Selectol Soft and Dektol for Print Contrast Control?

Colleagues:

Is anyone using SS and Dektol to control print contrast? I read in Ansel Adams that he liked to mix the two to control contrast, whereas Fred Picker in one of his newsletters said to use two trays and vary the times in each one, for a total developing time of two minutes.

Just curious if anyone is using SS and Dektol on a regular basis and what approach works best for them. Have some on order, but have not gotten it yet.

Any advice? Thanks!

this is something that Les McLean does in his darkroom processes workshop.

lee\c

mmcclellan said:

Colleagues:

Is anyone using SS and Dektol to control print contrast? I read in Ansel Adams that he liked to mix the two to control contrast, whereas Fred Picker in one of his newsletters said to use two trays and vary the times in each one, for a total developing time of two minutes.

Just curious if anyone is using SS and Dektol on a regular basis and what approach works best for them. Have some on order, but have not gotten it yet.

Any advice? Thanks!

Click to expand...

I have used it in the past. What I do is mix a tray of SS and my normal developer (Zone VI which is nearly identical to dektol) in a 2nd tray. The way I use it is to maintain my standard print development time of 2 minutes and split the development between the two developers. So, if I am printing on a grade 2 paper and feel that the contrast is too high, I develop for the first minute in SS and the final minute in my standard developer. I mix the time based upon my needs e.g. if 1:1 is too much, I could go 45 seconds in SS and 1 min 15 secs in standard and so on... I never change my 2 minute standard because I always like to have a firm reference point. Doing this gives you multiple grades of contrast downward to the next lower grade. I think the real value to me is printing on a grade 3 and achieving contrasts between 2 and 3 rather then taking the full step to 3.

If you are using VC or MG papers, I wouldn't think that this technique would buy you a lot. You should be able to accomplish the same thing with filtration. I only use graded papers; I use this technique sparingly because I have tested my film development time to closely match my grade 2 paper.

Slectol

Do yourself a favor and mix up some ansco 120. It's workability is much better than the SS. Just my opinion...
Peter

I used to use this technique all the time with graded papers...works amazingly well in that extremely subtle changes of contrast are possible.

Peter Schrager said:

Do yourself a favor and mix up some ansco 120. It's workability is much better than the SS. Just my opinion...

Click to expand...

I had read what Peter is saying so often I had to give it a try, even though I had never mixed anything myself before. Really, do yourself a favour and mix some Ansco 120 up and do some side by side tests with Selectol Soft. I find the SS prints "muted" in comparison.

Murray

You'll get nice gradations in contrast, and you'll get a slight print color shift, as the absence of Hydroquinone in the SS or Ansco 120 lends toward, I think, a nice cooler color than the often greenish cast of Dektol. One other thing, I used to use a three minute developing time. But I think it was because I used the SS in a 1:2 dilution. Don't remember exactly, but it's still a good idea to be sure the paper is fully developed, without going over the line into fogging territory.

I use this alot with MG paper. First in SS then Dektol for a total of 3 minutes. I vary the time and pull the print out of the SS when I see the highlight the way I like it. Then the balance of the time is in Dektol.

Very nice in warmtone paper.

Peter Schrager said:

Do yourself a favor and mix up some ansco 120.
Peter

Click to expand...

I don't know the formula for nor have I worked with
Selectol Soft. I do know about Ansco 120 and Beer's A.
Beer's, as you may know, is a VC paper developer. Beer's A
is the exact same developer as Ansco 120 save for being
2/3 the strength when compounded. At the suggested
working strengths they are the exact same.

Beer's B is the hydroquinone portion. While A will work
alone, B will not. A alone or A and B mixed in a choice of
ratios provides contrast control. My little work so far with
Beer's shows it can deliver a considerable range of contrasts.

If you've already Beer's A, Ansco 120, brew up some
B and give it a try. Another is Ansel Adam's Ansco 130
A and B. There again B is the hydroquinone. Dan

Peter Schrager said:

Do yourself a favor and mix up some ansco 120. It's workability is much better than the SS. Just my opinion...
Peter

Click to expand...

I agree, I was useing SS. and dektal for years and lately the SS. would lose its strenth after only a few prints and take to long for the image to start in the tary. Maybe Kodak change the formula so that we would have to use more of it. I did mix up some 120, and found it to be more consistant and controlable.

