Minimum exposure for maximum black printing

[lmmccubbin]

I am new to the darkroom. I have grown tired of making gray pictures and embarked on some film speed and development time tests. My initial Zone 1 for film speed, and Zone VIII for development time tests were suggestive but not entirely conclusive, so I have shot a few rolls of High, Medium and Low contrast scenes, cut them in half, and developed them at recommended development and 30% below (I'm shooting 120 Tri-X 400 and developing with D-76 1:1 for a condenser enlarger). I have made contact sheets at grade #3 and exposed for the minimum time to achieve maximum black.

And so to my question: If a negative is exposed and developed correctly, should it in theory just straight print (not proof) at filter grade #2 for the minimum exposure to achieve maximum black? That, is, any change in enlarging time would be to compensate for having strayed from exposure and development perfection?

Thank you for your help.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

If you've tested everything to proof for minimum time for maximum black, that should give you a printable neg, but that doesn't mean there won't be any further fine tuning. Usually larger prints require more contrast than smaller prints, and the effect of your light source when enlarging may be different from the same light source used for contact proofing. Then you might still want to dodge and burn or use other techniques to get everything you can out of the neg.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

...beginner...I have grown tired of making gray pictures...Zone System

I don't know if this applies directly to the OP, it is a general tirade on the general subject:

If you are just starting out then you don't need the Zone System or film tests or any other "There is But One Way to Perfection" methodology to make pictures that aren't gray on gray. The basics are sufficient. When you can make reasonable pictures without all the Zone system clap-trap then go the next step to the Zone System and Beyond if you feel the need.

Remember: Most black and white pictures, including the best black and white pictures, have been made _without_ the Zone system. For many photographers the ZS is a trap from which they do not escape.

That said, the basics are: When taking pictures:

1) Make sure the lens is clean
2) Use a lenshood when needed
3) Expose generously - check the meter indicates f-16/11 at 1/ASA for noon-time sunlit scenes

In the darkroom check that:

1) The enlarger lens is clean
2) The darkroom is dark
3) The safelight is safe
4) The paper is fresh
5) The developer is fresh

When developing film:

1) Check the temperature, change development time as needed
2) Agitate as directed

When printing:

1) Develop prints for at least 90 sec for RC, 3 minutes for fiber, developer temperature at 68F or more (room temperature)
2) Expose enough so the blacks are black and no blacker
3) Use a contrasty enough paper so that whites are white and no whiter

You should get all the deep black and sparkling white you want.

 

[lmmccubbin]

Thanks for the reply. Just a quick follow-up.

I determined minimum enlarging time for maximum black for the negatives using a blank negative from one of the rolls.

For the purpose of deciding on best EI (I bracketed the shots) and development time (between the normally developed and the 30% less development halves), should I print the negatives to the minimum time for maximum black on grade #2 and decide on the best EI/dev. time combination, or should or try to optimize each print and determine which negative yields the best result?

Thanks again for your help.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

should I print the negatives to the minimum time for maximum black on grade #2 and decide on the best EI/dev. time ....

You should expose the print so that you get the black you want - the "Min time/Max..." is irrelevant: The goal is to get the picture you want, not to do what the magazines tell you to do.

You should expose the film so you get the shadow detail you want.

Very few scenes have a pure black in them, and it is only a pure black that should yield clear film. The blacks you may want in the picture will have to be 'printed down' from the dark grays in the scene.

If you are exposing your pictures so there is shadow detail and printing so only unexposed film will be black then your pictures will have no blacks.

 

[MurrayMinchin]

Welcome to APUG

I use the minimum exposure time on grade 2 through clear film for max black when testing as well...actually, I use the the last step just barely before max black and selenium tone later for a full black. Something tells me I'm getting fuller shadow detail doing this, but I have no proof other than it just feels right.

Most people test their Normal developing times (after establishing their personal EI) by seeing if Zone VIII prints as it should, but I prefer to use Zone IX (the last shade of pretty much non-textured light gray before max white)...again, just because it feels right and is easier for me to judge. Doing this lets you fire a negative in the enlarger, blast off a print at standard settings and get a proof print that shows exactly what you've done (as long as your print exposure/processing is consistent) and hint at where you could take it with further refinements.

Try the search feature in the different forums - there's tons of information just waiting for you to discover!

Murray

 

[lmmccubbin]

Thanks, Nicholas.

I'm with you on the basics of your previous post, though I expose the print for the whites and adjust contrast for the blacks (and develop prints for 60" as per developer instructions).

I was not getting the the blacks or the whites, for that matter, that I wanted - and, yes, I hit the books, but I hear you. Your second post clarified things.

Out of the books, and back to the darkroom.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

develop prints for 60" as per developer instructions

You don't mention the paper or developer, but try increasing the time to 2 minutes on a print and see if you like it more.

