Help me diagnose my photos?

dcy · 2025-06-26T01:43:11-0400

F4U said:
Now that this site has included digital, how do I tell if this thread is in the digital, film, or hybrid categories?

For what it's worth, I considered whether to post in the hybrid forum. Ultimately I opted for the analog forum because my goal is to print in the darkroom and the scans were just a means to diagnose my analog process. It had not occurred to me that my digital process would be partly at fault. The explanations I got about digital processing were valuable to me in that they helped me understand why my photos look drab, but they do not inspire me to improve my digital process. On the contrary, they make me want to get back in the darkroom.

dcy · 2025-06-26T01:50:47-0400

GregY said:
dcy...... people who print in darkrooms still spot with a fine 5.0 brush & spot tone (or similar inks)....Especially on bigger size enlargements any flaws in a negative are magnified.
(since we are in the analog subforum)

Is that true in general... or just for people doing exhibitions?

GregY · 2025-06-26T02:12:18-0400

dcy said:
Is that true in general... or just for people doing exhibitions?

I spot prints whenever necessary in any size.....(if it's getting drymounted then it's a fine print). It gets archival processing....selenium toned...washaid... then spotted and flattened in a drymount press before mounting on board.

MattKing · 2025-06-26T02:29:11-0400

Yes, digital spotting is a lot of work.
Which is why one of the reasons I don't digitize everything - or even the majority of my film work, which is most of my photography.
But sometimes I have expectations that I will want to both print and digitize from the same roll. So when that is the case, I've tried to develop the discipline to get the spotting done right away, because that leaves the results available for reasonably prompt finalization in the digital realm.
And as for spotting darkroom prints:
1) my darkroom printing workflow tends to minimize the need - diffused light source enlargers help with that;
2) if I intend to share my prints with others, I always check to see if spotting should be done before doing that sharing.
Smaller prints don't always need to be spotted, even if something 11"x14" from the same negative does.

koraks · 2025-06-26T02:29:39-0400

F4U said:
Now that this site has included digital, how do I tell if this thread is in the digital, film, or hybrid categories?

Moderator note: With problem diagnosis, we often have to deal with the situation where we're presented digital examples and part of the problem can be in the digital aspect of the process. If in a thread, the emphasis shifts exclusively towards scanning or digital editing (or it's there to begin with), we'll generally move the thread to a hybrid or digital category. In this case, I'd be hesitant to do this since the heart of the matter is still in the question of optimizing a film-based image and the interventions that are being discussed are not exclusively in the digital domain. In such a case, we'd generally leave the thread where it is.

F4U said:
I certainly don't wish to waste the readers' time interjecting my pearls of wisdom in a mixed forum.

If the subject matter of a thread does not appeal to you, it's best to not respond. If a particular thread really rubs you in the wrong way, then consider (1) reporting it using the report function if you feel it violates the forum rules or (2) consider using the 'ignore' function on the thread so you won't be triggered by it any longer.

Let's go back to the on-topic discussion.

dcy · 2025-06-26T03:57:37-0400

GregY said:
I spot prints whenever necessary in any size.....(if it's getting drymounted then it's a fine print). It gets archival processing....selenium toned...washaid... then spotted and flattened in a drymount press before mounting on board.

Alright. Thanks.

For perspective, I had to do a DuckDuckGo search to find out what "drymount" means. I watched a YT video on spotting. It was interesting. Love seeing how passionate people care about their craft.

MattKing said:
And as for spotting darkroom prints:
1) my darkroom printing workflow tends to minimize the need - diffused light source enlargers help with that;

Oh... I remember learning about this when I was in the market for an enlarger. I got a diffuser cause I didn't want to deal with dust.

MattKing said:
2) if I intend to share my prints with others, I always check to see if spotting should be done before doing that sharing.
Smaller prints don't always need to be spotted, even if something 11"x14" from the same negative does.

Learned something new today. Didn't know that people retouched darkroom prints with paint brushes. Nice to know that that's an option.

Don_ih · 2025-06-26T05:04:23-0400

dcy said:
I sure hope the experience in the darkroom isn't like this.

Try to make sure there's no dust on the negative, the holders, and the paper. The bigger the enlargement, the more you'll notice the dust in the print. For the same reason, the smaller the negative, the more you'll notice the dust in the print.

snusmumriken · 2025-06-26T08:53:36-0400

dcy said:
Oh... I remember learning about this when I was in the market for an enlarger. I got a diffuser cause I didn't want to deal with dust.

I'm afraid you almost certainly will have to deal with dust, especially as you are using the bathroom as a darkroom, and enlarging from half-frame (i.e. big magnification of negative and any dust on it). Get your negatives into sleeves as soon as you've cut them up, put the sheets in boxes, and keep them there until you are actually printing. That will help to minimise the problem.

dcy said:
Didn't know that people retouched darkroom prints with paint brushes. Nice to know that that's an option.

