Increasing Graded Paper Contrast

[Thomas Bertilsson]

I was thinking of Glycin developers. I have used Ansco 130 a lot with VC papers, and way back when I used the VersaPrint II for neutral to cold tones. It appeared that letting the print sit in the developer for longer than the 'full development/contrast' time, the print would continue building blacks. Exactly how much I'm not aware, but there was a definite change (I don't measure with a densitometer, I just don't like to get too scientific), perhaps as much as 1/2 stop. Whether that works on graded papers or not, I have no proof, but see no reason why it wouldn't.
- Thomas

 

[Peter Schrager]

1/2 grade

Edwal Ultra Black will give you a 1/2 grade increase. I regularly print on number #3 paper with 120 size acros and do it with rotary development and amidol and a water bath. not exactly the hardest thing in the world. some films like Tmax400 or Pl100 do contrast increase better than others but I don't see why most films like trix (and I've done it there too) won't develop to a grade 3 or higher contrast. keep it simple folks. I only do selenium toning if I really screwed up. better to develop to the right contrast from the beginning....
Best, Peter

 

[Ryuji]

Oh why didn't I think of this... change the head

I mean, change the head from diffusion to condenser, and to a well adjusted condenser, and to a point source...

I use Durst Laborator 138 as my main enlarger, and when the condensers are matched to the lens, I get a bit (about a full grade) of increase in contrast from condenser head. I also have a point source unit and this gives me quite a bit of contrast increase, although, this comes with the cost of very sharp and distracting grains and dusts on the negative.

 

[dancqu]

Another answer is Dr. Beers developer - I use it almost exclusively.
It's a part a and part b solution. Different dilutions give you approx
1/4 grade change in both directions. There are 7 different dilutions
so you can go up or down as much as 3/4 grade. Tim

I'll likely have a small batch of Beer's A mixed up tonight. From
blend 1, which is just the metol portion at a correct dilution, to
blend 7, there is a very easily seen increase in contrast. In use
Beer's A is the same developer as Ansco 120. Beer's B is the
hydroquinone portion. The combination, A&B, has a parallel;
A. Adams A&B Ansco 130.

If new to Home Brew, Beer's A&B is a good place to start.
A contrast control developer with only five ingredients. Dan

 

[Doremus Scudder]

I doubt whether the Beer's no. 7 will be any more contrasty than Dektol straight. The Edwal ultra black might be, I'm not sure since I haven't used it in a long time.

Changing to a more collimated light source will increase contrast a bit. I didn't think of it immediately.

I agree about post-processing negatives except in the case of selenium toning. Selenium intensification of the negative is easy, safe, and actually protects the negative somewhat (in the same way selenium toning protects prints). The only effect is the increase in contrast. It is, however, not reversible, so one should be sure they can deal with the increase in contrast before proceeding.

I haven't tried the "blue-light-printing" with graded paper (this seems more like a technique for VC papers...). If there are silver halides of varying sensitivity/contrast in the graded paper emulsion it might work... Another experiment for me for later.

Boy, I sure miss Oriental/Brilliant/etc. grades 4 and 5!!

Doremus Scudder

www.DoremusScudder.com

 

[Ryuji]

A short note: selenium toning the negative also increases granularity and it may not be desirable. If this route is chosen, test with a test film of the same emulsion processed identically to see if the quality is adequate. I'd rather use the method I described before in this thread.

Generally, if there is something wrong and bad enough so that sufficient correction cannot be made during printing process, it's a good idea to get a high quality scan of the negative and just deal with that... but this original post does not sound bad enough to touch the negative.

 

[Richard Jepsen]

Lots of good advice given which is why forums such as APUG are so valuable. The print in question has good blacks, slightly soft mid tones and highlights. If I increase exposure/development the middle grays become darker. I don't want middle grey tones to darken as the subject primarily is in the middle register. Those greys need more contrast.

Your comments got me into a book I own, Controls in Black and White Photography. Richard Henry writes about one experiment extending development times in Dektol. His conclusion was extending development time only provides a small (13%) increase in contrast. Last night I adjusted exposure and increased time to 3 min. There was not much of a change.

Switching to a condensor is an option. I have access to a B-22 at a local community darkroom but they don't have a 645 neg carrier. I have two enlargers at home, a 1C and LPL C7700MX w Color head.

I'm going through all this trouble to find new paper materials. Galerie has a different paper curve than other papers I use. One paper is not better than the other, just different. Galerie has excellent mid tones and a long scale.

