What am i doing wrong?

[TattyJJ]

This is only my second go at this, and am pretty much having to figure it out for myself, so kinda need all the help i can get!
I had another go at doing an enlargement this evening, would have like to have a few more goes but was getting late.
This is just a quick scan of the print, and my test strips. The first one i thought looked to dark, so closed the aperture a notch, the print was 50 seconds.
It is much too grey, the dark bits aren't anything like as dark as they should be, but the light bits are grey too, this has me confused!
Also, there are a few botches or blemishes, are these dust or os there something else going on.
Lastly, do you use photo flo or whatever it's called on prints or is it just film?

You'll have to excuses the marks on the right, the damn line snapped as i was hanging it up. Good job i don't like it!!

 

[cliveh]

What type of film and film development are you using? Also what type of enlarger, paper, process and times are you using?

 

[MattKing]

One thing I note is that the scan of this you posted in the other thread is flipped. Which is the correct orientation? If the scan was correct, you should flip the negative over in the negative carrier.
I'm wondering whether you are having problems with safelight fog. Are you using an easel that leaves borders? If so, how do they appear?

 

[TattyJJ]

Film is HP5 developed in DDX, cant remember what make the enlarger is.
The paper is Ilford Multigrade RC Gloss
Ilford multigrade developer for 1 min, stop 30sec, fix 1 min and wash
The easel does have borders, but i don't like the look of them much so filled the paper. But... When i used the enlarger last time didn't have any issues like this.
You know i cant actually remember what the proper orientation is

 

[NJH]

I started printing recently too. Easy mantra to remember is that exposure controls the highlights and contrast/paper grade controls what happens with your shadows (the opposite to the old mantra about how to expose film). To get a result that is more black and white than grey you will need to print at a higher contrast grade, you only need enough exposure to get highlights where you want them i.e. less exposure gives more white stuff. I have ended up needing to filter onto multigrade paper at anything between 00 and 3.5 because I have a mixture of negs way overprocessed by a lab, and others done by them or myself with OK negative contrast so I am rapidly getting the feel for this exposure and contrast thing.

Matt makes a good point, the borders should be paper white if held under the easel blades during exposure.

 

[cliveh]

Well for a start you should increase the paper development time by 30 seconds, but may I ask what your print developer dilution and temperature is?

 

[TattyJJ]

Figured i'd try going without filters for now, while i get the basics under control.
The DDX was 1:4 at 20c, the dark room has a funky tap mixer that spits the water out at a constant temp. 1 min is what the instruction in the dark room said, to be fair it did look like it had finished developing. That could be in my head though...

 

[Rick A]

Figured i'd try going without filters for now, while i get the basics under control.
The DDX was 1:4 at 20c, the dark room has a funky tap mixer that spits the water out at a constant temp. 1 min is what the instruction in the dark room said, to be fair it did look like it had finished developing. That could be in my head though...

If you are using variable contrast paper you should always use a filter, even though the "default" is grade #2. Using a filter will allow you slightly longer exposure time, and you should shoot for one and a half to two minutes developing time with RC paper and longer for fiber base paper.

 

[TattyJJ]

If you are using variable contrast paper you should always use a filter, even though the "default" is grade #2. Using a filter will allow you slightly longer exposure time, and you should shoot for one and a half to two minutes developing time with RC paper and longer for fiber base paper.

*EDIT AS I CANT READ*

Ok i'll add a bit on for next time.
What kind of exposure time should i be aiming for? Some stuff I've read said to be around 20-30 seconds, but others saying about 1 min...

 

[removed account4]

i'd use a 3 1/2 filter
and do another test strip..


pick your time and make a print,
time how long it takes for the print to first appear on the paper
if it is about 20 seconds for rc paper you are around the right exposure
its around 45 seconds for fb paper...

YMMV

 

[NJH]

To get the blacks you want you will be needing more contrast.

jnanian beat me to it.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

You should look at the print NOT the clock when developing a print. The print will tell you when development is finished. Here are the steps that a print experiences.

Development To Completion

1. The induction period where nothing seems to be happening.
2. Linear portion of H&D curve. Density more or less follows elapsed development time.
3. The linear and shoulder portions of the H&D curve intersect. Here changes in density slow markedly but contrast still increases.
4. Well into the shoulder where over-development and developer fog become evident.

If you pull the print in Stage 2 contrast will be low and blacks weak and muddy. This is where most beginners screw up. It is very difficult to judge a print under a safe light. It will look good when it is not. So don't watch the clock but observe the changes in the print. However once in the shoulder development is complete and the print should be removed to the stop bath. When you become familiar with the method you will know precisely when to stop development.

The above method also compensates for developer temperature. I have used it at 65F to 85F with excellent results.

If you are still experiencing problems you need to look at film exposure and development for the problem. The same method described above can also be used when developing film by inspection.

 

[TattyJJ]

Ok, so first i need to use filters.
Now excuse me for being dum, but where do i place them? The enlarger doesn't have a specific place to put them that i can see, so above or below the negative?
And secondly more developing time and pay attention to what the print is doing.

This is a low res scan of the print, if i could get it close to this, maybe a smidge lighter, i'd be right chuffed!

 

[Sirius Glass]

No, you are not being dumb. None of us was born with this knowledge, we had to learn from someone.

If there is not a built in filter holder, the you will need a filter holder on the lens so that the filters can fit under the lens.

