Print Tone Question

[emanded]

Still trying to get to grips with this developing business - I have what is probably a dumb question to you guys but all my prints come out with what seems like a faint sepia tone. I use new developer each session but not stop and fix, temps 20 degs, safe light is a Paterson model, enlarger M670 Durst -
Any ideas?

 

[PVia]

Which developer, and which paper are you using?

How long do you develop the print for?

 

[Martin Aislabie]

Untoned print colour or tone is dictated by the type of paper you are using and the developer

Paper has two properties, base colour - white/creamy/....... and emulsion colour - cold (blue black)/neutral (black blank) or warm (brown black)

Developers also effect the colour of the prints but to a lesser extent than emulsion - and are split into cold/neutral/warm toned devs.

It may be you are using either a warm toned paper and/or a warmed tone developer

If you fix is shot then leave a print in a sunny window and watch it change colour in from of your eyes.

Never exceed the manufacturers recommended limits - yes they are cautious - but better be safe than sorry

Martin

 

[emanded]

I'm using Ilford multigrade (60ml in 540ml water) with Ilford RC multigrade.
Developed for 50sec stopped for 30sec fix for 30sec.

 

[Neal]

Dear emanded,

Try longer development times. Having said that, I always found Ilford Multigrade to be ever so slightly warmer than Kodak. If adding time in the developer doesn't help, try Kentmere paper. It appears a bit cooler to my eye.

Neal Wydra

 

[PVia]

Try at least 1 1/2 minutes in the dev and see if that helps...

 

[bill spears]

You say you're using fresh developer but not fix ? Fresh fixer is probably more important. Without proper testing its not always apparent when the fix solution is over saturated with silver although there may be some discolouration.
Sounds like this may be your problem and your prints are staining because they're not fixed out properly.
Also, 30 sec fix time is rather short unless its a very strong solution.

 

[emanded]

Thanks for your help - I'll try what I can in my next session.
Incidently, how long should I allow the developer to drip off before putting in the stop bath?

 

[pentaxuser]

How many prints do you make in roughly what quantity of fix before changing it? When you say they come out faintly sepia toned, do you mean they look sepia straight before and/or after washing or is the tone fairly neutral at first and then they become sepia, hours/days later?

What fix? If it is Ilford then 30 secs is short unless it is diluted at film strength of 1+4 rather than 1+9. However even at 1+9 and 30 secs I wouldn't have thought that the print would be affected very quickly, although in bright daylight I don't know how long it would take for this short fixing time to show problems.

I use Ilford Multigrade IV RC and with std multigrade dev and have never noticed anything even slightly representing a sepia tone. I am now using WT RC with WT dev and even that combo doesn't do other than faintly warm up the print. Maybe I am particularly insensitive to warmth.

If you could scan a print to accurately represent its tone, it might be easier for respondents to make a judgement. It might simply be you are particularly sensitive to any warmth present and the rest of us would say that what you see as sepia is the normal neutral to very slightly warm look that MG dev and MG paper gives.

pentaxuser

 

[pentaxuser]

PS Just had an idea. Have a look at Andrew Moxom's Bygones series in the gallery. These are what I'd expect a light sepia toned print to be like. Do yours look like these? My WT paper and WT dev doesn't even get remotely close to these in tone terms nor anything like them in warmth. If I place a WT print developed in WT dev alongside a MG IV print developed in MG then a difference is apparent but in full daylight it is very subtle. Only as it approaches evening and the light slightly fades and in an unlit room does the WT begin to show as really warmer.

pentaxuser

 

[emanded]

I use the fixer at 1+4 and as soon as I turned the light on they looked toned. However, as the number of prints made increased the worse it got - I did about 15 over two nights (same stop & fix used - 600ml each).
Process - after developer the print is allowed to drip for a few seconds- stop bath - after stop print drips for a few seconds - fix - after fix 2-3 mins to get from darkroom to kitchen sink to wash.
-Pentaxuser, the level of tone is about 1/3 of Andrew Moxoms bygones.
I think I'll start afresh tomorrow - I'll expose to the safe light only and develop fully to eliminate that then check Ilfords timings and re-print.
Any further advice welcome...........

 

[bill spears]

Is there any tone in the white print borders (assuming you are leaving borders?) This is where the fixer does the most work, removing the silver from the paper. The borders should be a nice clean paper base white. If your prints are very high key ie: contain lots of bright white areas, the fix will exhaust quicker.

 

[emanded]

The white borders are white as white - prints are not very high key

 

[pentaxuser]

Ok Here's another comparison. Have a look at Shiny's prints in the gallery. To all intents and purposes yours should look like his, at least tone wise.

If they are clearly more sepia/warmer than Shiny's then something is wrong but I don't really have any definite solutions at this stage - just ideas. If the fixer hasn't been overused then 30 secs at 1+4 should be fine.

Very low contrast prints might just about emulate what you are describing but really should look too grey to be described as faintly sepia.

If I had to guess and that's all it is, I'd say that something might be wrong with the developer. Try the same neg with prints from grades 1-5. There should be an appreciable contrast shift in each print. If there isn't then either the developer is spent or the paper is past its best. I have overused dev in the past and let it sit in the Nova slot processor too long as well and there was just a hint of what may be described as sepia. The key here was that I couldn't get the correct contrast or alter it. Print were wishy/washy looking. Changing the dev for fresh instantly solved the issue.

