fist.find the best exp time to get some detail in the highlights and change the paper grade to get some detail in the shadows. But dev time should always remain constant.

 

[pentaxuser]

Yes it would seem that the safelight may now be the main if not the sole factor and yet for it to turn the paper black it has to be a more serious problem that could be the case based on everything we have been told

I was tempted to say that the OP may have made a not uncommon mistake, especially in the early days of darkroom printing, which is to focus the print at f2.8 and then forget to stop down to say F11/16. However he has mentioned the light being quite dim at f16 so presumably has changed the aperture?

pentaxuser

 

[BGriffin23]

Iwould keep the dev time constant and experiment with the exposure time fist.find the best exp time to get some detail in the highlights and change the paper grade to get some detail in the shadows. But dev time should always remain constant.

I have experimented with exposure times of 2-30 seconds.

Yes it would seem that the safelight may now be the main if not the sole factor and yet for it to turn the paper black it has to be a more serious problem that could be the case based on everything we have been told I was tempted to say that the OP may have made a not uncommon mistake, especially in the early days of darkroom printing, which is to focus the print at f2.8 and then forget to stop down to say F11/16. However he has mentioned the light being quite dim at f16 so presumably has changed the aperture?
pentaxuser

I agree it the most likely culprit right now is the safelight. I will be ordering one of those suggested in reply #20 as well as some new paper.

As to focusing: I have been both focusing and exposing at f/8. Next time around I will try both at f/16 (the bottom of my enlarger's lens' aperture). I mentioned f/16 being dim as this will make it more difficult to resolve details in the enlarged image and thus focus.

 

[glbeas]

As to focusing: I have been both focusing and exposing at f/8. Next time around I will try both at f/16 (the bottom of my enlarger's lens' aperture). I mentioned f/16 being dim as this will make it more difficult to resolve details in the enlarged image and thus focus.

Do you have a focusing finder for under the enlarger? It would make that problem minimal.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/264867681111

 

[koraks]

There's no added value in focusing at f/16 with today's enlarging lenses. It just makes it much more difficult to focus increasing the risk of missing the focus anyway.

I'm not sure if the question was already answered, but your safelight is indeed red, right?

 

[BGriffin23]

There's no added value in focusing at f/16 with today's enlarging lenses. It just makes it much more difficult to focus increasing the risk of missing the focus anyway.

I will be experimenting with various things when the new items come in and I find the time to set up the darkroom again.

I would not assume any bit of my Beseler could be described as "today's" anything.

I'm not sure if the question was already answered, but your safelight is indeed red, right?

Very, very red. Is some other color (amber?) better?

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

My students almost always bring me a black print. Why? Because they missed the bit about stopping the lens down a couple stops first.

 

[Donald Qualls]

I previously posted with a link to the amber LED bulbs I have, which were tested by another Photrio member who provided the link in another thread. MUCH brighter than any red safelight I've used (the eye is much more sensitive as you move from deep red toward yellow-green), and 100% safe for graded and multigrade papers.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Make a print with your safelight turned off, to rule that out.

 

[grain elevator]

There's no reason to stop after one test strip if that one was all off. Go back to the darkroom and expose less. If you're not using multigrade filters (which would swallow some light) you may need very small apertures and short times for 5x7.

 

[pentaxuser]

As to focusing: I have been both focusing and exposing at f/8. Next time around I will try both at f/16 (the bottom of my enlarger's lens' aperture). I mentioned f/16 being dim as this will make it more difficult to resolve details in the enlarged image and thus focus.

Not sure why you are doing this. Focusing and resolving details on the negative projection is best done at max aperture of f2.8 with a grain magnifier and then you use f8/11/16 for the exposure

pentaxuser

 

[BGriffin23]

Not sure why you are doing this. Focusing and resolving details on the negative projection is best done at max aperture of f2.8 with a grain magnifier and then you use f8/11/16 for the exposure
pentaxuser

Because I'm too cheap to buy a grain magnifier the first time out. Have put down enough $$$s on this project thus far. I guess that's one more thing I'll have to get as well. Was interested only in printing some sort of image the first time out without being too concerned with quality. Obviously a totally black print or needing vastly lower development times than the manufacturer suggests to get any sort of image does not count as acceptable even by those modest initial goals.

Noob question: The focus doesn't change between f/4 (the minimum on my enlarger IIRC) and f/16? I seem to recall it does when playing around with it but don't have the Beseler handy at the moment.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Focus shift with aperture change is not unheard of with older enlarging lenses, especially the (originally) less expensive ones.

 

[koraks]

Very, very red. Is some other color (amber?) better?

No, red is good. Red is safe for all b&w papers, unlike amber which fogs for instance fomaspeed and fomabrom.
Btw, leds tend to have smaller secondary emission peaks in the green region; you might want to block those out with an additional red filter. However that doesn't explain your problem,which is much too severe for this to be the cause.

 

[pentaxuser]

OK you don't need a grain focuser for your problem. Focus by eye and then change aperture to f16. Koraks has echoed my point about your safelight, even with a problem, is not likely to be severe enough to give you the total blackness you have described.