It is optional, but it's transformative - really sinks the image into the paper, because you are suddenly not aware of the surface. You'll love that once you've got the hang of how to do it. It's like doing astronomy in a dark sky area .

pentaxuser · 2025-06-26T10:43:56-0400

F4U said:
Now that this site has included digital, how do I tell if this thread is in the digital, film, or hybrid categories?

You can't, can you unless you are told?

pentaxuser

GregY · 2025-06-26T10:50:34-0400

F4U said:
Now that this site has included digital, how do I tell if this thread is in the digital, film, or hybrid categories? I certainly don't wish to waste the readers' time interjecting my pearls of wisdom in a mixed forum. I perceive the OP's wish to come up to speed with enthusiasm. My recommendation would be to use the 35mm full frame camera, and forget adding the computer into the process. Too much too fast only results in fast burn-out, and an abandon of the craft entirely. Being out in the field with a decent film camera and a good processing technique can be one of the best mind-clearing activities of all. For every 500 wasted shots, a gem of great joy crops up. In a few short years, the print collection can be quite impressive.

At the top of the page: printed in a single line.

GregY · 2025-06-26T11:40:56-0400

GregY said:
I spot prints whenever necessary in any size.....(if it's getting drymounted then it's a fine print). It gets archival processing....selenium toned...washaid... then spotted and flattened in a drymount press before mounting on board.

BTW I use a cold light head enlarger (diffusion) and still spot prints when necessary.

Craig · 2025-06-26T11:47:37-0400

dcy said:
Oh... I remember learning about this when I was in the market for an enlarger. I got a diffuser cause I didn't want to deal with dust.

A diffusion enlarger isn't a magic bullet, you will still see dust if it's on the negative. A diffusion head will tend to lessen (not eliminate) the visibility of any scratches on the negative.

F4U · 2025-06-26T12:52:25-0400

dcy said:
For what it's worth, I considered whether to post in the hybrid forum. Ultimately I opted for the analog forum because my goal is to print in the darkroom and the scans were just a means to diagnose my analog process. It had not occurred to me that my digital process would be partly at fault. The explanations I got about digital processing were valuable to me in that they helped me understand why my photos look drab, but they do not inspire me to improve my digital process. On the contrary, they make me want to get back in the darkroom.

Good to hear. Progress comes quickly. Very soon you will have a picture to be admired that instills pride. But if you have a half frame and a full frame 35, the full frame will afford you much better work. Carry on and don't burn out. The next great pic is sometimes closer than you'd anticipated.

albireo · 2025-06-26T13:12:55-0400

F4U said:
Good to hear. Progress comes quickly. Very soon you will have a picture to be admired that instills pride. But if you have a half frame and a full frame 35, the full frame will afford you much better work.

Well I don't know sir. According to this line of thinking, would then large format afford much better work than medium format? I haven't found this generalises well.

Here's an idea: "quality" has very little to do with negative size.

dcy · 2025-06-26T13:19:58-0400

Craig said:
A diffusion enlarger isn't a magic bullet, you will still see dust if it's on the negative. A diffusion head will tend to lessen (not eliminate) the visibility of any scratches on the negative.

Yeah. I did not mean to convey that I thought it was a magic bullet.

dcy · 2025-06-26T13:25:30-0400

snusmumriken said:
I'm afraid you almost certainly will have to deal with dust, especially as you are using the bathroom as a darkroom, and enlarging from half-frame (i.e. big magnification of negative and any dust on it). Get your negatives into sleeves as soon as you've cut them up, put the sheets in boxes, and keep them there until you are actually printing. That will help to minimise the problem.

In all honesty, when my prints improve to the point that dust becomes the limiting factor, I will feel very proud.

snusmumriken said:
It is optional, but it's transformative - really sinks the image into the paper, because you are suddenly not aware of the surface. You'll love that once you've got the hang of how to do it. It's like doing astronomy in a dark sky area .

GregY · 2025-06-26T17:03:57-0400

F4U said:
Now that this site has included digital, how do I tell if this thread is in the digital, film, or hybrid categories? I certainly don't wish to waste the readers' time interjecting my pearls of wisdom in a mixed forum. I perceive the OP's wish to come up to speed with enthusiasm. My recommendation would be to use the 35mm full frame camera, and forget adding the computer into the process. Too much too fast only results in fast burn-out, and an abandon of the craft entirely. Being out in the field with a decent film camera and a good processing technique can be one of the best mind-clearing activities of all. For every 500 wasted shots, a gem of great joy crops up. In a few short years, the print collection can be quite impressive.

