How can I match this professional print??

[Brian Stater]

Hello Photrio

You have helped me a lot in the past and I hope you won’t mind me picking your brains again….

I have attached two prints of the same image. The first is the work of a darkroom professional, the second is my attempt to match his quality and detail. And I need help to improve it!

Here’s the story: I used HP5 Plus film in an Olympus OM2N SLR camera.
I took the neg along to a top-class darkroom in London and Nick, their printer, did a wonderful job, especially in bringing out the detail of the frieze in the upper section of the picture.
I have a small darkroom at home and have tried to replicate his print.
I am happy with the tone and texture of the stonework, but I cannot get the figures in the frieze, or the pedestrian and his bag, quite as sharp as I’d like.
I am printing on Ilford MGFB Classic paper, with a glossy finish, the same as Nick.
Nick told me that he used split grade printing, with filters 1.5 and 5, so I have done the same. I tried various combinations but the most successful (shown here) was 9 secs at f11 for the 1.5, plus 6 secs at f11 with the 5 filter.
I have burnt in the lower section (pavement and pedestrian below the waist) at 4 secs, f11, grade 2.5, then an additional 5 secs, f8, grade 2.5 for the triangular void on the left.
My print was developed for 60 secs, though I have used shorter and longer times too.
My enlarger is fairly basic — a Kaiser VP350 System V — with below the lens filters.
I am focussing with an old EPL Focus Scope.

Does anyone have any suggestions, please? I feel I’m about 90 per cent there in matching Nick’s effort, but need your help over the final hurdle…

Many thanks

Brian

 

[MurrayMinchin]

Sure, I'll take a stab at it.

Contrast looks good. He dodged the lower left shadow and burned the lower right one a bit to balance the dark areas. He burned the upper half, probably using a card starting from the top several times, resulting in proportionally more burn up top.

That and a wee bit of edge burning (and top corner burns?) would get you pretty much there, me-thinks.

As for sharpness...filters below the lens isn't helping.

 

[Michael Howard]

Looking as closely as I can to the two pictures, I believe yours is slightly out of focus across the whole print. F11 may have introduced a bit of diffraction across the print. Do you have a loupe you can use to critically look at various areas of the print to see if you can confirm this? It is also possible your enlarger/base/easel/lens/paper system is up against its limits sharpness-wise.

 

[Pieter12]

It looks like your negative popped between the two filter exposures, making it less sharp. I would suggest a heat-absorbing glass in the filter drawer or a glass negative carrier to prevent that.

 

[snusmumriken]

He has done a very nice job. Would you share who it was? (DM me if you prefer)

It looks as though he got that principle vertical line more upright than you have - I checked using a square on my screen, and it's slight but not an illusion, I think. He has certainly lost a tiny bit on the left and right sides, and gained a tiny bit at the top, relative to your print. So I wonder if he raised one end of the enlarger baseboard slightly to correct the perspective? Or maybe it's just a very slightly different crop.

Apart from that, his highlights on the wall are cleaner, and the crevices darker. So I would try a shade less time on the grade 1.5 and a bit more on the grade 5, bearing in mind that the G5 is slower. It's possible he's used a condenser enlarger, but your setup (opal bulb and condenser, I believe?) should be capable of matching that appearance.

I agree that your print looks slightly unsharp, especially in the corners. Popping may be the cause - try not to let the negative heat up too much by leaving the enlarger lamp on for more than about 30 sec. Focus quickly and turn it off. I use a glassless negative carrier (35mm), so I am careful about this (although my enlarger does have the benefit of a heat filter above the lens).

I respectfully disagree with @MurrayMinchin about the below-lens filter causing unsharpness! I have made prints both ways and I can't see any difference. I think you will cause more unsharpness changing filters in the drawer above the lens (if you have one) than you will gain. You don't say what enlarger lens you are using, but the consensus seems to be that most enlarger lenses are sharpest at around f/5.6 or f/8.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Two things... to me it looks like your negative is not sitting flat in the holder. The top is not in focus. If it's in a glass holder, then it would be, so if that is the case, are the three stages... negative, lens, and easel all parallel with one another?
The other thing is the bottom shadow should be dodged a wee bit.

 

[mshchem]

Also, question, did Nick use Selenium toner. It's very subtle on neutral tone papers but it increases Dmax.