• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

print meter

Rick A said:
I think the OP would do better to make test strips and maybe pick up an Ilford EM10 meter to help establish a base exposure. They are a lot less money than what he's looking to buy.
View attachment 294003
Click to expand...

I use that, the Ilford EM 10 just to have a first good approximation
for which f-stop to use for a certain enlargement,
then i start to make the test strips for the split grade printing.
 
I wonder how many (what percent of) darkroom printers measure exposures rather than learning how to eyeball. Similar to Zone System discussion.
 
DREW WILEY said:
But what is you time worth?
Click to expand...
Sorry, you just used a phrase that gets me going. Is someone paying you for that time? Would you rather be doing something else with that time? Time has no value unless there is something of value you can or could be doing with it. So if you enjoy making prints in the darkroom, the few extra minutes per print to use a second fixer is worth the time. When you are on your deathbed, will you regret the hours of your life you spent leaving a print in an additional bath. Or those hours upon hours adding up to months (maybe years) of watching TV?
 
I had almost 60 years of darkroom experience before digital cameras and printing became more practical for me. Even an inexpensive exposure meter or transparent pie chart does save time and paper in the darkroom. However, many inexpensive meters are designed to control the exposure by adjusting the F-stop while it can be more efficient to vary the exposure time. Enlarging lenses perform best over a narrow range of apertures. The few EL-Nikkor 50mm f/2.8 example I often used should be stopped down to f/4 to eliminate a hint of vignetting. At f/8 a grain focuser showed slight image softness due to diffraction. larger format enlarging lenses can be stopped down further. Learning to accurately count seconds is a useful skill for many photographers, both behind the camera and while printing.
For a beginning printer, each print should be a learning experience. Before using an exposure aid to determine the first print's exposure, guess what it will be. Comparing shadow density in the negative with the clear border around the image helps in doing this. Perhaps you will soon guess accurately enough that you don't even need the meter. With familiar equipment, i got to where maybe 2% of prints exposued by guess were discarded after the developer. Of course exhibition prints demanded more attention. Also, getting the best exposure in the camera saves time in the darkroom.
My favorite book on B&W photography is Way beyond monochrome by Chris Wooodhouse and our own Ralph W. Lambrecht. It has much information that a beginner may not use at first, but it is an inspiring way to set and reach high goals.
 
The Ilford EM10 was designed for use with Ilfochrome/Cibachrome. This material shifted its color balance if the exposure time changed; so to keep things simple the exposure was controlled with the lens' f-stop. The knob on the EM10 is there to get back to the same setting - the numbers on the knob don't relate to print exposure. Some people have calibrated their EM10 meter. The potentiometer in the meter is a transistor radio volume control and given to being 'scratchy,' especially at the setting you use the most -- as a result calibration can be iffy.
 
I printed Ciba as long as it was on the market, and never controlled the degree of exposure via f-stop. That f-stop was kept constant in order to keep optimal focus very shallow only upon the film emulsion itself, and ideally not bring into focus any grain from the registered mask or any potential idiosyncrasies or tiny dust issues of the carrier glass either. Ciba masks tended to be somewhat dense however, sometimes up to .90 density, and it was a slow medium to begin with. The answer was simple - powerful colorheads. Of course, those had their own problems like excessive heat, premature filter replacements, the need for huge fan capacity, etc. But this did allow for short exposure times and little worry about long exp recip issues. So all the exposure changes were done timer only. Fortunately, current RA4 chromogenic papers print way faster, even masked, so don't need a nuclear reactor inside the colorhead.

And I had far better and more sensitive instruments than an EM10, which seems almost like a toy to me.
 

Superb post! However you're overlooking the fact that many care less about results than they do about toys.
 
jtk said:
Superb post! However you're overlooking the fact that many care less about results than they do about toys.
Click to expand...


But some see the toys bandied about, and have to wonder if the toys will actually help.
 
sturmovik said:
But some see the toys bandied about, and have to wonder if the toys will actually help.
Click to expand...
Toys are helpful insofar as one knows how (and when!) to use them. Otherwise they're just toys. Much like brand-name cameras - a Hasselblad is a tool in the hands of someone who understands what it is capable of and when to use it, but near-useless jewelry in the hands of someone who does not.

