High Contrast Paper Developer with Ilford MG FB Classic

[Crit-ter85]

Does anyone have a formula for a high contrast paper developer to use with Ilford FB Classic? I'm trying to print a neg and my contrast filtration is already at 170M on my Saunders enlarger. I've been using Ilford MG developer for 3 minutes as my standard developer and time. I could use another grade (perhaps 2?) of contrast to produce the tonal range I'm looking for. I have tried selenium toning negatives in the past, but got some undesirable streaking in continuous tone areas (it was a snowy/foggy scene) after toning.

I have found these two formulas that claim to increase the contrast of paper, but I can't find any good confirmation that they work with variable contrast papers, nor the amount of contrast they will produce. Does anyone have some experience with these? Or any other good solutions?

Agfa 108
Water at 125F/52C, 500.0 ml
Metol, 5.0 g
Sodium sulfite, 40.0 g
Hydroquinone, 6.0 g
Sodium carbonate, monohydrate, 40.0 g
Potassium bromide, 2.0 g
Water to make 1.0 liter


Dr. Beer's Solution B
Water (52° C/125° F) 750 ml
Sodium Sulfite, Anhydrous 23 g
Sodium Carbonate, monohydrate 31.5 g
Hydroquinone 8 g
Potassium Bromide 2.2 g
Cold distilled water to make 1000 ml


Thanks for the help!

 

[Rudeofus]

Sadly, you will realize, that regular development will not much change contrast regardless of which "high contrast" developer you throw at the problem.

You could try to get a cheap set of "multigrade filters", which are filter sheets from yellow to magenta for setting gradation on enlargers without builtin gradation filter. Holding a "grade 5" filter between lens and paper during exposure should add a tad of extra contrast. If it adds a surprising lot of contrast, then try to fix your enlarger head.

 

[Don_ih]

I agree with Rudeofus. I find the max magenta setting on my Chromega is not equal to an Ilford #5 filter - which is also not that close to actual grade 5 paper. You need filtration to boost the contrast. Without higher filtration, a high-contrast developer (not a lith developer) will most likely muddy the midtones easily as much as it darkens the shadows. A lith developer may have a bit better luck, but it would likely make a lot of shadows out of your midtones.

The multigrade paper doesn't really vary that much with developer choice, not in terms of contrast.

Perhaps you should develop your negatives a little more. (Obviously too late for the ones you already have.)

 

[Crit-ter85]

I agree with Rudeofus. I find the max magenta setting on my Chromega is not equal to an Ilford #5 filter - which is also not that close to actual grade 5 paper. You need filtration to boost the contrast. Without higher filtration, a high-contrast developer (not a lith developer) will most likely muddy the midtones easily as much as it darkens the shadows. A lith developer may have a bit better luck, but it would likely make a lot of shadows out of your midtones.

The multigrade paper doesn't really vary that much with developer choice, not in terms of contrast.

Perhaps you should develop your negatives a little more. (Obviously too late for the ones you already have.)

Interesting, I hadn't thought about a difference between my color head magenta and an Ilford #5 filter. I do have some gel filters that I can test the difference with.

As far as increased development, this is one frame on a 120 roll where the rest of the frames were properly developed and this particular frame was of a much lower contrast scene. Obviously in an ideal world I could develop individual images for the proper time, but alas that isn't an option with roll film. It also happens sometimes that I've pre-visualized a scene for a particular contrast ratio and then change my mind at the printing stage, when it's too late to do anything about exposure/development.

 

[koraks]

Dichromate or permanganate intensification works on both negatives and prints. Dichromate is the nastier one of the two. They both work.

You make the intensifier by mixing a tiny bit of either dichromate or permanganate in water, then add a small quantity of hydrochloric acid. Use this bleach to entirely bleach back the image to a white almost translucent silver halide image. Then thoroughly wash the negative. Expose to intense UV light such as direct sunlight for half a minute or so. Redevelop in print developer and wash.

It's feasible to cut a single 120 frame and intensify it. Practice on test film first. It's very, very effective. On properly fixed negatives, it's easy to get a result that is perfectly even and without streaking, fog etc. If the density gain is insufficient after one round, rinse and repeat as often as you like. It's far more effective and flexible than selenium toning.

I don't personally hold much hope for trying to eek out another half paper grade by using a different kind of filter or trying to boost contrast through development. At best, the difference will be marginal.

You could also do the intensifier trick on paper; dichromate gives a greenish tone though. I prefer working on the negative so it's suitable for the intended printing process.

 

[Doremus Scudder]

If you have a #5 filter, try that first. I find, however, that I can get even more contrast than the #5 by using a #47 blue filter. It makes the image very difficult to see and increases the exposure time significantly, but gives me more contrast than either the #5 Ilford filter or the 170M setting on my Chromega head.

If you have a staining film developer like PMK or Pyrocat, you can intensify your negative with a bleach/redevelopment procedure. You'll need potassium ferricyanide and potassium bromide to make a rehalogenating bleach. 15 grams of each in a liter of water makes the bleach. You can do the whole procedure with lights on. Soak the negative in water for a few minutes, transfer to the bleach and agitate until the image is completely gone (note: if the original negative was developed with a staining developer, a faint yellow/brown stain image will remain). Five to seven minutes is usually more than enough. Then rinse the negative in running water for a few seconds and transfer it to the staining developer. Develop for the recommended time plus 30% or 40% longer just for security. This step develops the rehalogenated silver in the negative to completion, so there is no risk of overdevelopment. The resulting negative will have the original silver image plus an extra layer of stain from the staining developer that will add contrast. I find this method very gratifying in many cases.

