Not enough contrast!

[Anon Ymous]

Can't you increase contrast by adding some sodium/potassium carbonate in the developer?

 

[zumbido]

Any approach that involves developing for longer than the recommended times should (even more so than any other experiment) be tried on some test films first imo. I'm not an expert but a lot of people who are seem to think that even the rec. times are often too long, and this is what I've seen in my limited experience as well. Thronton for example addresses this in Edge of Darkness (someone please let me know if that's bad info).

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Is there a danger of losing detail in parts of the neg that are already very dense using selenium? This particular neg is low contrast, but there is a bright window in it. Is it advisable to tone selectively in this case, or should I use a lower dilution?

I'm going to do a bit of reading about this before I try it, but if you can get me started...

cbphoto

Going by your last description, the negative is a bit different from what was originally stated. This is not a low-contrast negative but a negative with low local contrast (without the window) and high overall contrast (with the window). In cases like this, you need to look at your negative and separate the issue into two individual problems.

1. You have gotten several suggestions how to increase overall contrast. Pick one of them and do it. I would tone the negative in sulfide. If you need more, increase paper contrast as suggested.

2. Of course, this will leave you with little or no print density in the window. For that you need to cut a simple burn-in mask and print it down.

Ask yourself if these images are good enough to justify the effort?

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Any approach that involves developing for longer than the recommended times should (even more so than any other experiment) be tried on some test films first imo. I'm not an expert but a lot of people who are seem to think that even the rec. times are often too long, and this is what I've seen in my limited experience as well. Thronton for example addresses this in Edge of Darkness (someone please let me know if that's bad info).

You need ONE controlled film test to understand how your film responds to exposure and development. Any attempts to short cut this procedure through trial and error are a waste of time.

Anyway, that's not the OP's problem. His film is already developed. He is looking for advice how to work with what he's already got. So he is left with negative intensification, changes in print processing and print manipulation.

 

[zumbido]

You need ONE controlled film test to understand how your film responds to exposure and development. Any attempts to short cut this procedure through trial and error are a waste of time.

Anyway, that's not the OP's problem. His film is already developed. He is looking for advice how to work with what he's already got. So he is left with negative intensification, changes in print processing and print manipulation.

Indeed. To avoid hijacking I've asked a follow-up in a new thread:

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

 

[cbphoto]

cbphoto

Going by your last description, the negative is a bit different from what was originally stated. This is not a low-contrast negative but a negative with low local contrast (without the window) and high overall contrast (with the window). In cases like this, you need to look at your negative and separate the issue into two individual problems.

1. You have gotten several suggestions how to increase overall contrast. Pick one of them and do it. I would tone the negative in sulfide. If you need more, increase paper contrast as suggested.

2. Of course, this will leave you with little or no print density in the window. For that you need to cut a simple burn-in mask and print it down.

Ask yourself if these images are good enough to justify the effort?

It's just one pic, but yeah...it's a key portfolio piece. Back when I did the hybrid thing (when this photo was taken), I would develop everything in dilute Rodinal and raise the contrast in scanning. This a photo with a rare need for extreme contrast, locally.

I did a bad job explaining the neg - the window is not hard to burn in during printing, but I don't want to blow it out on the neg (selenium does not pose this threat? Does it cut itself off?). The rest of the image needs a local contrast boost. I'm going to first try switching papers, and then selenium toning, if that doesn't work.

 

[cbphoto]

I tried selenium on a strip from the same roll, and I can't really see any significant highlight increase, but the film looks bluish now. I used 1+3 dilution and let it sit with occasional agitation for about 45 minutes, checking it now and then.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I tried selenium on a strip from the same roll, and I can't really see any significant highlight increase, but the film looks bluish now. I used 1+3 dilution and let it sit with occasional agitation for about 45 minutes, checking it now and then.

It's hard to see with the unaided eye, but it will be about half a grade. Too bad you don't have any sulfide toner. You would get a full grade. The bluish tint is silver selenide, which is very stable. These negatives will last for a long time.

I hope you did not forget to wash the film thoroughly after toning. Selenium toner contains fixer!

 

[cbphoto]

It's been washing for a good 45 minutes so far. I'll give it another 15 or so.

I can experiment with other toners, but my goal today was to save $$$ by using what's on hand (and avoid leaving the apartment to go to B&H).

If this works, I may say goodbye to VC paper. I like the look of the Slavich stuff, but it's just too soft for my negs.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

It's been washing for a good 45 minutes so far. I'll give it another 15 or so.

I can experiment with other toners, but my goal today was to save $$$ by using what's on hand (and avoid leaving the apartment to go to B&H).

If this works, I may say goodbye to VC paper. I like the look of the Slavich stuff, but it's just too soft for my negs.

Save your water. Film washes easily within 30 minutes at 20C. It washes within 10 minutes after treating it in wash aid.

'go to B&H', I wish I could do that.

 

[cbphoto]

It sounds better than it is. I still have to get my film and graded paper from Freestyle!

I'm going to do some research on toning negs with different toners. Any good references would be appreciated.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

It sounds better than it is. I still have to get my film and graded paper from Freestyle!

I'm going to do some research on toning negs with different toners. Any good references would be appreciated.

Tim Rudman's 'Toning Book' is very good. It covers all aspects of toning, but for negative intensification I prefer the magazine publications of Liam Lawless. Tim's book is out of print and used copies sell for too much money. Liam's work is hard to find in libraries, but you can search the web or I'll ask him for permission to copy what I have.