Since you say you do not have anyone nearby who can teach you how to print with your enlarger, here are a couple of starter tips.
  • If you are having issues with focusing, then a "toy" that is worth getting is a grain focuser. You put it on your easel, under an area of your image with sufficient detail that you will be able to see when something is in focus. For optimum performance, put one of your old, bad test strips under the foot of the grain focuser to make sure the device is focusing at the same plane as your projected image. Looking through the eye-piece of the focuser, turn the focus knob until you see the grain and the details you selected pop into sharp focus.
  • When you are making test strips to determine proper exposure for your print, place the test strip across an area that will have maximum black in it. Set your contrast to grade 2 (however your enlarger controls contrast, either through below-the-lens filters, or via some other contrast control system). Do your test exposures over that area, then process the strip, and evaluate. You will want to use the time that represents the first stripe on your test strip that you achieve maximum black. After determining the baseline exposure, make one print of the whole image using that baseline. Look at that print - are your midtones and highlights too bright? If that is the case, decrease the contrast. If they are too gray and murky, then increase the contrast. If you are going up or down one grade from grade 2, you will not need to alter your exposure time (not entirely true, but it's accurate enough for your purposes). If you need to increase your contrast beyond grade 3, you will need to re-do your test strip to determine a new baseline time, and same with if you need to decrease below grade 1. This is a gross oversimplification, but it should get you on the path to making acceptable prints, and we can refine from there.
  • As others have mentioned F-stop timing, it is a good idea to start thinking of f-stops in terms of controlling printing. The materials are very similar - film and prints just have different substrates (celluloid and paper), and different sensitization (film is much more responsive to light), but the chemistry and physics work the same way. Just as you would open the lens on your camera one stop to increase brightness or change shutter speed from 1/30th to 1/60th, exposing paper works the same way. If your print is not dark enough when the enlarging lens is set to f/8, then you'll want to increase that exposure by one stop (or more but let's stick to a simple example). If the time you used was 12 seconds, then you'd double that time to 24 seconds. If on viewing that, you decide that 24 seconds is too dark, you'll want to cut that by a half stop - so you'd cut the exposure back to 18 seconds (1/2 stop).
  • Once you get your basic processes down so that your exposures and your developing of your film is dead-on consistent, you won't need to do lots of testing - all your negatives shot on a given film stock should print with the same base time and contrast, and only vary by the amount of burning/dodging you need to do. That is another lesson for another time.
 
My best work in the darkroom is done without meters. I like to get my print times to fit in with what a one minute clicking timer can do (32 to 40 seconds is ideal.) So I adjust f/stop and usually add 0.6 ND filter to get “too dark” in 50 seconds and “too light” in 16 seconds. If the first test strip is practically white I will open two f/stops and try again. I hardly ever get “too dark” a test strip the first time.

Everone agrees working in f/stop increments is best. I just memorize the clicks between a few third stop increments: from 50 seconds, (it’s 10, 8, 7, 5, 4, 3.) and I move the cardboard each of those counts.

Lately I have been playing with a Beseler PM2M It’s overkill but has a nice analog display. My best use of it has been setting the f/stop that gets me in the 32 seconds ballpark.
 

Ralph Lambrecht (author of Way Beyond Monochrome) does the opposite: He first gets the highlights correct, and then adjusts contrast until shadows are correct. Ilford's filters maintain constant skin-tone for all except the highest contrast filters, allowing one to adjust shadows without altering skin-tones, suggesting that getting light tones correct should be done first when using Ilford's filters.

But for a beginner? The simplest approach is to make a test strip at grade 2, and select the patch that looks best. A bit more advanced would be to first guess the grade based on lighting: grade 1 for sun+shade, grade 3 for flat diffuse light, grade 2 for everything else.

Mark Overton
 
New developer and new paper and knowing to count is most important not switches and timers.
 
Hi Tom. My Durst 2000W colorhead would punch a 30X40 inch Ciba with an intergral mask of about .60 in around 8 seconds. It was their older style with parabolic quartz mirrors and four big pure silicone duct hoses attached to a 220V cooling fan that used more electricity than a typical commercial table saw. I replaced it with my own additive design RGB 1500W unit which runs way way cooler; but additive filters are denser, so printing times were more around a minute for that size Ciba print.. Still no problem recip-wise. And it does big 30X40 RA4 prints in about 15 sec. But now I also have a regular Durst CLS 600W 8X10 CMY head on a 184 chassis which prints about the same speed. A 2000W CMY head would be just too fast; and most people I know who have those later Durst 2000W watt heads have converted them to 1000W. Only Ciba printing needed a water-cooled plutonium reactor inside with control rods to prevent another Chernobyl accident.

All the above are too powerful for ordinary b&w printing without introducing some additional ND. I have a tamer customized RGB head on my 4X5/5X7 enlarger for sake of more routine smaller print and smaller negative tasks.
 