At the printing stage, you can expose for the shadows in the print, do your best at dodging highlight areas and then bring up the whites even more with localized bleaching, or, if the scene if predominantly white as in a snow scene, you can bleach the whole print overall. Many use a weak Farmer's Reducer for this but I use the same rehalogenating bleach as for bleach/redevelopment above, only much weaker. Search here and on the web for info about print bleaching, also a gratifyingly effective procedure.

Let us know how you do,

Doremus

 

[koraks]

I can get even more contrast than the #5 by using a #47 blue filter.

Have you quantified this by determining the ISO-R you hit in both instances? Also, are you referring to the Ilford paper OP is using? Papers differ massively in how they perform at the extremes.

Also, I'm not familiar with a Wratten #5. Is this from some other range than the Wratten range? #50 is a deep blue filter, but I can't find a spectrum for it. I wonder how the transmission spectra of these filters compare, hence the question. #5 filter, d'oh!

 

[koraks]

Ok, concerning those grade 5 and Wratten #47 filters, this is how they relate to each other in terms of density:

Blue = #47, red = grade 5.
The #47 shaves a little off of the longer wavelength blues. It's a small bit, but may be significant depending on far the sensitivity of the blue layer extends towards cyans and greens. You'd have to plot this against the spectral sensitivity of the paper's emulsions to figure that out.

 

[Crit-ter85]

Dichromate or permanganate intensification works on both negatives and prints. Dichromate is the nastier one of the two. They both work.

You make the intensifier by mixing a tiny bit of either dichromate or permanganate in water, then add a small quantity of hydrochloric acid. Use this bleach to entirely bleach back the image to a white almost translucent silver halide image. Then thoroughly wash the negative. Expose to intense UV light such as direct sunlight for half a minute or so. Redevelop in print developer and wash.

It's feasible to cut a single 120 frame and intensify it. Practice on test film first. It's very, very effective. On properly fixed negatives, it's easy to get a result that is perfectly even and without streaking, fog etc. If the density gain is insufficient after one round, rinse and repeat as often as you like. It's far more effective and flexible than selenium toning.

I don't personally hold much hope for trying to eek out another half paper grade by using a different kind of filter or trying to boost contrast through development. At best, the difference will be marginal.

You could also do the intensifier trick on paper; dichromate gives a greenish tone though. I prefer working on the negative so it's suitable for the intended printing process.

This seems like a very reasonable process to try out with a test neg first, especially if it doesn't cause streaking like selenium toning can. Thanks!

 

[cliveh]

May I add to this thread by my experience of teaching thousands of photographic students over 25 years. About 75% would be constantly adding magenta to a multigrade enlarger head to increase contrast as apposed to yellow to reduce it. This is a clear indication (given average subject brightness) that they are under developing the film.

 

[Doremus Scudder]

Have you quantified this by determining the ISO-R you hit in both instances? Also, are you referring to the Ilford paper OP is using? Papers differ massively in how they perform at the extremes.

Also, I'm not familiar with a Wratten #5. Is this from some other range than the Wratten range? #50 is a deep blue filter, but I can't find a spectrum for it. I wonder how the transmission spectra of these filters compare, hence the question. #5 filter, d'oh!

Ok, concerning those grade 5 and Wratten #47 filters, this is how they relate to each other in terms of density:
View attachment 367917
Blue = #47, red = grade 5.
The #47 shaves a little off of the longer wavelength blues. It's a small bit, but may be significant depending on far the sensitivity of the blue layer extends towards cyans and greens. You'd have to plot this against the spectral sensitivity of the paper's emulsions to figure that out.

Thanks for the spectral transmission chart, koraks.

I tested my (not the newest) MG grade 5 filter against the #47 Wratten gel I have with a Stouffer step wedge. I got one less stripe resolved when using the #47 filter compared to the grade 5 filter and two more stripes than the 170M setting on my Chromega head. That's a half-stop and a full-stop difference respectively, so not huge, but significant.
I did not test against a new-just-out-of-the-box grade 5 filter. Mine might be a bit weaker than brand new, but it hasn't been used that much. Paper was Ilford MB Classic FB.

Best,

Doremus

 

[Doremus Scudder]

This seems like a very reasonable process to try out with a test neg first, especially if it doesn't cause streaking like selenium toning can. Thanks!

I'm surprised you got streaking with selenium intensification. It really shouldn't happen if you have a well-mixed solution and agitate well, e.g., continuously. I'd try it again if you've got the selenium toner handy. Use a test negative first. I use a 1+2 dilution when I selenium intensify. I do that less now, since my toner takes the stain out of PMK negs resulting in a net zero gain in contrast due to the lost stain density. With negatives developed in a non-staining developer, selenium intensification would be my first choice.

Best,

Doremus

 

[geirtbr]

D19 is a pretty straight high contrast developer you can mix yourself and see if if it works well for you. Another one is kodak d8. There are some similar ones. Look for the HQ ratio to metol or phenidone, that influence contrast a lot.
I do think magenta filter work reasonably well to isolate the high contrast layer. When I did reversal on multigrade rc papers, I found out that one could have three contrast grades using different filtration on reexposure. Either full magenta for high contrast, full yellow for soft contrast, or white light for medium contrast. (Reversal is an excellent way of getting deep blacks and clear whites on old RC paper, but thats another issue).

 

[grain elevator]

Obviously it's a whole 'nother kettle of worms or box of fish or whatever, but you could lith print, gives you another set of contrast controls.

 

[Lachlan Young]

Developer fiddling won't really help. Selectively bleaching the print can make a dramatic difference. A contrast boost mask is another option. Or make a 2-step duplicate neg and manipulate those steps to boost contrast enough.

This is also one of these occasions where having a condenser head on hand for the enlarger can be very useful.

And, more importantly, none of these are potentially destructive of the original neg if they don't work.