Thanks everyone! I really appreciate the help and feedback. Now to find some Ansco 120 . . .

APUGgers really are the greatest when it comes to helping out!

Following a suggestion in Les's book I have been using Tetenal's Dokumol and Centrabrom S. They are are easily found here. I generally start with 30sec in the hard Dokumol 1+6 then finish with 2min in Centrabrom 1+15 then change the time from there. I noticed the difference in my VC prints immediately-- blacker blacks and a longer smoother tonal range-- based on side by side comparison of prints of the same neg developed with this two tray method versus a one tray of Ilford MG developer. The dokumol cannot be used again. But the Centrabrom lasts longer, usually two printing sessions depending on how many prints have beeen run through it and how long I wait between sessions.
James

mmcclellan said:

Thanks everyone! I really appreciate
the help and feedback. Now to find some Ansco 120 . . .

Click to expand...

Brew your own. The formula is very simple; sulfite,
metol, and carbonate. Skip the fractional grams and
see how it works without the bromide. I've been doing
without the bromide. You'll have Beer's A and Ansco 120.
Order some hydroquinone and brew some Beer's B as well.

BTW, you don't need to brew up the whole batch.
P. Formulary likely has the 120 or similar. Of course
they have all the chemicals. Dan

dancqu said:

Brew your own. The formula is very simple; sulfite,
metol, and carbonate. Skip the fractional grams and
see how it works without the bromide. I've been doing
without the bromide. You'll have Beer's A and Ansco 120.

Click to expand...

I once made up a soup of just Metol, sulfite and carbonate and some Benzotriazole. I was after a cool-to-cold tone on a cold tone paper. It worked pretty slowly, but the results had this beautiful, subtle gradation in the mid to high values, and a lovely blue-gray print color that I never got using anything with hydroquinone. Interestingly, about the simplest developer of all is the old Kodak film developer, D-23, which is just Metol and sulfite. I wonder how that would work for a print developer? :confused:

Dektol and Selectol Soft is a combination that I have often used but I do not use the standard dilutions. For example if the suggested dilution is 1 to 9 for liquid Dektol I dilute 1 to 3, making a considerably stronger developer while the Selectol Soft (normal diluton 1 to 1 or 2) would be diluted 1 to 4/5 or even 6 making a very weak and slow working soft dev. My normal process then is to leave the print in the strong Dektol until the first sign of tone, about 20 seconds, and then transfer the print into the very dilute Selectl Soft until I am satisfied with the tonality of the print. Sometimes this can be 3 minutes but often it is longer. I still get very deep rich lower values as anyone who has seen my prints will testify, but the long development in the soft dev allows total control over the highlights and midtones.

Les, do you use this technique with VC papers, or graded?

1. The effect of adding small amounts of Dektol to Selectol-Soft to reach the necessary contrast is a bit different than using Selectol-Soft / dilute Dektol as consectutive baths. Beers A and Beers B work the same, and are virtually identical.

2. The advantage of using a single bath is when making an edition of prints, it is more consistent than consecutive baths.

3. "Consecutive baths" are an easy way to work for normal, low volume printing.

4. I expose the print to get correct whites in a normal time in the Soft developer, adjusting the paper grade, or filtration, as needed. When the scale of the negative is so long that my blacks are too soft ( after drying the print ! ) I use the Hard bath as needed.

5. it is important to dilute the Hard bath. Dilution does not change the contrast, it merely slows the development rate. ALSO, adding Pot Bromide 10% will effectively shield the whites from the effect of the Hard developer. ( note: mixing 120 from scratch, do not add bromide. Only add drops of 10% if you need it, which you probably won't )

6. Published formulae for both Soft ( Selectol Soft, Ansco 120 ) and Hard ( D72 ) are virtually identical when corrected for dilution.

7. The longer the print is in the Soft developer, the cooler the tone.

8. Using Selectol Soft / 120, one can expose to a higher density negative that will print with greater clarity than is common with a Hard developer. This alone solves the old problem of making different negatives for Silver and Platinum.

9. Higher density negatives also make it possible to make strong and clean shadows with low contrast filtration, reducing the need for N- development.

10. Glycin developers work very well with two bath technique. The Ansel Adams variation of Ansco 130 was a common application of the pre WW2 era. Without the HQ, 130 becomes an extra long scale developer capable of strong blacks without losing the whites of Selectol-Soft / 120.

