max black issues...

[ronocnikral]

well, i went through an almost fun exercise tonight of trying to find my minimum time to max black.

my issue, all i was seeing was gray mud. between times, i could hardly notice a difference in tones and never saw anything close to black. using ilford MGIV paper, tried both glossy and pearl flavors. the last test i tried was opening the lens up from f/8 all the way to f/3.5. 4 times "as much light," and no noticeable difference in tones, nothing close to black, just gray. varied development time (using ilford paper developer, 1+14) between 1 and 3 minutes. using an undeveloped frame from arista edu 100 (120) film. regardless of what i did, i saw very little difference in my gray mud tones, varying exposure and development times in every combination possible.

my thoughts are i botched the mixing of the developer and/or i need a new bulb in the beseler 23 cii. i was cursing the paper for awhile (and yes, there are no light leaks, i tested a strip), but then i tried the other flavor of paper and i was having the same problem.

thoughts? as you can tell, i am new to this whole thing...i can't even print a black test strip...thanks for any input you may have and putting up with my newbness...

 

[tkamiya]

The only part I didn't understand is where you mentioned UNDEVELOPED FILM. Undeveloped film is opaque. It passes very little light.

Can you expose small clipping of your paper to room light for few seconds and develop it? If you don't get very dark black, there is something very wrong with either the paper or the developer...

 

[erikg]

Old paper could be a fault, but I would look first at the developer. Check the temperature too, although I doubt it gets that cold in Houston. Developers loose activity below 60.

 

[ronocnikral]

point taken. unexposed, not undeveloped...

left a test strip out for a minute or two with the lights, flipped lights off, developed for 2 minutes. looked like the rest of the test strips.

sigh...i'll try some new developer and paper...

thanks for the help!

 

[Anscojohn]

Try a fresh batch of developer first.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

I second Anscojohn - your developer needs to be chucked. Rinse out your bottles with lots of hot water, open a new bag of Dektol and try again.

The paper is likely OK. Don't throw it out.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

well, i went through an almost fun exercise tonight of trying to find my minimum time to max black.

my issue, all i was seeing was gray mud. between times, i could hardly notice a difference in tones and never saw anything close to black. using ilford MGIV paper, tried both glossy and pearl flavors. the last test i tried was opening the lens up from f/8 all the way to f/3.5. 4 times "as much light," and no noticeable difference in tones, nothing close to black, just gray. varied development time (using ilford paper developer, 1+14) between 1 and 3 minutes. using an undeveloped frame from arista edu 100 (120) film. regardless of what i did, i saw very little difference in my gray mud tones, varying exposure and development times in every combination possible.

my thoughts are i botched the mixing of the developer and/or i need a new bulb in the beseler 23 cii. i was cursing the paper for awhile (and yes, there are no light leaks, i tested a strip), but then i tried the other flavor of paper and i was having the same problem.

thoughts? as you can tell, i am new to this whole thing...i can't even print a black test strip...thanks for any input you may have and putting up with my newbness...

As John already said: You need fresh developer, but I'm not clear if you are trying to find the minimum exposure or development time to get Dmax.

 

[ronocnikral]

^minimum exposure time. time seemed to have very little to do with what i was doing last night.

 

[mikebarger]

Time should have had everything to do with the test.

You have base plus fog negative in the carrier (unexposed but developed sheet), enlarger set to f8, sheet of paper in holder.

Give the sheet a 3 second exposure, then use a another piece of paper to cover all but 1/2 an inch and give another three second exposure. Slide the paper over 1/2 an inch and give another 3 second exposure. Do this all the way across the sheet. If you don't get to max black for the last couple of exposures, open the lens one stop and do again.

After doing that, you still didn't get to max black?

Mike

 

[ronocnikral]

Time should have had everything to do with the test.

You have base plus fog negative in the carrier (unexposed but developed sheet), enlarger set to f8, sheet of paper in holder.

Give the sheet a 3 second exposure, then use a another piece of paper to cover all but 1/2 an inch and give another three second exposure. Slide the paper over 1/2 an inch and give another 3 second exposure. Do this all the way across the sheet. If you don't get to max black for the last couple of exposures, open the lens one stop and do again.

After doing that, you still didn't get to max black?

Mike

exactly. they all look like just the same tone of gray. ran a couple of test strips doing the same thing above (varying exposure times), and varying the development time for each strip just in case something was off in the chemistry. same results, just about the same shade of gray. open up aperture one stop, repeat a couple times, varying development time per strip, starting at ilford's recommended development time. just about same tone of gray. open up aperture and repeat.

uber annoying. i'm going to get new paper developer today and i'll pick up one of ilford's student packs of paper just in case.

any other suggestions.