 

[lmmccubbin]

I just use Ilford Multigrade IV Deluxe RC Glossy paper with Ilford's Multigrade Paper Developer.

 

[analogsnob]

I am new to the darkroom. I have grown tired of making gray pictures and embarked on some film speed and development time tests. My initial Zone 1 for film speed, and Zone VIII for development time tests were suggestive but not entirely conclusive, so I have shot a few rolls of High, Medium and Low contrast scenes, cut them in half, and developed them at recommended development and 30% below (I'm shooting 120 Tri-X 400 and developing with D-76 1:1 for a condenser enlarger). I have made contact sheets at grade #3 and exposed for the minimum time to achieve maximum black.

And so to my question: If a negative is exposed and developed correctly, should it in theory just straight print (not proof) at filter grade #2 for the minimum exposure to achieve maximum black? That, is, any change in enlarging time would be to compensate for having strayed from exposure and development perfection?

Thank you for your help.

Using a condenser enlarger I would recommend standardizing on grade 2 and do your tests around zone one and zone V rather than VIII. Using Zone VIII leads to depressed mid tones and Zone VIII might not exist in every film developer combination.Especially with a condenser enlarger. That is where the differences in film/ developer combinations really lie.

A properly made print minimum time for black should with any negative provide a "passable" print but not a final by any stretch. You have gottten past the first 75% so you can now concentrate on the (harder) last 25%.

The Zone system is not a religion, simply a tool to give you control. Once you have control you must take resposibility and realize that you WILL use this control to make stupid pictures. This is the time when you will be tested. IIt is not the fault of the Zone system it is the challenge of art. So make stupid pictures and learn, one day you too will start making the 4 or 5 good pictures a year the rest of us hope to make.

 

[analogsnob]

In reading my last post I forgot to say that you should standardize on an enlargement (usually 8x10) made at minimum time for black through film base. This is because with a condenser enlarger your contacts will not match the prints you make. (Another reason to use a diffusion enlarger) Making contacts on a grade higher will help but the difference is not contrast alone. So standardize for the prints not the contacts.

 

[smieglitz]

I've never understood why the minimum time/maximum black thing has been stressed so much with the zonies. Wouldn't it be better to figure out the exposure scale of the paper and standardize on a time that prints Zone VIII properly, adjusting the negative and paper contrast grade/chemical development so that a good max black is also present? When enlarging, proper highlights are the criteria for exposure, so why isn't it the same for making contact sheets? Finding max black seems the easy way out though perhaps not the most accurate.

 

[nworth]

In theory, you should be able to get an acceptable straight print from a properly exposed and developed negative. In fact, it seldom works that way, especially with roll film. First, different scenes on the roll will have different lighting ranges. You can correct that for the most part by printing with different contrast grades for the paper. But then, some individual part of the picture is usually lighter or darker than you want. You have to correct that (those, since there are often several areas that need treatment) by dodging, burning, and maybe bleaching. The only way to learn is to plunge in and do it. Severe criticism from your friends helps. By the way, the case of gray prints by beginners is usually either underexposure or underdevelopment of the print. Start by giving the full recommended time in the developer. Adjust the exposure until the print is more or less right. Then adjust the contrast and do any manipulations needed. There are several good books on the subject.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

When enlarging, proper highlights are the criteria for exposure, so why isn't it the same for making contact sheets?

I think it is convenience: Highlights are teeny-tiny and hard to judge in a contact sheet and different in every frame. The film border is large and easy to judge.

It gives a consistent contact sheet, I suppose. I use it, and couldn't really care less about it.

How it came to assume any significance outside of a guide to exposing contact sheets is a complete mystery to me, it has only the most sophomoric logic to it.

 

[weasel]

I am not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but I think lots of us are missing the point of minimum exposure for maximum black, and why it is practical.
What you are doing when you establish the minimum exposure for maximum black, and then doing the testing to find out the proper exposure for your film/conditions, and then doing the testing to get the development right to put the highlights where they belong, is that you are adjusting the process to the paper you are using.
I find that this greatly simplifies my time in the darkroom, wastes less material, and gives me many more negatives that are keepers.
It is all a matter of eliminating variables so you can take pictures, and not have to struggle to get what you want onto paper.

 

[weasel]

I've never understood why the minimum time/maximum black thing has been stressed so much with the zonies. Wouldn't it be better to figure out the exposure scale of the paper and standardize on a time that prints Zone VIII properly, adjusting the negative and paper contrast grade/chemical development so that a good max black is also present? When enlarging, proper highlights are the criteria for exposure, so why isn't it the same for making contact sheets? Finding max black seems the easy way out though perhaps not the most accurate.

