Question for anyone with an RH designs Analyser Pro

[rpavich]

I'm taking delivery of an Analyser Pro tomorrow and so I've been familiarizing myself with how it works for several days; I've been watching videos, searching forums for questions, etc.
The one thing I haven't seen is this; what do the paper channels signify? I see that it has paper channels (I think) numbered from 2 to 8 but for the life of me, I cannot see what these represent.

When it comes and I turn it on, what is the default paper that it's set for?

Do the other settings (non-default) correspond to something or are they just extra slots for the user to populate with his/her paper brands/types?

FWIW; I'm mostly using Ilford MG IV paper though I do have some Adorama brand and some Oriental also.

 

[Svenedin]

The paper channels are for setting the default settings for different types of paper. Different papers have different speeds (how long they need to be exposed) and different responses to contrast filters. The default is "pap 2" (I don't know why) and the machine is pre-set for Ilford MGIV. All the other channels have the Ilford settings by default but you can programme them for different papers. To programme the other channels takes quite a long time making and reading test strips. I have done it for 4 different papers. You may be able to find calibration settings you can enter for different papers but it depends on your own enlarger and filtration so the best results are by doing your own calibration.

 

[rpavich]

The paper channels are for setting the default settings for different types of paper. Different papers have different speeds (how long they need to be exposed) and different responses to contrast filters. The default is "pap 2" (I don't know why) and the machine is pre-set for Ilford MGIV.

Thanks, that gets me started at least.

BTW: if you have any good tips you've gleaned from using it, don't hesitate to throw them my way, that would be helpful too.

 

[Svenedin]

I will. At work just now. Added some more to my original reply. The default will probably be ok for you to get started with MGIV and you can add "offset" figures if it needs a tweak without doing a full calibration run.

 

[rpavich]

I will. At work just now. Added some more to my original reply. The default will probably be ok for you to get started with MGIV and you can add "offset" figures if it needs a tweak without doing a full calibration run.

Ahh...thank you. That did help.
I appreciate it...I'm very excited to use this. I just printed a bunch of post cards to send out and thought I'd done a bang up job and after coming home from work the next day I realized just how dull and ill-printed they were, embarassing really because I'd already sent a bunch out to the recipients. Having something that can help get to a good working print would be a boon for me, my experience at this point is limited. I'm going to start by taking negatives that I've already printed and do a print using the analyser and compare to see how much it will improve my prints.

 

[mr rusty]

I've replied to your PM. For anyone else, I have been using an analyser for 3-4 years and can hopefully answer any user experience questions anyone has

 

[klownshed]

Does anybody use an analyser Pro with RH StopClock Pro for split grade printing?

I have an analyser Pro that I got when I purchased a StopClock pro but haven't used it for split grade printing, but this thread got me wondering whether it would be helpful with split grade printing? From what I can work out it's main purpose is as a device to eliminate the test strip.

 

[rpavich]

One more question; how is it used to check my developing times for my negs?
I see that it can be used for that, what is the procedure and what am I shooting for density-wise?

 

[Ozxplorer]

G'day... You might find all the information you need here: http://www.rhdesigns.co.uk/darkroom/Analyser_Pro_UM_v64.pdf
To get the best out of this unit you will need to invest time firstly with the manual then calibrating it to suit your needs. Once done it is a breeze to use including grade determination, split grade printing, negative density readings & burning in... Controls the safe lights too! Fred

 

[rpavich]

G'day... You might find all the information you need here: http://www.rhdesigns.co.uk/darkroom/Analyser_Pro_UM_v64.pdf
To get the best out of this unit you will need to invest time firstly with the manual then calibrating it to suit your needs. Once done it is a breeze to use including grade determination, split grade printing, negative density readings & burning in... Controls the safe lights too! Fred

Thanks Fred!

I'm chomping at the bit for the UPS guy to show up but first I have to make it through a sleepless night!

 

[paul_c5x4]

One more question; how is it used to check my developing times for my negs?
I see that it can be used for that, what is the procedure and what am I shooting for density-wise?

You use the probe to select a white point, then a black point. By cycling through the grades, you can decide what tones you want the selected points to print at. You can also increase/decrease the calculated exposure in steps of 1/12th of an f stop (the step size can be altered in the menu). Selecting a different paper will also affect how and where on the tonal curve the selected points will print. If you have over/under cooked your negatives, the analyser function will let you know if it will print well at G2 or need something much harder/softer. I'd suggest looking up Barry Thornton's excellent articles on personal film speeds and development times.

I will often use the probe to "read" several different areas to get a feel for where the tones will print on the papers I've programmed in - It sounds complicated, but once you start using the probe & timer, you will find it very easy. It doesn't make the test strip redundant, and I would still encourage you to do one when working. Even more so when doing split grade printing.

For making quick working prints, the Analyser Pro takes much of the guesswork out of getting a half decent print first time.

 

[rpavich]

You use the probe to select a white point, then a black point. By cycling through the grades, you can decide what tones you want the selected points to print at. You can also increase/decrease the calculated exposure in steps of 1/12th of an f stop (the step size can be altered in the menu). Selecting a different paper will also affect how and where on the tonal curve the selected points will print. If you have over/under cooked your negatives, the analyser function will let you know if it will print well at G2 or need something much harder/softer. I'd suggest looking up Barry Thornton's excellent articles on personal film speeds and development times.

I will often use the probe to "read" several different areas to get a feel for where the tones will print on the papers I've programmed in - It sounds complicated, but once you start using the probe & timer, you will find it very easy. It doesn't make the test strip redundant, and I would still encourage you to do one when working. Even more so when doing split grade printing.