 

[mikebarger]

you use Ilford paper developer?

If you expose a sheet to room light then develop. does it go to black?

Mike

 

[edtbjon]

Most b/w materials, i.e. film and paper, goes out very slowly. If you used the paper a year ago it may have gone bad, but it will still be black. What is lacking is white which becomes gray.
Developer on the other hand is similar to e.g. milk and should be used rather soon after mixing. Once too old there's hardly any effect left in it. Unless you print often and very much, age is what kills the diluted developer within a few weeks to a month or so (in topped up bottles, half-filled the decay is much quicker).

//Björn

 

[Anon Ymous]

... Unless you print often and very much, age is what kills the diluted developer within a few weeks to a month or so (in topped up bottles, half-filled the decay is much quicker).

//Björn

And if you go back to the 1st post, you'll see that ronocnikral used Ilford's paper developer at 1+14. The more dilute the developer, the quicker it goes bad.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

^minimum exposure time. time seemed to have very little to do with what i was doing last night.

That's not an easy thing to determine with precision. Why do you need it?

 

[mikebarger]

I don't know what procedure he is following, but for Fred Picker's, it would be needed for the proper proof.

Mike

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I don't know what procedure he is following, but for Fred Picker's, it would be needed for the proper proof.

Mike

The min exposure time to Dmax is difficult to determine, because the paper characteristic curve has a very significant shoulder. In other words, adding several seconds may give an insignificantly higher density. It's better to pick a target max density (close to Dmax) and aim for that. For example, the eye does not see any difference between a density of 2.10 vs 2.15, but 2.10 is sufficiently dense, even that it is not max black in this case.

In following Picker's idea of the proper proof, one is better of aiming for Zone I or II but not Zone 0. However, I think the OP needs to change the developer first and then we can get back to this subject.

 

[Anscojohn]

I think the OP needs to change the developer first and then we can get back to this subject.[/QUOTE]

******************
EXACTLY!

 

[ronocnikral]

it is old paper developer...but in concentrate form. i mix right before i print, since i can only get to doing once every week or two. mix with stop and dispose of.

i'm going to camera store in a bit...will be back at it tonight once the sun goes down.

 

[ronocnikral]

report in time...

went and got some dektol. was hesitant to use the old packs i have laying around...so i bought a fresh new pack. mix as per instructions, expose, develop, ta-dah!!! black!!

thanks for the help everyone...i've got a lot to learn...

 

[mikebarger]

Great!!!

Mike

 

[tkamiya]

Yay!

 

[RalphLambrecht]

report in time...

went and got some dektol. was hesitant to use the old packs i have laying around...so i bought a fresh new pack. mix as per instructions, expose, develop, ta-dah!!! black!!

thanks for the help everyone...i've got a lot to learn...

Now let's talk why you are trying to find the minimum time to max black.

 

[dancqu]

If the developer is at all active there would certainly be
a very noticeable difference in print density twixt NO
exposure at all and some MUCH greater exposure.
Does the paper go gray with NO exposure? Dan

 

[mikebarger]

Ralph

I've very little experience in the darkroom. I'm testing HP5 w/510 Pyro, MCP310 in Dektol 1:2. Using a Zone VI 4x5 w/ a Caltar II-E 6.8

In this thread (rather than repeat it all here) http://photo.net/black-and-white-photo-film-processing-forum/00VaCU

I've gone over the steps I've followed from Fred's book. The developer/originator of 510 Pyro believes the time of development the testing led me to is way to long.

From reviewing your website, it is extremely apparent you have your darkroom process's nailed. Would you mind reviewing the above thread and commenting on the test? Be gentle, I am a novice.

Thanks

Mike

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Ralph

I've very little experience in the darkroom. I'm testing HP5 w/510 Pyro, MCP310 in Dektol 1:2. Using a Zone VI 4x5 w/ a Caltar II-E 6.8

In this thread (rather than repeat it all here) http://photo.net/black-and-white-photo-film-processing-forum/00VaCU

I've gone over the steps I've followed from Fred's book. The developer/originator of 510 Pyro believes the time of development the testing led me to is way to long.

From reviewing your website, it is extremely apparent you have your darkroom process's nailed. Would you mind reviewing the above thread and commenting on the test? Be gentle, I am a novice.

Thanks

Mike

Mike

Novice, with over 1300 posts on APUG?