Just to be sure, you have tested that your aperture on every click stop gets dimmer all the way to f16? One last thing. Move your enlarge head as far up the column as it will go then place your small easel and print in the middle and try again. The light hitting the baseboard should be much reduced. Can you get hold of a neutral density camera lens filter and place this under the enlarge lens then do test strips again and see what you get. If you can't get a ND filter then at least do the other steps I have suggested

pentaxuser

 

[BGriffin23]

Just to be sure, you have tested that your aperture on every click stop gets dimmer all the way to f16?

It does.

One last thing. Move your enlarge head as far up the column as it will go then place your small easel and print in the middle and try again. The light hitting the baseboard should be much reduced.

Will do. Putting the head far up will generate a very large image IIRC, so only a portion of the film frame will be printed.

Can you get hold of a neutral density camera lens filter and place this under the enlarge lens then do test strips again and see what you get. If you can't get a ND filter then at least do the other steps I have suggested

Will add this to my list of experiments for next time.

 

[Pieter12]

Because I'm too cheap to buy a grain magnifier the first time out. Have put down enough $$$s on this project thus far. I guess that's one more thing I'll have to get as well. Was interested only in printing some sort of image the first time out without being too concerned with quality. Obviously a totally black print or needing vastly lower development times than the manufacturer suggests to get any sort of image does not count as acceptable even by those modest initial goals.

Noob question: The focus doesn't change between f/4 (the minimum on my enlarger IIRC) and f/16? I seem to recall it does when playing around with it but don't have the Beseler handy at the moment.

Focus may shift slightly, depending on the lens. Do you have a VC filter in the enlarger? No filter can mean unmanageably short exposure times. First and foremost you have to get a proper exposure.Then you can hone your focusing skills. By the way, how close is that safelight to your trays and enlarger?

 

[BGriffin23]

Do you have a VC filter in the enlarger? No filter can mean unmanageably short exposure times.

The Beseler is very basic, there is no provision for filters AFAIK. At best I can manually hold an ND filter or something in front the lens while exposing.

By the way, how close is that safelight to your trays and enlarger?

Very close. As I have said in a previous reply the light, a bare bulb, was directly plugged into the timer, which was right next to the enlarger on the top shelf of one of those metal wire shelving units placed into my bathtub. On the second level were the trays, with the dev tray being furthest away, maybe 2-3 feet from the light, while the easel was maybe 1 foot. I have one of those metal bowl reflectors in the basement somewhere and will try to dig that out and bounce the bulb linked to in reply #20 off the wall away from everything next time around to make the light more diffuse.

 

[Pieter12]

The Beseler is very basic, there is no provision for filters AFAIK. At best I can manually hold an ND filter or something in front the lens while exposing.



Very close. As I have said in a previous reply the light, a bare bulb, was directly plugged into the timer, which was right next to the enlarger on the top shelf of one of those metal wire shelving units placed into my bathtub. On the second level were the trays, with the dev tray being furthest away, maybe 2-3 feet from the light, while the easel was maybe 1 foot. I have one of those metal bowl reflectors in the basement somewhere and will try to dig that out and bounce the bulb linked to in reply #20 off the wall away from everything next time around to make the light more diffuse.

1. If you want to have the advantage of printing on MG paper, you will need to use MG filters. The Cadet should have a filter drawer for 3x3 filters above the negative carrier.
2. Your safelight is way too close. And if you end up with one of those bright LED lights it still needs to be at least 3-6 feet (if not more) from the trays and easel.

 

[pentaxuser]

Based on your #43 it may just about be possible for the safelight to be the sole problem I suppose. So add the expose and develop in the total darkness suggestion that has already been made.

pentaxuser

 

[MattKing]

Very, very red.

There is red, and there is red.
If you hold a CD near the bulb, and adjust the angle carefully, you should be able to see a reflection that looks a bit like a rainbow. If it is all red, that is good. If you see spikes of green and blue, your "safelight" isn't safe at all.

Because I'm too cheap to buy a grain magnifier the first time out.

Dollar store, high power reading glasses are your friends. A magnifying glass can also works. But until you get to larger enlargements, leaning down and getting your eyes close to the easel should be good enough - for now.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I will be experimenting with various things when the new items come in and I find the time to set up the darkroom again.

I would not assume any bit of my Beseler could be described as "today's" anything.



Very, very red. Is some other color (amber?) better?

No, dark red is the safest safelight. amber will make it easier for you to see but will fog the paper evenquicker.

 

[BGriffin23]

1. If you want to have the advantage of printing on MG paper, you will need to use MG filters. The Cadet should have a filter drawer for 3x3 filters above the negative carrier.

Ok, where is the filter drawer in this picture?

The curved thing with the silver handle in front is shown in the OP.

I just got one of these and some more Ilford MG, hope everyone agrees I did the right thing.

 

[MattKing]

Note the warning for that bulb - a minimum distance of ten feet - that bulb needs to be diffused and controlled.

 

[BGriffin23]

Note the warning for that bulb - a minimum distance of ten feet - that bulb needs to be diffused and controlled.

Why would they put such a powerful bulb in such a small enlarger? When I opened it up upon first receiving it the only thing between the bulb and the lens except the film carrier shown in the OP was a large lens, flat on one side and hemispherical on the other. Nothing I'd describe as able to diffuse or control the output of the bulb. Do I need another bulb now? What should the wattage be?

smh. This is getting ridiculous.