 

[Ryuji]

Richard, based on what you just said, I suggest to print slightly darker, develop fully, and use a dilute ferricyanide bleach to lighten highlights and lighter midtone, and then re-fix, wash and whatever your usual sequence. If you don't completely re-fix and tone it in polysulfide or selenium, you get interesting effects but that's another story. I use this technique a lot when doing portrait work and when the skin tone is a bit too dark to my taste (given the contrast and density of other things set right).

 

[fhovie]

I mixed some paper developer in warm water (100F) and didn't let it cool long enough - I noticed a big jump in contrast (kind of subjective - didn't actually measure it) - I already use a condenser enlarger - I like the sharper images! hate the sharper dust though.

 

[ChuckP]

Years ago I remember that in a Howard Bond workshop he recommended using Edwal-G print developer to increase contrast slightly. I tried it once but can't recall the results. In those days you could get the higher grades of paper and I found it easier to go down. Now I'd just use VC for those things that don't print well on the available grades.

 

[dancqu]

I mixed some paper developer in warm water (100F)
and didn't let it cool long enough - I noticed a big
jump in contrast ...

I think that is due to an increase in activity of any
hydroquinone present in the developer. IIRC it is more
active than other agents at elevated temperatures and
the more so with the more exposed portions of the emulsion.

I had forgotten about that. Could be a good trick
for boosting contrast. Dan

 

[Ryuji]

The activity of hydroquinone goes up as the temperature is raised but this doesn't necessarily increase contrast. It's likely not in the case of most print developers. As long as an electron transfer agent (Phenidone or Metol) is present, increased temperature increases the overall rate of development.

If a developer is to be reformulated for a different temperature, the ratio of the developing agents, etc. should be adjusted for optimal superadditivity. Also, at a higher temperature, fog formation is increased, so this, too, needs adjustment.

 

[fhovie]

I believe the heated developer was actually PC-TEA. So the agents would be Phenidone and Ascorbic acid - The contrast boost was my initial impression - I did not compare results with identical prints done in the same batch, later - cooler - It just seemed to me like it was a big unexpected contrast jump for the apparent DR of the negative I was printing at the time.

 

[Gary Holliday]

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

The info above should help.

 

[dancqu]

[QUOTES=Ryuji;472085]
"The activity of hydroquinone goes up as the temperature
is raised but this doesn't necessarily increase contrast."

It is common knowledge that developing agents are more
active at higher temperatures. There are NO exceptions of
which I'm aware. That increase in activity is not the same
for each agent. True or false? Actual data I do not have;
from reading that is my impression.

As an agent alone hydroquinone either does or does not
produce an increase in contrast with an increase in
temperature. Easy enough to test.

"It's likely not in the case of most print developers. As long
as an electron transfer agent (Phenidone or Metol) is present,
increased temperature increases the overall rate of development."

And the most active of the agents at that increased temperature
will the more influence development. After all hydroquinone at
normal temperatures IS a developing agent and I suspect
that at elevated temperatures, much more active.

"If a developer is to be reformulated for a different temperature,
the ratio of the developing agents, etc. should be adjusted for
optimal superadditivity."

That statement only supports my contention. The increase in
activity of the various developing agents with increase in
temperature is NOT the same.

Optimal superadditivity is a secondary consideration when
formulating developers. A lot of popular film and print
developers have no superadditivity at all or deviate
greatly from those 'correct' ratios. Dan

 

[Richard Jepsen]

I reread this old thread. I’m making a comment because there is a lot of good info from members that should not be lost. I ended up buying a used LPL 670 condenser based on forum comments. As advertised I achieved a grade change between the two type enlarger heads. At the time changing the type of light source was easier for me than using a chemical solution. Over time I lost space for two enlargers and changing heads on a single enlarger in my small space was a bit of a pain. I moved to multi grade papers but still have the LPL 670 condenser. There is a lot of knowledge on this web site.

 

[pentaxuser]

Wow, nearly 15 years dormant, is that a Photrio record?

pentaxuser

 

[Vaughn]

I reread this old thread. I’m making a comment because there is a lot of good info from members that should not be lost. I ended up buying a used LPL 670 condenser based on forum comments. As advertised I achieved a grade change between the two type enlarger heads. At the time changing the type of light source was easier for me than using a chemical solution. Over time I lost space for two enlargers and changing heads on a single enlarger in my small space was a bit of a pain. I moved to multi grade papers but still have the LPL 670 condenser. There is a lot of knowledge on this web site.

Cool -- fun to re-read some old posts, too.
In alternative processes, the UV light source type can also cause noticeable differences in print contrast and sharpness (both actual and perceived).