I always use multiples of 5 and I try to never print for less than 10 seconds, so there's some easiness in case of needing to dodge. That's just what I was taught and I've stuck with it.
A couple of years ago, I used to find papers in the community darkroom I use with notes for exposures that were 40-50-60 seconds long, and I always wondered why someone would use those...may be someone here works like that and can share their point of view!
Where do those numbers come from? I'm trying to find some sort of pattern!I always prefer to start with a progression of 8, 11, 16, 22, 32, 45 or 64 seconds.
But I don't think that is OCD - habits that you are used to can simplify the variables.
I see! I had not considered larger prints. Thanks!Daniela, I like longer printing times in the range of 20-30+ seconds. That enables me to do whatever dodging I have to do without hurrying and making mistakes. Sometimes, I'll purposely make an even longer exposure by stopping down if I have particularly complicated dodging to do.
However, prints in the one to many minutes exposure range are likely due to their being large (longer exposure required unless you have a really powerful light source) or being made on enlargers with weaker light sources or needing lots of filtration.
So paper sensitivity can be another factor. Thanks!I find some warm tone papers are very slow. I still have a supply of Forte Poly Warmtone. It's so slow normal times are frequently a minute or so. Luckily it's so slow it's hasn't noticeably aged despite being out of production for a long time. Maybe they were printing on slow papers or with dense negatives and it wasn't by choice. I like times of 20 seconds or so.
I always prefer to start with a progression of 8, 11, 16, 22, 32, 45 or 64 seconds.
But I don't think that is OCD - habits that you are used to can simplify the variables.
In case you didn't realize it, that progression gives you equal half-stop increments of times - f-stop printing without charts or fancy equipment!Where do those numbers come from? I'm trying to find some sort of pattern!
I considered f-stops but the 45 kept throwing me off!In case you didn't realize it, that progression gives you equal half-stop increments of times - f-stop printing without charts or fancy equipment!
One chap looking perplexed asked me if I ever just printed to a standard time, I looked back equally perplexed not understanding how that would be possible.
I remember showing some of my prints to a photography group and describing my choices of different contrast, dodge and burns, different f stop printing times and toning to each individual print. One chap looking perplexed asked me if I ever just printed to a standard time, I looked back equally perplexed not understanding how that would be possible.
I have "CDO." It's like OCD, but it's in alphabetical order like it should be!!
Seriously, the only obsessive thing I do in the darkroom is to be too nit-picky. Sometimes I'll make prints with small variations that even I can't tell apart once they are fixed and dried, just to see if I can "make one even better."
I won't make prints in increments smaller than one second. If I need to change something by a fraction of a second to refine the print, the exposure time is too short to start with.
Daniela, I like longer printing times in the range of 20-30+ seconds. That enables me to do whatever dodging I have to do without hurrying and making mistakes. Sometimes, I'll purposely make an even longer exposure by stopping down if I have particularly complicated dodging to do.
However, prints in the one to many minutes exposure range are likely due to their being large (longer exposure required unless you have a really powerful light source) or being made on enlargers with weaker light sources or needing lots of filtration.
Best,
Doremus
I always prefer to start with a progression of 8, 11, 16, 22, 32, 45 or 64 seconds.
But I don't think that is OCD - habits that you are used to can simplify the variables.
Maybe you should have asked him what he meant by a standard time?
Like Daniela I use multiples of 5 seconds, and prefer an exposure time in the 5 x 5 seconds range, if possible, for dodging and burning. And I mean 5 x 5 seconds - not a continuous running total of 25 seconds. My students used to challenge me on that, so we'd do both from the same negative to see. The difference was obvious, the values were darker on the continous running time.
Works for me, I'm sticking with it.
The difference you saw is due to the intermittency effect. Five five-second exposures will always be less than one 25-second exposure; something to do with reciprocity and threshold I think. Couple that with ramp-up time for the bulb and no wonder there was a difference. You could have easily matched the prints by exposing the continuous print for less time.Like Daniela I use multiples of 5 seconds, and prefer an exposure time in the 5 x 5 seconds range, if possible, for dodging and burning. And I mean 5 x 5 seconds - not a continuous running total of 25 seconds. My students used to challenge me on that, so we'd do both from the same negative to see. The difference was obvious, the values were darker on the continuous running time.
Works for me, I'm sticking with it.
That's an old printing method that was mostly used in commercial settings.One chap looking perplexed asked me if I ever just printed to a standard time, I looked back equally perplexed not understanding how that would be possible.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?