Paper

[AnselMortensen]

Ok, here's The Time-Tested Old-School Way of determining which side of the paper is which if you can't tell by sight or by touch:
Touch the slightest corner of one side of the paper to your damp (not wet) lip.
If it wants to stick, it's the emulsion side.
If it doesn't want to stick, it's the base side.

 

[redbandit]

Is this in addition to avoiding the danger of anyone "helping" by pouring fixer into your developer bath? Are there other users of your darkroom there at the same time who also have use of the developer and fixer and even if there are, why are they likely to pour fixer into your developer bath. Is this their honest stupidity and if so wouldn't this affect them unless they use different trays or is there something more sinister at work such as they have something against you and that why "helping" you is something you have put in inverted commas?

If space is so restricted that you have no space for trays, why are there others in the darkroom at the same time taking up what little space already exists

I am completely puzzled

pentaxuser

im at HOME.. you know, leave the trays in the bathtub dont be surprised when you come back from lunch and the 2 litre bottle of mixed fixer is empty, and the developer tray is now over flowing when before it was only 1.5 litre in it.

 

[afriman]

i tried the tray developing but using the cibachrome tube makes sure i get the MINIMUM times for paper developr and fixer.

using tubes isnt about time at all. its about space.

Isn't there a contradiction here?

im at HOME.. you know, leave the trays in the bathtub dont be surprised when you come back from lunch and the 2 litre bottle of mixed fixer is empty, and the developer tray is now over flowing when before it was only 1.5 litre in it.

I can see at least two solutions:

• Tell everybody to leave your stuff alone
• Put away the bottles.

 

[pentaxuser]

im at HOME.. you know, leave the trays in the bathtub dont be surprised when you come back from lunch and the 2 litre bottle of mixed fixer is empty, and the developer tray is now over flowing when before it was only 1.5 litre in it.

OK, thanks. That clears up matters a little so presumably these "helpers" are little kids who have no idea the problem this creates, teenage siblings who had done this for a prank or adults who object to trays of chemicals being left in the bath and want to make a point and if I may say so in quite a nasty way if he/she or they empty the fixer tray by pouring it into the developer tray so it overflows?

pentaxuser

 

[afriman]

If it's little kids you shouldn't be leaving this stuff within their reach anyway.

 

[MattKing]

I too work with a bathroom/temporary darkroom, and sometimes use Cibachrome drums for black and white prints - most commonly for a batch of contact proof sheets.
The set-up and take-down times for tubes are a lot quicker than the process I need to use for the trays.
But it only works easily if one has several tube and cap sets - I find four sets work well. Which means that there isn't a lot of saving of space.

 

[koraks]

using tubes isnt about time at all. its about space. I have no space for trays

Weren't you printing on 5x7 paper? So is that ft or in?
I generally print 8x10 (or a little more or less; European sizes). 4 trays, dev, stop, fix, water/hold fit on my smallish (4ft) countertop, side by side. When I'm done printing, they stack into each other and go in the cupboard below the work top. For smaller formats like 5x7 I use even smaller trays, which stack into the bigger ones. The trays are in fact plastic storage containers. Cheap, cheerful and the high walls prevent chemistry splashing all over the place.

Anyway, by all means use drums if you so prefer. It should not make the paper orientation issue any more difficult.

It might prove feasible to ask the people you share a living space with to not mess with your chemistry. And consider pouring the contents of trays back into bottles before having lunch. It takes just a minute.

It sounds like you have lots of little problems that have pretty easy solutions. Again, there's probably some reason why these problems keep popping up. I'd really look into that part if I were you - but I'm not, so that's something I feel is up to you.

 

[abruzzi]

using tubes isnt about time at all. its about space. I have no space for trays

I don't have space for trays either. I prefer developing by inspection so tubes don't really work for me. If you have some counter space, you might look for a "Nova Print Processor". They are vertical trays with a little clip, and you can still see the print while developing. They're uncommon in the US, and the heated ones don't work on our voltage, but if you come across one they are worth it. (they don't seem to be available new at the moment.)

Like others, I've never encountered a single bag of paper to have different sheets oriented different ways. Maybe you got a bum box of paper? None the less, I always check every sheet just by looking at it at a highly oblique angle and lookig for the right texture. Good luck sorting it out.

