Help for m800

[angela lucari]

Not bad for the first print Angela!
It looks like your negative is underexposed at least 1 to 1 ½ f stop and there is some univenes of development and fingerprints on the printing paper or dirt on the negative.
Did you use camera TTL light meter to figure out exposure?

Yes, I used a camera ttl light meter on Canon A-1 camera.

 

[angela lucari]

Not bad for the first print Angela!
It looks like your negative is underexposed at least 1 to 1 ½ f stop and there is some univenes of development and fingerprints on the printing paper or dirt on the negative.
Did you use camera TTL light meter to figure out exposure?

• Thank you!
however, I must confess that there is an artifice of development (the sky)
I try to explain
I cut the roll badly , at the end of an epic that I am not here to detail,so I charged two spirals. In one 3/4 of a roll and in the other the rest. But in the while,I had prepared the development only for 1 spiral ... in the middle of development I notice this oversight then, after the necessary minutes I overturned the tank and I shaken it, being careful not to continue the development also to the previous one (I shaken very little up down but I rotated), all this for another 2 minutes. ,I acted on intuition, a bit panicked because I really cared about this roll! The other photos, those of the 3/4 roll are safe and well developed.
Unfortunately, I always develop and print in the evening and I must admit that I am too tired and easily lose concentration.
However, I am satisfied because in addition to having saved the development, I acted with determination and cold blood thinking about what I had to do in order not to totally destroy an entire roll.
For the print I exposed to 12 sec (after a traditional scaling test) masking on the right (more in the lower part) for about 6 seconds. I added 2 seconds left to the sky masking the rest. Totally 14 sec. I used a filter multigrade 3.5 f8.

 

[Craig75]

View attachment 295309

That's an excellent image.

It's moody and atmospheric- not easy to achieve either in camera or in the print but you've captured it and printed it very well.

Be patient and with practise and discipline you will remove any development problems.

 

[gorbas]

Angela, it's always better to use full capacity of the tank even you develop just roll of the film on the reel. That way you have the same agitation of the developer in the tank.
Also when are you using TTL light meter in the camera in situations like in this picture, point camera down, away from the sky, determining exposure and then recompose and take picture.That way brightness of the sky will less influence your measurement.
There are lots of things to learn, but just be patient and do not lose interest in it.

 

[ruilourosa]

You are in the beginning, stick with what you have and correct your procedures.
I have a similar enlarger and i was used to condensor head from my laborator 1000, now i have just diffuser heads.
I note that i now have to develop a little more and i can use a sharper developer like rodinal, fx37 or even beutler or fx1 without having a too harsh image.
The lens that you use is of great importance, try newer and 6 elements, i can advise you el Nikkor 50mm 2.8, the newer model.
Some books will be good to read... Adams, vestal, ctein, thornton, anchell, rudman, graves... But first you could get a older copy of Basic photography from Langford.

 

[angela lucari]

Angela, it's always better to use full capacity of the tank even you develop just roll of the film on the reel. That way you have the same agitation of the developer in the tank.
Also when are you using TTL light meter in the camera in situations like in this picture, point camera down, away from the sky, determining exposure and then recompose and take picture.That way brightness of the sky will less influence your measurement.
There are lots of things to learn, but just be patient and do not lose interest in it.

Thank you so much! You are very kind in giving me these valuable suggestions.

 

[angela lucari]

You are in the beginning, stick with what you have and correct your procedures.
I have a similar enlarger and i was used to condensor head from my laborator 1000, now i have just diffuser heads.
I note that i now have to develop a little more and i can use a sharper developer like rodinal, fx37 or even beutler or fx1 without having a too harsh image.
The lens that you use is of great importance, try newer and 6 elements, i can advise you el Nikkor 50mm 2.8, the newer model.
Some books will be good to read... Adams, vestal, ctein, thornton, anchell, rudman, graves... But first you could get a older copy of Basic photography from Langford.

Thank you very much!

 

[koraks]

I confirm what others have said - you're just starting out, so the focus in my opinion should be on learning the process. Learn to expose properly for the result you want, and learn to use your enlarger as it is. The things you don't like about your photograph (which has its merits as it is) are not due to the condensor or any other hardware aspect of your enlarger. Your enlarger is fine as it is. It would have made the print you are most likely looking for if you had started with a negative with more detail in the shadows and if you had adjusted the contrast grade (you're probably using variable contrast paper) to a lower grade, and/or dodged the bottom half of the scene. Any sharpness issues are most likely due to improper focusing of either the camera or the enlarger.

In conclusion, there's a lot to learn. If things go wrong at this stage, the first part to look at is your own capabilities and knowledge. Don't start with changing the hardware because you believe it's faulty. The odds are you're just not using it optimally.

 

[angela lucari]

I confirm what others have said - you're just starting out, so the focus in my opinion should be on learning the process. Learn to expose properly for the result you want, and learn to use your enlarger as it is. The things you don't like about your photograph (which has its merits as it is) are not due to the condensor or any other hardware aspect of your enlarger. Your enlarger is fine as it is. It would have made the print you are most likely looking for if you had started with a negative with more detail in the shadows and if you had adjusted the contrast grade (you're probably using variable contrast paper) to a lower grade, and/or dodged the bottom half of the scene. Any sharpness issues are most likely due to improper focusing of either the camera or the enlarger.

In conclusion, there's a lot to learn. If things go wrong at this stage, the first part to look at is your own capabilities and knowledge. Don't start with changing the hardware because you believe it's faulty. The odds are you're just not using it optimally.

you are right. Thank you for your suggestions

 

[AgX]

It's always better to use full capacity of the tank even you develop just [one] roll of the film on the reel. That way you have the same agitation of the developer in the tank.

First time I hear this advice.

 

[gorbas]

Angela, first, sorry to hijack your thread.

First time I hear this advice.

This advice belongs as another paragraph to the chapter about prewetting or no prewetting films, using Paterson or Stainless steel reels, agitating every 30 sec or every minute, amount of developer needed by the roll, etc.
In my opinion, 2 reels Paterson style or SS developing tanks are most common. I'm not talking here about developing single roll of 35mm film in 8 reels tanks.
In my 44 years of developing films I have seen once single 35mm reel Paterson tank. They are much more common as SS variety.
So, developing single roll of 35mm film in 2 reel capacity tank with 300ml of developer, in that case turbulence or agitation will be vastly different than developing it with 600 ml of liquid in the same tank. Is it possible to see difference between those two methods??? It works for me. YMMV