Saving paper.

marciofs

Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2011
Messages
802
Location
Hamburg
Format
Medium Format
I have to burn a couple of papers in order the find out the exactly exposure time for a single foto.

To save paper I usually get a sheet and cut in 4 or 6 peices depending on the size.

I wonder if different papers have different time exposure or not. So I could use a cheap paper to test and use the expensive one to actually make the final print.

I have only used 1 paper so faz and now I am going to use Ilford ART 300.
 

Thomas Bertilsson

Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2003
Messages
15,708
Location
Switzerland
Format
Multi Format
Different papers have different characteristics, and therefore different exposure times.

The best way to save paper is to get one of the Darkroom Automation enlarging meters. Nicholas Lindan of this web site puts them on the market, and they are a very good product.
It's a bit expensive at first, but quickly pays for itself.

- Thomas
 

Klainmeister

Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2010
Messages
1,504
Location
Santa Fe, NM
Format
Medium Format
Usually within the same manufacturers, they will have close to the same time, but often times are not identical. Unfortunately, there's no shortcuts to getting a great print. My suggestion would be get close with a strip, then do a full exposure--check for dust spots, highlight burnouts etc, then you should have a good solid try next round with dodging/burning now that you've seen the whole thing.
 

pentaxuser

Member
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
20,016
Location
Daventry, No
Format
35mm
I think that the OP's question is simply this: Can he use say Ilford MGIV RC paper( the cheap stuff) to ascertain the right exposure or nearly right exposure for Ilford Art 300?

Am I right OP?

So anyone use both papers and if so is the emulsion the same or close enough for MGIV to be used?

pentaxuser
 

tkamiya

Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2009
Messages
4,284
Location
Central Flor
Format
Multi Format
They are ALL different. Even between MGIV RC and FB, they are different. Even if emlusion reacts the same, paper texture will make the contrast LOOK different which requires different contrast grade, which will affect your exposure time. There's quite a bit of difference between neutral and warm tone papers. So if you use multiple papers, it will get quite confusing FAST.

All you can do is cut up a sheet into small parts and test few times. Once you get a hang of it, you can extrapolate from different paper type fairly well. Then few more sheets to fine tune. It's wasteful. There's no doubt about that.
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
53,252
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
You can learn some useful information about prints on another paper by refining a print on your first (cheap) paper, but you probably won't save any money overall.
 
OP
OP

marciofs

Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2011
Messages
802
Location
Hamburg
Format
Medium Format

Yes, that is my question.
 
OP
OP

marciofs

Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2011
Messages
802
Location
Hamburg
Format
Medium Format

If I use a normal lightmeters that I have already?
 

pentaxuser

Member
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
20,016
Location
Daventry, No
Format
35mm
I sympathise with the OP. Ilford Art paper isn't cheap. So is there a surface that is close enough to the Art paper surface out of the MG range of Glossy, Pearl and Satin that will enable the OP to get very close to the right exposure. Of course this relies on the MG IV emulsion being the same or very similar to that of Ilford Art. Is it in terms of exposure characteristics. Maybe Simon Galley will respond here?

I am sure that ideally you should do test prints on the same paper but how close would the quick and dirty test of using MGIV get him?

pentaxuser
 

ac12

Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2010
Messages
720
Location
SF Bay Area (SFO), USA
Format
Multi Format
Try using a projection print scale
Dead Link Removed
With a piece of 4x5 (maybe smaller) paper you will get very close to the final exposure, then from there you can fine tune.

re enlarging meter, here is an article to read
http://www.jollinger.com/photo/meters/other/enlarger_meter_roundup.html

You could use a normal light meter, but you have to know how to use it for enlarging use. w/o an enlarging attachment it would be difficult.

I use a Unicolor enlarging meter like this one:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Unicolor-Pr...D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557
This one from Ilford will do.
http://www.ilfordphoto.com/aboutus/page.asp?n=115
With all enlarging meters, you still have to calibrate it by printing a "good" print first, then calibrate the meter to that print.
And you have to learn how to use it to its best potential.
 

Newt_on_Swings

Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2011
Messages
2,147
Location
NYC
Format
Multi Format
The only way I think to save money is through using paper from a smaller size for a test strip. Say you are planning to do an 11x14 or a 16x20 print, you can use a strip from a sheet of 8x10 of the same paper type and grade in an area you are focusing on to save you the cost of cutting up one of the larger sheets.
 

AgX

Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2007
Messages
29,973
Location
Germany
Format
Multi Format
Gossen once made a meter-attachment "Lab" that fits all meters that accept a attachment, which is half a dozen.
 

mooseontheloose

Moderator
Joined
Sep 20, 2007
Messages
4,110
Location
Kyoto, Japan
Format
Multi Format
In all honesty, I would keep notes. If you are enlarging the same kind of film to the same kind of enlargement, and you are working with an average (that is, not difficult) negative for whatever contrast you prefer, then you should be printing at around the same time for any particular paper. Of course, once you change the variables, then you have to start using some more paper again, which is why standardizing is good. I would sacrifice some paper to do some tests for every different kind of paper you use...but once you know how it works, you shouldn't need to test again. RC and fiber will be different, and different brands will be different. The Art 300 is considered slower than the other Ilford papers, so it really can't be used as a baseline against other papers. And of course you need to deal with drydown as well. Les McLean has a good article about that here.
 

tkamiya

Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2009
Messages
4,284
Location
Central Flor
Format
Multi Format
OP might want to gain some experience with different paper and hone in some skills before using something like ART300.... This is not meant as an insult. But based on some of other questions OP asked, he may not be able to fully utilize a special paper like this.
 

