Even said twice, I don't understand you. How does "proportional" time increase make more sense, again?
More commonly called f/stop printing.
Instead of making test strips exposures 5, 10, 15, 20, 25 seconds, make them in f/stop related increments.
For example third-f/stops: 5, 6, 8, 10, 13 seconds.
I used Gene Nocon f-stop system for years until RH Designs produced the Stop Clock Professional an F Stop enlarger Timer. When I got used to using that I could never see myself going back to any other type of printing. I also have the Zone Master II by the same company. But through all the changes I could never eliminate the use of test strips. I find them a comfort to know that I'm nearing the best print that I can make.
Hi Vincent, I am new to darkroom work and am awaiting delivery of the rh design stop clock pro and zone master. Could you please point me in the right direction for a starting point about using them.
Thanks in advance
The user manuals are available for download here:
User Manuals - RH Designs
The latest User Manuals for our products are available here. An archive of manuals for older products is also available further down the page. All manuals are in PDF format and can be opened with either Adobe Acrobat Reader or in your web browser. Download the free Acrobat Reader here. Analyser...rhdesigns.co.uk
Instructional videos can be found on the RH Designs YouTube channel:
Even Ansel Adams suggests making test prints with even increments of exposure. ("???" - not sure the meaning of this - ed)
Have any of you found you are making smaller test strips in view of the increasing cost of paper. Although I evaluate more negs through scanning before printing them, I still find I am making smaller test strips in the darkroom, being conscious of the cost of paper these days.
I forgot to say that - to me - the sense in using smaller strips of paper (and not using a strip-printing gadget) is that you can choose the areas of the image that are most informative with respect to highlights or shadows. Otherwise, you end up with what might have been the perfect exposure falling on a desert of uninformative mid-tones. Personally I'm not convinced about the value of analysers, but I have never had the opportunity to try one.
To be honest been a complete newbie, and yet to produce a print, I can't confirm or deny your comment. But I will however post my opinions. ( once I have figured it all out. But I do appreciate your input.
A wonderful thing about photography is that you don’t need a huge lot of kit at the outset. My suggestion FWIW would be to defer the analyser purchase until you have learned to do it without. Then decide if the outlay makes economic sense.
I'm sure we've discussed this beforeAA, being a musician, used a metronome for timing. F-stop timing with a metronome might be possible, but I can't see any easy way. Ye old 4, 5.6, 8 ... sequence might be adequate for the short and simple print but when things get involved (and AA's prints were decidedly involved) I think that linear metronomic methods would cause less brain pain.
I'm as much a proponent of f-stop timing and measuring as anyone but I do use test strips on occasion. There is no such thing as a universal tool.
There was an old movie of AA making a print in a contact frame. The movement of his hands over the exposing frame was, indeed, as if he were conducting a musical composition.
It's due tomorrow I think,
They're cool products, I have an Analyzer Pro and find it useful, but I did learn how to make prints the 'standard' way before buying it. I think that doing things more manually at the outset gave me a better understanding of/appreciation for what the Analyzer was actually doing.
Enjoy the new toys and learning to make prints.
Thank you
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?