 

[HiHoSilver]

SG: "No, you are not being dumb. None of us was born with this knowledge, we had to learn from someone."

You're a class act, SG. Bravo!

 

[TattyJJ]

Here was me thinking it's probably obvious! Ha

Out of curiosity, this was 8x10 on glossy paper.
But I also have 8x10 and 5x7 kentmear luster.
Would I be making life easier on myself by using smaller or less glossy paper?

 

[wiltw]

You should look at the print NOT the clock when developing a print. The print will tell you when development is finished. Here are the steps that a print experiences..

But each paper in a specific developer has a Recommended time at 68F degrees!

 

[Sirius Glass]

Yes but the temperature for print paper can safety go much higher than 68°F, and the prints will develop faster as the temperature rises. Black & white prints are not temperature sensitive as film is.

 

[MattKing]

Would I be making life easier on myself by using smaller or less glossy paper?

Smaller - yes. Because when you are learning, you should expect to have lots of discards. Smaller will save you money.
I cut 8x10 into two 5x8 sheets because it is a little cheaper than 5x7 sheets, and because it means I just need one box. You can always trim off the extra inch on each, and use it for test strips.
Glossy is decent to learn with. When you have a little more experience, you may decide to change.
Your negatives may be under-developed, leading to low contrast, leading to a grey print.
But I would suggest an easel and a check of the borders, along with a safelight test.

 

[wiltw]

So, if you overexpose the paper, and it comes up dark a bit too quickly, you cut development time from 60 sec to 40 sec to compensate for the overexposure?! No. The process control specifies a time at a temperture for a reason, and one should have reasonable process controls established. Paper is processed by inspection, under a safelight, and 'to completion', normally at the recommended time and temperature to obtain the appropriate D-max and get the full tonal range. Do not attempt to pull a print before it is completely developed in an effort to control density; the resulting print will be flat and muddy with uneven development.

The photos of post #1 looks overexposed and underdeveloped. There are no blacks. Full development time allows blacks to come up fully, but also for almost-highlight areas to still be close to white but with detail. Some developers, those with higher percentage of hydroquinone, are relatively high response to elevated temperures, while developers with more Metol are not so responsive, and manufacturers seldome publish time-tep charts for paper developers, so it is best to use 68F as the target temperature.
The later photo looks much better for blacks, but if her hair really is off-blonde, it is too dark in the print and a higher contrast grade of paper (or variable contrast filter) is needed to get shadow areas deeper without also getting midtones so dark.

 

[TattyJJ]

I will try with borders next time then, though I'm not keep on the look personally, if it has other benefits I'll go with that for now.

How do you do a safelight test?


Who said anything about a shorter developing time? I was under the impression I needed to go longer....

 

[Neal]

Dear TattyJJ,

The longer development time referred to the negative, not the print. That is no longer an option for this photo.

The only thing I can add to this now is that I used to lay the filters on top of of the negative carrier when I had an enlarger that didn't have a dedicated drawer.

Good luck,

Neal Wydra

 

[TattyJJ]

Wowwww now I'm really confused!

Far as I can tell the negatives look good and developed nicely. They were developed in DDX for 9 mins
I thought everyone was talking about the print not being developed for long enough at 1min in ilford multigrade....

 

[R.Gould]

If your enlarger does not have a filter draw then get a set of below the lens filters, they come with an attachment that sits below the lens and filters mounted in a plastic mount with the contrast numbers marked on the plastic,

 

[wiltw]

Who said anything about a shorter developing time? I was under the impression I needed to go longer....

If you look at the blue vs. the green text in A, they conflict because the blue text sounds as if it recommends to "watch the print come up fast and yank it, rather than develop to set specific time", (yet that is NOT what the later green text says to do!). My remark was about the blue text and its results not developing a print 'to completion'

a. One response did write...
"You should look at the print NOT the clock when developing a print. The print will tell you when development is finished. Here are the steps that a print experiences.
Development To Completion
If you pull the print in Stage 2 contrast will be low and blacks weak and muddy. This is where most beginners screw up. ...The above method also compensates for developer temperature. I have used it at 65F to 85F with excellent results.

b. As result of blue text sounding wrong, I made the comment about each developer+paper having specific time at specific temperature.
To that comment, someone then remarked,
"Yes but the temperature for print paper can safety go much higher than 68°F, and the prints will develop faster as the temperature rises. Black & white prints are not temperature sensitive as film is."

c. So to that comment I replied that you do NOT take an overexposed print and yank it out of the developer because the density is coming up way too rapidly, thinking that you are doing so because the temperature is 80F rather than 68F. It is better to get your temp down to the recommended temperature. I know that some locales have an issue that even cold water from the tap is too warm during heat waves, so one should resort to somehow chilling water to get working dilution closer to recommended temp, not adjust the time to be shorter in hot developer...after all, the manufacturer does not publish any recommendations for temperatures other than the recommended one of 68F to guide the user.

Because your photos in post 1 look so grey and muddy, it looked to be a case of overexposing and yanking the print early to control excess density. But seeing your comment in a later post about 1 min. time, either the developer manufacturer actually recommends TWO minutes, or your paper contrast is way too low...there are no DEEP blacks!

Depending upon the dilution that you used, the time for Ilford Multigrade is either 1 min at 1+9 dilution or 1.5 min at 1+14 dilution...did you dilute to 1+14 but time it for the stronger dilution?