For making quick working prints, the Analyser Pro takes much of the guesswork out of getting a half decent print first time.

Thanks Paul, much appreciated!

 

[klownshed]

Sorry, got confused between the Analyser and ZoneMaster II. I have the ZoneMaster which can plug in to the StopClock to send the times.

But I've not really used the ZM. I've tried it out but can't really see how to incorporate it into my split grade printing process without making life more complicated. I;m sure I'm missing something though.

I'd be interested to hear how you use an Analyser Pro or StopClock Pro with ZM for split grade printing...

 

[rpavich]

Ok, it came and i spent abot 2 pleasurable hours making prints...what a blast!

I reprinted the post cards and they came out much better than previously printed.

I also took a couple of recently printed negs and gave them a whirl...boy am i impressed! Decent working prints and not one test strip.

The operation is pretty intuitive and burning is easy to understand, though i couldn't figure out how to set up dodging.

I only left a filter in the enlarger while measuring twice!

 

[Svenedin]

I'm glad you like it. I waste far less paper using my analyser. It usually gets an acceptable print straight off but I will often make several tweaks. The only time it gets it wrong is if I have chosen the wrong measurement points. F-stop printing is far more logical. I write the details of exposure time, filter grade, paper type and lens stop gently in soft pencil on the back of the print. Then I can make extra copies another time even more easily.

 

[rpavich]

I'm glad you like it. I waste far less paper using my analyser. It usually gets an acceptable print straight off but I will often make several tweaks. The only time it gets it wrong is if I have chosen the wrong measurement points. F-stop printing is far more logical. I write the details of exposure time, filter grade, paper type and lens stop gently in soft pencil on the back of the print. Then I can make extra copies another time even more easily.

Thanks, ill make that a habit, good idea.

 

[Svenedin]

PS: I have calibration figures for both a condenser (LPL) enlarger using Ilford above lens acetate filters and a diffuser enlarger (Kaiser) with a multigrade head. I have figures for Kentmere Select (gloss), Fotospeed (oyster), Ilford MGIV (pearl) and Ilford MG warm tone (pearl). All RC. I found there are big differences between the 2 different enlargers and also between papers. Ilford warm tone for example is nearly 1.5 stops slower than standard MGIV at certain grades.

 

[rpavich]

PS: I have calibration figures for both a condenser (LPL) enlarger using Ilford above lens acetate filters and a diffuser enlarger (Kaiser) with a multigrade head. I have figures for Kentmere Select (gloss), Fotospeed (oyster), Ilford MGIV (pearl) and Ilford MG warm tone (pearl). All RC. I found there are big differences between the 2 different enlargers and also between papers. Ilford warm tone for example is nearly 1.5 stops slower than standard MGIV at certain grades.

Hey, those would be good to have... right?
I'm using a condenser head and ilford MGIV pearl paper.

I found that just making an offset really helped the ilford postcard paper even though it was MGIV also.


IF you wanted to PM me those offsets that would be great. (or post them here)

 

[rpavich]

Whew!
That first calibration was brutal! I must have ruined 20 pieces of paper for various reasons; forgetting things, pushing the wrong button, forgetting where I was and having to start over...more than a few reasons.
But....I finally got a good set of test strips.

This is Ilford MGIV Post card paper in Pearl. So far I only have the exposure offsets, not the contrast numbers yet. I had to rest my back...I've been at it for 3 hours straight.

 

[Svenedin]

Well done. It's a bit of a marathon isn't it! These are my figures just to illustrate the difference between different enlargers and different filter systems. It really shows that calibration is vital to get the best from the machine.

 

[mr rusty]

forgetting things, pushing the wrong button, forgetting where I was and having to start over

been there, done that. It's worth it in the end!! You do have to be extremely methodical

 

[rpavich]

been there, done that. It's worth it in the end!! You do have to be extremely methodical

Ok...I'm stuck.

I did the step wedge part of if for contrast and I'm not quite sure what I pick for comparison. I THINK that I pick the first light patch that matches the "zone VIII" (lighter) patch, and then pick the darkest patch that corresponds to the "zone III" patch on the patch swatch. Then I take the difference in steps and multiply by 15 to get the contrast.

Does this look normal?
I have descending figures: 150, 150, 135, 105, 90, 75, 60.

Here is a picture of what I got; 00 is on the left, 5 is to the right end.



EDITED TO ADD: YES, I GUESS HAVING DESCENDING NUMBERS IS NORMAL.

I just printed a postcard picture and it turned out nice.

Wow...what a work out.

 

[R.Gould]

Before you get to confused go to the RH designs website where you will find the settings for most common papers, some from users who have calibrated the analyser for themselves, this includes the offset for MGIV, plus there are videos that make calibration simple, 99% of the time the published settings are spot on,I have been using the analyser/pro for at least 10 years and have only had to calibrate mine once, for Foma Varient, If you ever use the Adox remake of the Agfa paper just dial in the settings for Agfa, they are spot on, use them myself, so my best advice is before starting go to RH designs site

 

[Svenedin]

Your figures make sense to me and seem fine. I found the RH designs figures (R Gould mentions) to be very close indeed to my own calibration figures when I was using a condenser enlarger with Ilford above lens acetate filters (but there were no figures for some of my papers). However, when I moved to my Kaiser diffuser/condenser enlarger with a multigrade head there was a big difference. Stick with it. You are doing well and your test strips look really good.

Attached pic: test strips for Ilford MGIV, pearl. My old (now given away) LPL condenser with Ilford above lens (filter drawer) multigrade filters.

 

[rpavich]

?...some from users who have calibrated the analyser for themselves, this includes the offset for MGIV...

I thought MGIV was the default?