Dennis S

Subscriber
Joined
Mar 16, 2008
Messages
1,763
Location
Vancouver B.C.
Format
Multi Format
As mentioned above I use a Projection Scale Exposure Aid 4x5". I usually do 11"14" so I sacrifice one in the beginning of a package and it usually works all the way through as when I am getting to the end of my test pieces I only use a small square (3"x3")right in the middle of the test scale as I really don't have to see the times printed on the test strip to know the proper time
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Nicholas Lindan

Advertiser
Advertiser
Joined
Sep 2, 2006
Messages
4,249
Location
Cleveland, Ohio
Format
Multi Format
RC test prints are a good idea if you are going to be doing any dodging or burning - it can often take a few tries to get it right. And making a 5x7 full frame test print at the start can tell you a lot about the image and how you want to crop it. After getting the print 'mostly right' on RC [with a large pile of 'mostly wrong' prints at the bottom of the trash barrel] you can move to the final FB paper.

Usually small test strips, and final test prints, are best made on the paper you will be using for the final print. You can expect differences in both exposure and contrast when moving from the RC to the FB version of the "same" paper.

Enlarging meters have a terrible reputation. You can find them in most darkrooms sitting in the junk box under the bench. Not surprising as most of them are next to useless when making a fine print.

You have to control exposure to 1/10th of a stop or better - about 1 second in 15 seconds. You can be a bit sloppier at grade 2, but at grades 3 1/2 and up your exposure has to be very accurate.

You need to measure better than you control: if you want to cut a bit of wood to the nearest inch your tape measure has to measure to 1/2 inch or better.

So you need a meter that can meter to 1/20th of a stop or better. The Darkroom Automation meter measures to 1/100th of a stop - a bit of overkill but 1/100th is the next digit over from 1/10th and the resolution can be useful for checking local contrast, evenness of enlarger illumination and when using the meter as a densitometer for Zone System work. I believe the metering portion of the RH units works in 1/24ths of a stop, but someone from RH would have to comment.

The Ilford EM-10 is a comparator. It can tell you if two levels of illumination are identical. Some have tried to calibrate the Ilford unit - but you need a very accurate enlarging meter to do the calibration. You can't accurately calibrate a meter to a projected step tablet as the effective densities of the tablet are changed by Callier effect, flare, stray light, variations in illumination and vignetting.
 

Jim Noel

Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
2,261
Format
Large Format

No!
 

pentaxuser

Member
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
20,016
Location
Daventry, No
Format
35mm
Jim Noel said:
No!
Click to expand...

Well that is what I call unequivocal and tells the OP what he needs to know in one word Thanks

Certainly sounds as if you just need to be prepared to spend a bit of money if you go in for Ilford Art paper. There is no easy way to save on paper

pentaxuser
 

Bill Burk

Subscriber
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Messages
9,327
Format
4x5 Format
I recommend using strips of the paper you are going to print the final print with.

And never print a full sheet without running a test strip first, no matter how much you think a neg looks like the previous one.

Being decisive and consistent like that, will save you a whole sheet of paper now and again, and that's pretty good economy.
 
OP
OP

marciofs

Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2011
Messages
802
Location
Hamburg
Format
Medium Format
This is not good rsrs.

Thanks.





Don't be so judging.

My questions may look silly at first sight but making silly questions you may learn some details about things you presume you know very well.

I have learned a lot and something more about what I already knew with my silly questions. And believe me, presuming some answers are too obvious to be asked or thought you may lose the opportunity to learn some details that can make a good practical difference.

Those who think they know enough don't evolve.

So don't be judging. If you what to know if I have try other papers and for how many prints I have done with them, just ask me. So you can give me better advises.
 

Bill Burk

Subscriber
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Messages
9,327
Format
4x5 Format
marciofs said:
Don't be so judging.
Click to expand...

tkamiya's not a judgmental person, so that's not what he meant at all.

I think he's saying you can get more experience on the same budget using less expensive paper. You can work faster, take more chances and try everything. Then you will make good use of better paper, some point in the future of your journey.

I personally recommend always using the best paper. Once I used expired/old paper and the fog made me think I was terrible. It shattered my confidence. Since then I always print on the best paper and have been very happy about that decision.
 

jeffreyg

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 12, 2008
Messages
2,652
Location
florida
Format
Medium Format
I agree with those who suggest making test strips on the paper you wish to make the final print on. While small pieces to make a test strip will only show a portion of an enlargement somewhere along the line you will have to make a full size print and probably see something to improve/correct and need to make at least another print. I didn't notice the mention of dry down which varies from paper to paper so it might save you paper to fully process and view the dry print even if it means reprinting another day. You could consider scanning your negatives for a larger view so you can pick out the ones worth printing and get some idea as to areas that may need burning, dodging or split-grade contrast printing. Even making test prints on a less costly paper before deciding on using an exhibition quality paper. There really are no shortcuts to making an exhibition worthy image. of course starting with the best negative possible helps.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/
 

cliveh

Subscriber
Joined
Oct 9, 2010
Messages
7,553
Format
35mm RF
I would also agree that making test strips with the same paper you use to make the final print is a good idea. You may also try three test strips at a time to sample the bightest highlight, a midtone and the darkest shadow. I have seen many times people making test strips and when making the final print they suddenly find a white blob in some part of the image they didn't notice before. The eye quickly goes to the brightest part of the image.
 
OP
OP

marciofs

Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2011
Messages
802
Location
Hamburg
Format
Medium Format
Yes... usually I scan to check how the entire image looks like.

But, if instead of test strips I cut a strip on the size of the negative and make some contact prints, with different time exposure on the same strip, so I can see the whole image and check what time expesure are the best on different areas for burning and dodging? Sounds a better idea? (by the way, I print from 35mm and 6x7 frame negatives).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…