 

[redbandit]

I had fun tonight real fun.

Took a sample sheet out, ran it through the whole process, turns out it was upside down. but it had some details visible.

Did another one 40 minutes later, as far as i can remember i did the opposite surface up, and it was the correct surface.

This print came out pretty nearly perfect the only actual issue i have is that i cant see the birds eye without alot of hard looking.

The structural issues is that the image only printed out at about 7x9.8" so im SLIGHTLY sad but i dont really care. I can always toss in a different lense, but right now i seem to have the focus just freaking perfect,
I just wish the negative strip im using wasnt one of my first ones, fomapan 100 isnt quite the outside film, and i was using a 50mm f/1.8 lens and i HATE that lens because it doesnt have any DOF..

 

[ntenny]

Unless I missed something, you haven’t said what type of paper you’re using—you mentioned the brands, but is it RC or FB, matte or glossy or in between?

With anything but matte, you should be able to see under the safelight which side is the emulsion: It’s the side that reflects. This should be really clear for glossy and pretty clear for pearl/semi-matte-type surfaces. I always check visually with RC paper, because I’m never sure which way is up in the box. With FB I’ve never had a problem trusting the curve of the paper.

The structural issues is that the image only printed out at about 7x9.8" so im SLIGHTLY sad but i dont really care. I can always toss in a different lense, but right now i seem to have the focus just freaking perfect,

You don’t normally change the image size by changing the lens, but by changing the enlarger height. Focussing also changes the size slightly, so there’s a back-and-forth routine to get both the size and focus right; it takes some patience, but you get a preview on the easel, so there should never be a surprise about the final image size.

-NT

 

[redbandit]

Unless I missed something, you haven’t said what type of paper you’re using—you mentioned the brands, but is it RC or FB, matte or glossy or in between?

With anything but matte, you should be able to see under the safelight which side is the emulsion: It’s the side that reflects. This should be really clear for glossy and pretty clear for pearl/semi-matte-type surfaces. I always check visually with RC paper, because I’m never sure which way is up in the box. With FB I’ve never had a problem trusting the curve of the paper.



You don’t normally change the image size by changing the lens, but by changing the enlarger height. Focussing also changes the size slightly, so there’s a back-and-forth routine to get both the size and focus right; it takes some patience, but you get a preview on the easel, so there should never be a surprise about the final image size.

-NT

i have my spiffy-less borderless easel set for 8x10, the image fills the WHOLE paper area when i do the focusing. when i MAKE the enlargement its smaller then 8x10.

I also get to see the very edge of the projected image, and its kind of funny how wonky the edge looks.

 

[rcphoto]

I might recommend posting some samples of the issues you are having.

 

[ntenny]

i have my spiffy-less borderless easel set for 8x10, the image fills the WHOLE paper area when i do the focusing. when i MAKE the enlargement its smaller then 8x10.

Let me see if I’ve got this right:
1. You project and focus on the easel, with the projected image covering the whole paper area
2. You add the paper to the easel, without moving the easel or changing the enlarger settings in any way
3. You turn the enlarger on and see the projected image covering the entire paper
4. You turn the enlarger off
5. You process the paper
6. The developed image does not cover the entire paper

That sequence of events should be physically impossible, because the silver that emerges in step 5 is activated by the projected light in step 3.

If this is what appears to be happening, something is wrong in your workflow and one of the steps isn’t behaving as expected, and I think the person who suggested inviting an experienced APUGer for lunch was on the mark—someone experienced will be able to see what’s going on, but it’s very hard to diagnose from a written description.

Don’t worry about the nuances of the image quality and stuff like that, at this stage. First, get your workflow to the point where the image that develops is the image you saw on the easel.

-NT

 

[snusmumriken]

i was using a 50mm f/1.8 lens and i HATE that lens because it doesnt have any DOF

Man, the number of things you are finding to complain about is mind-blowing.

Is this your enlarger lens you are talking about, or the camera lens? In either case, stopping down to, say, f/8 will give you ample DOF - exactly as much as you'd get from an f/2 or f/3.5 50mm lens at f/8!

 

[mshchem]

Just stick to it. You'll figure it out. The clamshell papersafes with the Velcro work great.I pull out the whole stack of 25 sheets,put the envelope and plastic bag in the safe at the bottom, then put the paper in emulsion down.