That is exactly what the testing does. You test get the maximum black with minimal exposure for the paper; you test and get an ei for the film that puts the shadows where you want them; you test to get the development right to put the highlights where you want them ( zone 8 usually), using the standard minimum exposure maximum black time you have established.
You have just fit your film/developer/exposure to what the paper you are using is capable of giving.
When you go to print, if you expose to put the highlights where you want them, the rest will fall into place.
I use a little ilford enlarging meter that I calibrate to zone 8. When I pop a negative in, I find zone 8, put the meter there, and use the exposure it gives me.
This has saved me a huge amount of time and waste.

 

[Chuck_P]

I've never understood why the minimum time/maximum black thing has been stressed so much with the zonies.

It's not. The only resource I have that even mentions it is Fred Picker's "Zone VI Workshop". And it has nothing to do with the zone system as a system of exposure and development control. Picker talks about it, I believe, mainly from the standpoint of making a "proper proof", that's it.

Wouldn't it be better to figure out the exposure scale of the paper and standardize on a time that prints Zone VIII properly

This is right. With film we expose for the shadows and develop for the highlights----with printing we expose for the desired high value and adjust the contrast for the shadow values. Usually it is the high values in the zone VII to VIII range, but some may use IX.

When enlarging, proper highlights are the criteria for exposure, so why isn't it the same for making contact sheets? Finding max black seems the easy way out though perhaps not the most accurate.

I find making proof sheets to be unneccessary now that I have a scanner and can scan the negative and "proof" it in that way. When I did make contact sheets, I used the MTMB b/c it is quick. I knew what the time was for a certain enlarger height there was nothing to it. A proper proof can tell you how well or how poorly you exposed and developed the negative.

When I'm ready to print, I make a very low contrast print based on the desired highlight that I do not feel will need to be dodged, or will need very little dodging. This helps to see as much raw detail in the negative a possible.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

The decision as to where to place the black point in an image is a decision I make when printing and it is not up to the negative to decide it for me.

That the negative should be properly exposed and developed is a given that has nothing to do with printing technique. When it is time to print, the negative is a done deed - I'm stuck with it for better or worse and my goal is to make from it the best print I can, not slavishly follow some dictate.

And if the negative isn't properly exposed and developed then even more reason to ignore "Max Black".

There are much better techniques to eliminate wasted time and materials.

Max Black is the exposure equivalent of always printing the full frame of the negative: A cheap and lazy solution to a real problem.

Nullius addictus judicare in verba magistri - Horace

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

I use the the last step just barely before max black and selenium tone later for a full black.

Good point - the blacks in a print should be at least a 1/2 - 3/4 stop down in exposure from the paper's black saturation point (min time for max black) if one wants to optimize shadow detail. Usually 1.9 to 2.0 OD is a good value.

 

[MurrayMinchin]

It's a known point of departure which, if your negative fits your interpretation of a scene, will give an adequate proof print. That's it.

As far as printing goes, I've always been a 'bottom up' kinda guy, preferring to arrange a prints values from the base notes up. I could never figure out why it was easier to print for highlights then start changing contrast because if I change contrast, the local contrast in the highlights I loved so much changed anyways.

To each their own, eh?

Murray

 

[analogsnob]

In the holy book of Ansel it is written: The negative is but a score the print is the performance. Thanks be to Ansel....

It only makes sense that if one has tested to gain control of his materials the performance will be easier than for he who leaves everything to others. Unless one wants one's work to look as if it was done by a Japanese engineer, the photographer must make exposure/ placement decisions. When one first gains control many stupid negatives will be made but if one continues and learns one arives at negatives that reflect the feeling experienced infrount of the subject.

Nobody's perfect and adjustments usually need to be made but with testing the routine should land one close to the target.

The bottom line is the print not the technique but without technique how does one get to the print?

I worked for a small daily newspaper once and at this paper the guy that had the police beat used to take his own accident pictures. He did this by exposing apparently however he felt like it and then processed the film by loading the tank, adding the developer, going out to his desk to write the story including usually a call to the police agency and or the hospital and sometimes including supper after which he came back dumped out the developer followed usually by the stop and fix a quick rinse and denatured alcohol to fast dry it. The man got picutres but I was usually the poor schmuck that had to print them. Exposures sometimes extended into minutes for a 5x7 size then the next was 4 seconds at f11 or `16. I am from the sweat blood school of printing but I much prefer to sweat blood for the crowning 10% rather than just to get "something". Call me lazy........

 

[Vaughn]

In the holy book of Ansel it is written: The negative is but a score the print is the performance. Thanks be to Ansel.../QUOTE]

And then we all do the Parrot Sketch...

I just treat prints as the inverse of the negative -- exposed for the highlights and develop (and apply contrast controls) for the shadows. Basically, I make the best damn print I can, and then do it the same way again the next time. After a couple decades it ain't so hard.

Vaughn