11. Selectol is NOT the same as Selectol-Soft.

12. The effect of using Selectol Soft is absolutely NOT the same as changing filtration: the two techniques are HIGHLY complimentary.

Brother McLean does this technique BACKWARDS with wonderful results.

Suzanne Revy said:

Les, do you use this technique with VC papers, or graded?

Click to expand...

Suzanne I use it with both VC and graded and the method is not confined to Dektol and Selectol Soft. I use it with any combination and hard and soft working developers, many from old formulae that I mix myself. I am also prepared to use neat hard developer stock if it will achieve the result that I want.

I have been told by some printers that iit's pointless using this method when we have VC papers, I disagree for I feel that it provides another level of subtle control in the search for the expressive print.

Here's an example from a study I made yesterday of an old favorite at the Detroit Institute of Arts, "Reverie" by Elie Nadelman, c. 1916.

I wanted to bring home the modeling of the marble face, while keeping a sense of full shadows in the galerie.

I exposed TMY at 1/30 @ f/1.4, knowing that would be adequate for the shadows, but knew it would drive the densitiy of the bust to the moon. And I was confident the film would hold it. It got normal development in Aculux ( could have been any normal developer ) to maintain the local contrast. The highlights on the bust read D 1.7. And, no, the grain was not terrible.

It printed on unfiltered Ilford FB MG in my Focomat V35.

First developer: Ansco 120 ( normal dilution )
Second developer: D72, diluted with about 3 times the normal restrainer.

An easy print to make. Had to 'print the scan down' to read the highlights on a display.

The point of the study ?

To get the right feeling. I'm happy with it.

Too bad I missed the chin leaving a 'trap' against the shoulder.

Practise, practise, practise.

This afternoon, I'll try it Les's way... shadows first. Cool.

.

rhphoto said:

I once made up a soup of just Metol, sulfite and carbonate
and some Benzotriazole. I was after a cool-to-cold tone on
a cold tone paper. It worked pretty slowly, but the results
had this beautiful, subtle gradation in the mid to high
values, and a lovely blue-gray print color that I
never got using anything with hydroquinone.

Interestingly, about the simplest developer of all is the old
Kodak film developer, D-23, which is just Metol and sulfite.
I wonder how that would work for a print developer?

Click to expand...

What do you mean, "worked pretty slowly"? Developed
slowly? What is pretty slow in your book when it comes
to print developing?

D-23 makes a fine print developer. It works slowly,
5 minutes, and the paper needs some additional
exposure. I tested using 125 ml of an 8 - 80
gram D-23 at 1:3 dilution. Dan

dancqu said:

What do you mean, "worked pretty slowly"? Developed
slowly? What is pretty slow in your book when it comes
to print developing?

D-23 makes a fine print developer. It works slowly,
5 minutes, and the paper needs some additional
exposure. I tested using 125 ml of an 8 - 80
gram D-23 at 1:3 dilution. Dan

Click to expand...

Yeah, it took about 5 minutes for my "soup" to fully develop a print. My surprise at D-23 working as a print developer is that it has no restrainer. I guess I just thought that was OK for film, as it might bring up the FB+Fog a bit, but thought it would dull the whites with paper. Do you like the print color you get with D-23?

rhphoto said:

My surprise at D-23 working as a print developer is that
it has no restrainer. I guess I just thought that was OK for
film, as it might bring up the FB+Fog a bit, but thought it
would dull the whites with paper. Do you like the print
color you get with D-23?

Click to expand...

With only sulfite D-23 makes for a little activated print
developer. Add carbonate and you've an Ansco 120/Beer's A
type. Both have a 1:3:3 metol, sulfite, carbonate ratio. And
that is just what I was reminded of when looking at that
5 x 7 put through D-23.

Restrainer may not be needed. Perhaps it's a hangover
from generations gone by. Of four or five papers I've worked
with over the last few years only one was in need. A few
milliliters of bromide solution did the trick. Bromide does
delay image emergence. All other matters being OK,
tone, contrast, whatever, leave it out.
Color? I'd say neutral. B & W!

Beer's A, BTW, is the lowest contrast combination of the
A and B combinations. It is the metol only portion. Dan