At the factory the paper is stacked and cut, it is all in the same direction. Get a paper safe. Then you will know orientation.

 

[Buzz-01]

I'm not going into the discussion too much, just wanted to add this:
The Foma FB papers I buy in packs of 25 sheets are divided 50/50 in orientation. From either side it's emulsion side towards the middle of the stack, but you can easily recognize emulsion side from the paper curl.

Foma RC papers are all stacked in the same orientation. But that makes sense as they don't curl at all.

 

[Joe VanCleave]

using tubes isnt about time at all. its about space. I have no space for trays

I frequently use those plastic 3-drawer cubical storage bins as development trays. Developer in the top drawer, stop in the middle, fixer on the bottom. The size fit for "8.5x11" is good for 8x10 paper. It only takes up the footprint of a single tray, perfect for small darkrooms.

 

[redbandit]

Let me see if I’ve got this right:
1. You project and focus on the easel, with the projected image covering the whole paper area
2. You add the paper to the easel, without moving the easel or changing the enlarger settings in any way
3. You turn the enlarger on and see the projected image covering the entire paper
4. You turn the enlarger off
5. You process the paper
6. The developed image does not cover the entire paper

That sequence of events should be physically impossible, because the silver that emerges in step 5 is activated by the projected light in step 3.

If this is what appears to be happening, something is wrong in your workflow and one of the steps isn’t behaving as expected, and I think the person who suggested inviting an experienced APUGer for lunch was on the mark—someone experienced will be able to see what’s going on, but it’s very hard to diagnose from a written description.

Don’t worry about the nuances of the image quality and stuff like that, at this stage. First, get your workflow to the point where the image that develops is the image you saw on the easel.

-NT

Well if the projected image has no ability to magically shrink once the paper is placed into the easel, can you explain why, using a blank sheet of 8x10 enlarger paper to do the actual focusing on, that i somehow have white strips on my developed enlargement?

 

[rcphoto]

Well if the projected image has no ability to magically shrink once the paper is placed into the easel, can you explain why, using a blank sheet of 8x10 enlarger paper to do the actual focusing on, that i somehow have white strips on my developed enlargement?

If we could see what you see, we might be able to help.

 

[ntenny]

Well if the projected image has no ability to magically shrink once the paper is placed into the easel, can you explain why, using a blank sheet of 8x10 enlarger paper to do the actual focusing on, that i somehow have white strips on my developed enlargement?

I can’t, but somebody who knows the ropes and watches your workflow should be able to.

-NT

 

[Joe VanCleave]

i have my spiffy-less borderless easel set for 8x10, the image fills the WHOLE paper area when i do the focusing. when i MAKE the enlargement its smaller then 8x10.

I also get to see the very edge of the projected image, and its kind of funny how wonky the

Well if the projected image has no ability to magically shrink once the paper is placed into the easel, can you explain why, using a blank sheet of 8x10 enlarger paper to do the actual focusing on, that i somehow have white strips on my developed enlargement?

You mentioned using a "borderless" easel. How are the edges of the paper held down?

 

[mshchem]

I'm tired.

 

[redbandit]

You mentioned using a "borderless" easel. How are the edges of the paper held down?

its a beseler borderless easel, its self explanatory on how it works, and already stated.

 

[snusmumriken]

Well if the projected image has no ability to magically shrink once the paper is placed into the easel, can you explain why, using a blank sheet of 8x10 enlarger paper to do the actual focusing on, that i somehow have white strips on my developed enlargement?

Show us a photo of your easel.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

is there any damned reason companies cant put the emulsion side of each sheet of paper in the same orientation? im just tired of wasting paper because i cant tell what side has the emulsion on it


and dont go into the "with the curve" crap, im using two brands of paper, and each is curved the same direction in the package, and im getting emulsion on either side.

i mean i take the sheet out of the package, FOLD a corner down, put the corner a certain way on the enlarger, then put the folded corner into the cibachrome tube a specific way and half the time the only image will be bits and pieces of black spots ON THE WRONG side of the paper,

ie upon the bottom side that was put to the outside of the tube.

I don't get it;never had a problem telling which was the emulsion side. The darkroom light does not reflect on the back side. Have you waited until your eyes are fully dark-light adopted?