F4, it's kind of grey in the OP's opening statement. The photos looked flat....but were neg scans not prints. Then Matt went down the digital rabbit hole with the digital spotting sideline. Often it's hard to tell on established thread.....what becomes a mixed forum....
It seems by and large less people are printing in a darkroom....but keep up your comments...We each take what we need/want from the discussions. Just because there are less of us, doesn't mean the comments are less important.

reddesert · 2025-06-26T17:30:25-0400

Repeating something I said in one of the OP's other threads: Get a good book that covers black and white processing and darkroom work, and spend some time reading it. It will have examples of contrast adjustment, of enlarging, burning and dodging, spotting, and so on. The Ansel Adams Basic Techniques by John Schaeffer; Henry Horenstein; or David Vestal books are the ones I'd recommend, although there are others.

It's not really about equipment, it's about learning how to work with the material.

dcy · 2025-06-26T17:45:31-0400

reddesert said:
Repeating something I said in one of the OP's other threads: Get a good book that covers black and white processing and darkroom work, and spend some time reading it. It will have examples of contrast adjustment, of enlarging, burning and dodging, spotting, and so on. The Ansel Adams Basic Techniques by John Schaeffer; Henry Horenstein; or David Vestal books are the ones I'd recommend, although there are others.

An incredibly generous member of this forum has graciously sent me a treasure trove of fantastic books covering black and white photography and darkroom work. I'm only getting started, but I feel I'm learning a lot from those books.

Craig · 2025-06-26T18:03:35-0400

"Creative Black and White Photography" by Les McLean is a good book too. It's more aimed at printing, than exposing negatives, but it covers that too.

Certainly not expensive used: https://www.amazon.com/Creative-Black-White-Photography/dp/0715312804

Les used to be a member here, but I believe has passed away.

dcy · 2025-06-26T18:24:26-0400

Craig said:
"Creative Black and White Photography" by Les McLean is a good book too. It's more aimed at printing, than exposing negatives, but it covers that too.

Certainly not expensive used: https://www.amazon.com/Creative-Black-White-Photography/dp/0715312804

$6.42 with shipping. Heck, what do I have to lose? Ordered.

pentaxuser · 2025-06-26T18:47:12-0400

In my 20 years of Darkroom printing using a diffuser enlarger I have found very few occasions when dust created a problem provided I regularly dusted the enlarger lens, the carrier and negative when in the carrier and the paper. A blower brush is all that I have needed Occasionally it is worthwhile to wipe all working surfaces with a damp cloth Any room including a darkroom will accumulate dust

It doesn't take much time out of the total time printing. On the few occasions I have dust spots I simply clean again and re-print

The time taken to do this and money "wasted " on making the print with dust spot(s) is not a lot compared to the time needed to learn how to spot with inks and brushes to create a blemish free prints.

That's just my experience of course, others may have different experiences

pentaxuser

GregY · 2025-06-26T18:58:26-0400

dcy said:
$6.42 with shipping. Heck, what do I have to lose? Ordered.

That's a good book & a great deal. I recently found my copy of Gordon Hutchings "Book of Pyro"......now available on Amazon.com for $249 USD (reduced from $999)...& of course $46.45 shipping..... I'm glad I got mine years ago!

MattKing · 2025-06-26T20:09:52-0400

dcy said:
Learned something new today. Didn't know that people retouched darkroom prints with paint brushes. Nice to know that that's an option.

Some more nomenclature .
Spotting isn't really well described as "re-touching" - at least not the simple spotting needed for dealing with dust on the negative at the printing (or scanning) stage.
"Retouching" better describes a process one employs to essentially edit the contents of a negative, or in some cases a print.
For example, if you have dust on the film when it is in the camera, there will be a blank area on the film - you re-touch to deal with that blank area when you create the final result.
Traditionally, and in certain circumstances, talented Re-touchers would actually work on the negative itself, to remove details, or sometimes even add them.
For example, the classic formal portrait of the family, where uncle Henry miraculously gained back the half of his right ear that he lost in the war .
And as for the "paint brushes", think instead of "spotting brushes". They are designed to place the smallest possible spot of fluid on the print.
When you spot a print, you don't paint in the spot. You build up the tone with lots of tiny little stippled dots, laid down in a slightly random pattern within the area needed to be spotted. A really good magnifier is important!
I actually use a substitute for the spotting brush - a set of very fine point pens called Spot Pens. They are pre-filled with various tones of spotting fluid. They aren't made any more, and no you can't have mine!

dcy · 2025-06-26T21:08:44-0400

pentaxuser said:
In my 20 years of Darkroom printing using a diffuser enlarger I have found very few occasions when dust created a problem provided I regularly dusted ... Occasionally it is worthwhile to wipe all working surfaces with a damp cloth Any room including a darkroom will accumulate dust
...
The time taken to do this and money "wasted " on making the print with dust spot(s) is not a lot compared to the time needed to learn how to spot with inks and brushes to create a blemish free prints.

THANK YOU!.... I mean... I'm not against the idea of holding a brush and it sure sounds a lot more appealing than hunching over a computer screen to look at pixels. But it doesn't strike me as something I'd want to do often. I guess time will tell.

Help me diagnose my photos?

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency