Scanning vs printing

[cerber0s]

Why not use a glassless negative carrier?

I’ll remove the glass and try again.

 

[grain elevator]

I see no mention of filters. You're using variable contrast paper. Use it! (Of course you also need to get the paper development under control.)

 

[cerber0s]

I see no mention of filters. You're using variable contrast paper. Use it! (Of course you also need to get the paper development under control.)

I learn so much here. Thanks!

 

[grain elevator]

I learn so much here. Thanks!

If you're using a colour head on your enlarger, you can control the contrast with the magenta and yellow channels. It you have a black&white head, you need a filter set such as the one from Ilford.
That being said, common advice is to aim for negative contrast that prints well without a filter. But with roll film, it's near impossible to get that on all negatives of a roll if they're of different subjects, so the filters are great to have.

 

[MattKing]

I learn so much here. Thanks!

Regarding print development time, I generally look at what the paper and developer manufacturers recommend, and if there is a range, I aim for the long end of the range.
That way if you are slightly inconsistent, or if you have longer printing sessions, any variability in the end result will be minimized.
It would be worthwhile for you to try a little experiment, which will use up a small amount of paper.
Do tests using the longer development time I just mentioned - until you get a result that seems reasonable. Then, using the exposure time you've arrived at, expose three - five small pieces (e.g. 1/5 of an 8x10 sheet?) of paper to the same segment of the image, using that exposure time.
Now put all those pieces into your developing tray and start them developing.
From then on, you will start pulling the pieces out of the developer and putting them into the stop, one at a time, over a range of times.
The time progression should be based on that longer recommended time - something like 2/3, 85%, the time, 120% and 150% of the time.
Then fix, wash and dry the results.
This will permit you to see the effect of variation of development time, and should help you understand better how things work.
You may be surprised at how little difference you will see between the last two times.

 

[MattKing]

If you're using a colour head on your enlarger, you can control the contrast with the magenta and yellow channels. It you have a black&white head, you need a filter set such as the one from Ilford.
That being said, common advice is to aim for negative contrast that prints well without a filter. But with roll film, it's near impossible to get that on all negatives of a roll if they're of different subjects, so the filters are great to have.

Correct - although I always recommend using the settings/filter for the equivalent to Grade 2 as your standard - it makes it easier to subsequently adjust the contrast without quite large changes in exposure time.
Can you remind us which enlarger you are using, and what head or light source is on it?

 

[cerber0s]

Regarding print development time, I generally look at what the paper and developer manufacturers recommend, and if there is a range, I aim for the long end of the range.
That way if you are slightly inconsistent, or if you have longer printing sessions, any variability in the end result will be minimized.
It would be worthwhile for you to try a little experiment, which will use up a small amount of paper.
Do tests using the longer development time I just mentioned - until you get a result that seems reasonable. Then, using the exposure time you've arrived at, expose three - five small pieces (e.g. 1/5 of an 8x10 sheet?) of paper to the same segment of the image, using that exposure time.
Now put all those pieces into your developing tray and start them developing.
From then on, you will start pulling the pieces out of the developer and putting them into the stop, one at a time, over a range of times.
The time progression should be based on that longer recommended time - something like 2/3, 85%, the time, 120% and 150% of the time.
Then fix, wash and dry the results.
This will permit you to see the effect of variation of development time, and should help you understand better how things work.
You may be surprised at how little difference you will see between the last two times.

Cool, thanks! I might try that the next time I haul out the enlarger.

 

[cerber0s]

It printed OK, but a little flat. I also tried printing a couple that came out better in the development, they were easier. I do uave dust issues though… and some water marks one one if the negs. Oh well…

View attachment 343840

Here’s another attempt, using the new enlarger. I tried split grade on Kentmere VC Select. I think it turned out better than the first one, but still not good enough. No dodge or burn.

Just a quick photo from the phone as the prints dry.