Last edited:
michael_r said:
Not true. It’s just a way of doing things. I don’t work that way, and actually none of the great printers I know work that way.
Click to expand...
You say it’s not universally accepted to do test exposures in divisions of stops?
 
michael_r said:
Not true. It’s just a way of doing things. I don’t work that way, and actually none of the great printers I know work that way.
Click to expand...
I've never seen anyone do test exposures in divisions of stops. I expose paper in seconds so I just test in seconds. Most of my print exposures are about ten seconds so two second test increments give me precise enough information to interpolate final exposure. Short tests, short exposures, quick burn and dodge, all get darkroom output moving efficiently.
 
Maris said:
I've never seen anyone do test exposures in divisions of stops.
Click to expand...
That is all I use.
But I know people who use seconds.
And I know of people who use percentages.
I recommend the f/stop approach - because it is easy to see how the progression affects the results - but I'm happy if you are happy.
This is always up on my wall behind my enlarger - even though my darkroom is temporary.
 
A grain focuser is very much a worthwhile tool, and mine quickly became a 'no brainer' purchase after using one. I wouldn't include one in a list of 'minimum viable kit' for enlarging, but probably at the top of the list of 'nice to have extras.

And an additional tip for learning to focus with it: Start off with grainy film, and make slow adjustments.
I had a rather frustrating time at first when I was trying to use it to adjust from an 'eyeballed focus' of a medium format Delta 100 negative. I thought I had been adjusting my enlarger slowly, but had been jumping right over the sharp grain effect.

After just a minute or two of playing around looking at different grain structures on a HP5 negative it became far more obvious and easier to see the effect even on fine grain film.


Bill Burk said:
You say it’s not universally accepted to do test exposures in divisions of stops?
Click to expand...

Linear time based test strips does seem to be the more common choice among YouTube photographers doing darkroom work that I've come across.

No idea if that is actually a deliberate choice, or if stop based timing just hasn't gained overall traction to really be common knowledge. To me it is one of those "Obvious once pointed out" things, but most content talking about test strips tends to default to "Just keep hitting the same 5 or 10 second exposure a bunch". No idea if I would have gone with a stop based solution on my own if I hadn't stumbled across it while I was getting set up.
 
Not new, but I concede it’s not universally adopted…

Lootens 1945 and Mortensen 1942 both recommend test strips in geometric series.

Mortensen recommends 4, 6, 8, 11, 16, 22, 32, 45, 64.

Adams confoundedly doesn’t. He says 10, 15, 20, 25, 30.

Drawback of the third-stop series I use (16, 20, 25, 32, 40, 50) is that it doesn’t cover much range.

Lootens’ series (5, 10, 20, 40, 80) covers enough range to assure a “too dark” and a “too light” patch.
 
michael_r said:
Linear works as well as any other system or gimmick. Use your eyes.
Click to expand...
Actually, the advantage of the f/stop system is that it is easier to see the progression of differences, because the steps are visually equal and consistent, and there is less likelihood that the best choices will be all crunched up together at one end.
But that doesn't mean that someone who is already comfortable with one approach, and familiar with their own darkroom setup, should feel the necessity to change.
 
And what a really good easel densitometer tells you is those f-stop settings on many enlarging lenses are NOT always of truly consistent intervals, so neither are those alleged steps, Matt. There's simply no replacement for a basic dried-down test strip to tell you what is actually happening. That's why, when I do use a meter, it's based on actual log density units of light to within 1cc, and not nominal f-stops. For instance, plus or minus 30cc is a .30 density change, and therefore one ACTUAL stop or EV change, and not just where some click stop says its supposed to be. That's great for critical work, like making precision matched color separations, masks, internegs, etc. But for routine black and white print test strips, and even color ones, ordinary timer beeps are plenty adequate. No need to get silly or overthink it.
 
Last edited:
Drew must be really fun at parties
This thread was started by someone starting at the very beginning with darkroom printing.
Someone whose enlarger is somehow set up so problematically that he is unable to properly print anything larger than a wallet sized print.
My advice to people in that situation is to do things in a way that it is easy to see what the effect of any changes you make might be, and to the best of your ability understand why you are making those changes.
To the OP: Some of the advice you have received in this thread really is more appropriate for you after you have a fair bit more experience under your belt.
f/stop printing has relevance to beginners, because it is useful and because it is easier to deal with if you start early.
 
RalphLambrecht said:
You must be joking.
Click to expand...

I suppose they sold a few of them back in that day. As I said, this was in a box of miscellany I acquired back in the 1970s. I think it came out of a photo lab I worked in. For decades, they had tossed all kinds of junk into the old upstairs, which used to be an apartment building, and when the fire department said to clean it up, I put in overtime hauling stuff out to the dumpsters. I intercepted all kinds of cool and weird stuff.
 
And by the way Drew, that is the progression I use for my first set of test strip exposures, not for fine tuning the result. For fine tuning, my aperture stays unchanged, and I use the 1/6 stop tables in Way Beyond Momochrome.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register