 

[Mark Layne]

My borders are bright white, so I don't think that's it.

You can preflash and still have white borders

 

[2F/2F]

Why not under expose a little and then develop for longer (or use stronger developer).

Hmmm......perhaps because the negatives are already exposed and developed...maybe???

 

[jgjbowen]

Captain Kirk: "Scotty, I need more contrast."

Scotty: "Aye, Captain, I'll add some Dilythium Crystals to the Soup."

This has probably already been suggested in this thread, but have you tried extended development of your paper, ie develop for 2 - 3 times longer than normal. It just might increase the print's contrast.

Good luck,

 

[cbphoto]

Tim Rudman's 'Toning Book' is very good. It covers all aspects of toning, but for negative intensification I prefer the magazine publications of Liam Lawless. Tim's book is out of print and used copies sell for too much money. Liam's work is hard to find in libraries, but you can search the web or I'll ask him for permission to copy what I have.

Thanks. I'll look into this.

I did some initial searching, and see many mentions of sepia toning and chromium intensification. In a nutshell, what are the different effects of either? I'm not getting a comprehensive picture yet.

I printed the neg in question after the selenium toning, and there was a noticeable boost to the highlights, but not enough for what I want. I need to go buy a different paper before I get into more toners.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Thanks. I'll look into this.

I did some initial searching, and see many mentions of sepia toning and chromium intensification. In a nutshell, what are the different effects of either? I'm not getting a comprehensive picture yet.

I printed the neg in question after the selenium toning, and there was a noticeable boost to the highlights, but not enough for what I want. I need to go buy a different paper before I get into more toners.

I'd stay away from chromium intensification. It's too toxic. While shopping pick up a bottle of Kodak Brown Toner and we'll take it from there.

 

[cbphoto]

I'd stay away from chromium intensification. It's too toxic. While shopping pick up a bottle of Kodak Brown Toner and we'll take it from there.

Will do

 

[cbphoto]

Got the brown toner! Now what?

 

[cbphoto]

I tried soaking a reject neg in brown toner at the dilution on the bottle for about 30 minutes. I don't see any effect. I'm assuming there's more to this. I've Googled it 100 different ways and found squat.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I tried soaking a reject neg in brown toner at the dilution on the bottle for about 30 minutes. I don't see any effect. I'm assuming there's more to this. I've Googled it 100 different ways and found squat.

I mentioned a couple of resources earlier, but the best to look for is probably Tim Rudman's toning book. Unfortunately, it is sold out, but Tim is an APUG member, and if you contact him directly, he will most likely help you out.

Until then:

Any sepia or sulfide toner can be used to intensify negatives. You can do so via direct or indirect toning. It works best with properly exposed but underdeveloped negatives. Sulfide toning will give the negative a brownish color affecting the spectral sensitivity of VC papers. The intensification is much greater than with selenium toning, but more so with indirect toning than with direct toning. Kodak suggests 15 minutes in Brown Toner 1+31 at room temperature.

I don't know what you expect to 'see' after toning the negative, but a brown hue should be clearly visible. To appreciate the toning effect, make a print before and after toning. Extend the time to increase intensification and/or raise the temperature. If still not satisfied, bleach a negative and redevelop in sepia toner.

 

[cbphoto]

I mentioned a couple of resources earlier, but the best to look for is probably Tim Rudman's toning book. Unfortunately, it is sold out, but Tim is an APUG member, and if you contact him directly, he will most likely help you out.

Until then:

Any sepia or sulfide toner can be used to intensify negatives. You can do so via direct or indirect toning. It works best with properly exposed but underdeveloped negatives. Sulfide toning will give the negative a brownish color affecting the spectral sensitivity of VC papers. The intensification is much greater than with selenium toning, but more so with indirect toning than with direct toning. Kodak suggests 15 minutes in Brown Toner 1+31 at room temperature.

I don't know what you expect to 'see' after toning the negative, but a brown hue should be clearly visible. To appreciate the toning effect, make a print before and after toning. Extend the time to increase intensification and/or raise the temperature. If still not satisfied, bleach a negative and redevelop in sepia toner.

Thanks. Is it a problem that I'm doing this on a neg that has already been selenium toned? Should I be doing anything else to neg before putting it in the brown toner?

This stuff is stinky.

 

[Marco B]

I tried soaking a reject neg in brown toner at the dilution on the bottle for about 30 minutes. I don't see any effect. I'm assuming there's more to this. I've Googled it 100 different ways and found squat.

If that is one of the negatives that you have previously selenium toned, I am afraid that there is no more that can be done to them.

If you've selenium toned to completion, which is very quick with a negative in my limited experience with it, there is no additional silver left to tone in your brown or sepia toner.

Only a non(-selenium) toned negative can be used in your brown toner. And if it is a toner of the bleach / redevelop type (selenium toner generally is not), you will need to pre-bleach before toning the negative. The bleach should be included as part of the toner package than.

Marco

 

[cbphoto]

Damn. I guess I need to go blow some more money on Ilford MG to get a real grade 5.

 

[Marco B]

Damn. I guess I need to go blow some more money on Ilford MG to get a real grade 5.

Don't forget you can selenium tone the prints as well. I recently had a very thin negative as well. By printing at grade 5 and toning both the negative and the final print, I was able to get into the ballpark for an acceptable or better said good print.