If you are tray processing and leaving it in the trays then I'd ditch the dev after 24 hour max i.e. you might get two consecutive evenings out of the dev but no more.

The only time I had a slight but real sepia look was with some outdated Kodak paper. To be frank it wasn't a bad look but the real problem was that I couldn't alter the contrast at all, even with new dev. I would have thought this is unlikely to be the case here unless the paper is quite old or possibly has been very slightly fogged but this should show up in the borders as faint grey.

If you have a scanner and can make it reproduce the tone of the print then somebody(ies) might have the answer. However a process of elimination is probably the surest way of getting to the root of it. Once you changed your dev and if the problem is no better, I'd try a sheet from way down the stack that you know hasn't seen any light or even open up another box of paper.

When doing that and in case your safelight is unsafe, I'd do a safelight test. Otherwise you might try switching off the safelight and withdrawing a sheet that you know hasn't seen any light for printing in the total darkness, inserting in the easel and exposing. Then transferring it to the dev, and fix in the dark. If the print comes out correctly then the safelight is certainly at fault.

Let us know how it goes.

pentaxuser

 

[Rich Ullsmith]

It really doesn't sound like your prints are reaching full development. Your tray time should be between 90 and 120s for RC paper. Any higher or lower than that, then something is amiss, unless you are trying for specific tones or contrast. Seems like it takes two minutes to get a good black on RC.

 

[pentaxuser]

I think MGIV RC in MG dev is supposedly full dev at one minute at 20C so 50 secs is slightly short but by itself seems unlikely to cause the prints to come out the way you describe them. However I'd still second Rich's comment. Try 2 mins to begin with. It's more than you should need but only by erring on the side of slight overdevelopment can you then eliminate short dev times as the likely cause. If 2 mins makes little or no difference then you can safely eliminate short dev times as the main source of the problem. Assuming that your stock dev hasn't gone off then changing it as often as you do should eliminate it as the source of the problem. How old is the stock dev and what colour is it?

There can only be a limited number of causes and it should be possible to eliminate them one by one.

pentaxuser

 

[emanded]

The developer before mixing is clear, when mixed is 'pee' coloured. I used a new mix each time.
I'm going to try and get in the darkroom today sometime.

 

[emanded]

HOORAY!
Prints are now ok - I've mixed the developer @1+9 and developed for 90secs and used new stop and fix - sorted.
s'pose it's part of the learning curve, cheers everyone.

 

[pentaxuser]

Glad it's sorted. Nothing more demoralising that being stuck on your own in a darkroom where things aren't happening properly. As you changed three things, we onlookers cannot determine which change made the difference but you might know if you changed each in turn.

Have you been able to identfy the cause? It sounds like simple lack of developing time. While the Ilford info sheets specify 1 min and 50 secs is only 10 secs short, it may be that every second short of 60 has a big effect and it is vital to set 60 as an absolute minimum with a safety margin of at least a few secs.

I think I read somewhere that a longer exposure and shorter dev time results in warmer(sepia?) prints. You might have been getting part of that effect with 50 secs.

Anyway if it is any consolation I have learnt something here from your misfortune, namely 60 secs plus, is a sensible target and that "short-changing" by as little as 10 secs may be more detrimental than I would have assumed.

pentaxuser

 

[emanded]

I think it was really a combination seeing that the previous prints were deteriorating the more I did - ie. the chemicals were over used.
This was proved (?) today as I left the 3 trays with their respective mixes in for most of the day today and when I returned and developed a print tonight I got the same problem back again so I presume oxidation plays a big part - The developer seemed to have gone very yellow.

 

[Martin Aislabie]

Some people claim they use, store and re-use old chemicals for months at a time.

I don't

I mix up fresh batches every time - which may several weeks apart - and then frisbie the stuff at the end

If you are doing small numbers of prints fairly frequently (say 2 or 3 times a week) - chucking the chemicals every time can get expensive

However, NOVA, have a verticle Slot Processor (think dev trays stacked on their sides) - which have a much smaller surface area for a given volume - hence the chemical oxidation rate (and odour) are much reduced.

You still need to use fresh dev - but the others can be used again

NOVA are only in Warwick and may even have a 2nd hand or shop soiled unit available (http://www.novadarkroom.com/cat/31/Print_Processors.html)

Martin

 

[pentaxuser]

I'd second a Nova slot processor. Of course you'd have to save quite a bit of chemicals to make up for the outlay of the cost of the Nova but the tandem(two slot) processors which are minus, I think, any heating elements, are quite a bit cheaper. I haven't done the break even maths but it might be measured in less than 18 months. Not long in terms of a lifetime of printing. You see very few secondhand Nova tandems on e-bay but the heated 4 slots appear quite frequently and can be used for RA4 or in a room where in the winter the temp is reguarly below room temp of 20C.

Ideal for short sessions. Mine are short most of the time and there's no set-up and clean-down time. Put the keeper tubes back in the top of the slots and walk out.

In my case I replenish dev after so many prints but have gone months without draining the dev slot. Of course if you print 2-3 times per week with replenishment then what's in the dev slot is not what was there a couple of weeks ago as the whole litre of dev has been replenished

There's even the option of using Nova's own developer and fixer. Great keeping properties and dev times of as little as 50 secs or even less is perfectly possible if you crank up the slot temp.

I sound like an agent for Nova. No, just a believer in this product.

pentaxuser