Not enough contrast!

RalphLambrecht · Jan 29, 2010

cbphoto said:
...Is it a problem that I'm doing this on a neg that has already been selenium toned?...

Indeed. Selenium toner converts silver into more stable silver-selenide, sulfide toner into silver-sulfide. In case of an already selenium-toned negative, sulfide can only convert residual silver into silver-sulfide.

You need to do this with an untoned negative, but again, make a print before and after to appreciate the effect.

By the way, the rotten-egg smell is coming from the hydrogen sulfide gas produced by sulfide toners. It is toxic in higher concentrations. Do this only in a well ventilated area. It can also fog photographic materials. There is no need to do this in the confines of a darkroom, because it can be done in daylight.

cbphoto · Jan 29, 2010

I guess I'm back to square one, until next time this happens.

RalphLambrecht · Jan 30, 2010

cbphoto said:
I guess I'm back to square one, until next time this happens.

I found another book where negative intensification through selenium and sulfide is well explained with detailed instructions:

'The Elements of B&W Printing' by Carson Graves.

This book is unlike Tim Rudman's still available from Focal Press. Highly recommended! Get a copy to be prepared.

cbphoto · Jan 31, 2010

I found that book for $10. Cool.

Now I need to go shopping for new paper and/or developer tomorrow. Since Kentmere cannot reach the contrast level I need, I guess I'll bit the bullet and pay through the nose for Ilford MGIV. I use LPD developer, but can change that if someone tells me that there is a commonly available (B&H or Adorama, since they're my local shops) developer that gives higher contrast while maintaining the cool/neutral tone I get from LPD.

Marco B · Jan 31, 2010

cbphoto said:
Since Kentmere cannot reach the contrast level I need, I guess I'll bit the bullet and pay through the nose for Ilford MGIV.

Don't write off Kentmere Fineprint VC paper to fast! I have good experiences with it, also in terms of contrast, and even like it more than straight Ilford MGIV (non warmtone), as, contrary to MGIV, it tones beautifully in sepia and selenium, much like a warmtone paper although it isn't classified as such in the new Kentmere product range.

In addition, I seem to remember reading that the new Kentmere paper, as now produced by Harman, actually has better response to extreme contrast filtering compared to the older version produced by Kentmere...

cbphoto · Jan 31, 2010

I like the Kentmere a lot for things printed at about G3.5 or below! The cold tone is really nice (I'm all about cold/neutral...never warm). How do I tell if I have the new Kentemre or the old? I bought it from B&H about two weeks ago.

Marco B · Jan 31, 2010

cbphoto said:
I like the Kentmere a lot for things printed at about G3.5 or below!

I have made successful and beautiful prints on Kentmere Fineprint VC across almost the entire filter range (0-5). No problem. Just depends on the negatives contrast what's needed or works.

cbphoto said:
How do I tell if I have the new Kentemre or the old? I bought it from B&H about two weeks ago.

Just look at the packaging. If it features "Made by Harman Technology" next to the Kentmere name somewhere on the package, it is the new stock.

cbphoto · Jan 31, 2010

Thanks. I'll check when I get home.

clayne · Jan 31, 2010

cbphoto said:
Thanks. I'll check when I get home.

Try Emaks K-888 #4 which is a neutral fixed grade FB paper and quite under-appreciated. You're also likely to see better effects on perceived overall contrast with graded paper.

cbphoto · Jan 31, 2010

clayne said:
Try Emaks K-888 #4 which is a neutral fixed grade FB paper and quite under-appreciated. You're also likely to see better effects on perceived overall contrast with graded paper.

I've wanted to try that paper, but I'll have to wait until I can print some of these older negs first. I tried some Slavich #4, and it was BEAUTIFUL, but really a grade 3 compared to my VC stuff. Going forward, I'm going to start shooting with graded paper in mind, but my backlog of negs developed for scanning are mostly pretty low contrast.

cbphoto · Feb 1, 2010

Got some Ilford MG today - solved the problem. At grade 5, it looks like about two grades contrastier than the Kentmere (new version). I like!

Jon Shiu · Feb 1, 2010

Congrats on solving the problem.

Jon

Tom Stanworth · Feb 2, 2010

I love the Fineprint with high contrast negatives as it tames the highlights and gives great blacks, but I too find it runs out of puff at about G3.5 and comes nowhere near MGIV or WT at the top end.

I have some negs that need intensification and I think I will try some of the techniques mentioned here. A really useful thread...

Marco B · Feb 2, 2010

cbphoto said:
Got some Ilford MG today - solved the problem. At grade 5, it looks like about two grades contrastier than the Kentmere (new version). I like!

Is this using your new or old developer? I would recommend to throw in the Kentmere as well if you've finally bought new developer and see how it behaves than. There might still be a difference with your MGIV, but it would be interesting to know how much of your issues were related to using old developer.

cbphoto · Feb 4, 2010

Marco B said:
Is this using your new or old developer? I would recommend to throw in the Kentmere as well if you've finally bought new developer and see how it behaves than. There might still be a difference with your MGIV, but it would be interesting to know how much of your issues were related to using old developer.

I could switch to to the Dektol and probably get a slight bump over the LPD, but I already have enough replenisher mixed for a long while, and the image quality is till good. From what i understand, LPD is safe to use this way, and I top off the slot with fresh developer just about every session.

Not enough contrast!

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency