What am I doing wrong?

[clayne]

Same thing.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

Oh. I thought a 'printing filter' may have been like ND filter or something. I've never heard them called that before.

 

[clayne]

Well in general since a printing/contrast filter is filtering light it's going to have some form of ND effect on it - which is what people were referring to. Rather than printing straight (which is around #2 grade anyways), instead just use a #2 filter which result in some light attenuation in the process.

 

[ROL]

The negatives you've presented do look underexposed (thin) to me. I think you've made fine progress in dealing with them and are looking pretty good. You might have a look at my article, Making a Fine Art Print.

 

[winger]

When I was mainly shooting 35mm, I thought my exposures were fine. When I started shooting MF, I also started getting more critical. I learned that I have a tendency to underexpose and got fairly good at printing thin negs. I've since worked on exposing better to start with and it's gotten a lot easier to print. I think your negs may be on the thin side (tough to tell on the web) to start with, but you'll learn how to print for that. You'll also learn to expose a little more. One thing I do is to make a contact sheet using a "standard" time and conditions - #2 filter, f8, 8 seconds, enlarger height just at the spot so an 8x10 sheet is covered with the light in focus, 50mm lens. I can tell from a contact sheet if I over or underexposed.
I've also heard the "rule" that you should stop down two stops for the lens to be at its best - I don't subscribe to that. I think it may have been true with older enlarging lenses, but there's a reason they have more than just that one aperture. If I'm making an 8x10 from 120, I usually use f11 or f16. For 11x14s, it will be f8 or f11. Sure, someone with a magnifying glass and measuring devices could probably find "issues" with those using f16, but I seriously doubt anyone actually would be able to see a major difference at normal viewing distances. The smaller the image, the closer the light is to the paper, so the shorter the time needed, too.
Whether you're using a diffusing or condenser enlarger may make a difference as well (I've really only used a condenser one since I started paying attention to what I was doing). Also, use the contrast filters all the time. I use them for contact sheets, too. If you're using them, you can do a first try with a #2 and be able to try a quick print with a #3 or #1 without starting from scratch.
The more you print, the more you learn.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

However, it *is* normal to use enlarging lenses at f/5.6-f/11. You should not have to stop all the way down to f/22 just to get a usable time. This is concerning to me that even at f/22 you're only around 15 seconds.

...which is why I suggested a film speed and development test a few posts back. You can 'save' a lot at the printing stage, but getting a decent work print should not be this difficult.

While the problems showing up in the first post have been decimated, the prints could be a lot better if the negatives were better and printing with ease at Grade 2. Getting an idea of film exposure and development time first saves a lot of agony later.

 

[skahde]

Thanks for the excellent feedback! This case is closed in my view with respect to the printing. I agree with the comments about the negatives.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

The negatives you've presented do look underexposed (thin) to me. I think you've made fine progress in dealing with them and are looking pretty good. You might have a look at my article, Making a Fine Art Print.

I LOVE your article!! I found it some months ago, and bookmarked it then. Since that time, I've read it multiple times and keep it handy for reference!

 

[ChristopherCoy]

When I was mainly shooting 35mm, I thought my exposures were fine. When I started shooting MF, I also started getting more critical. I learned that I have a tendency to underexpose and got fairly good at printing thin negs.

I'm quite certain that is one of my issues as well. I have a terrible fear of over exposing film, because as we all know, there isn't a 'recovery' slider for that after the fact. I'll second guess an exposure two, three, or four times, and then end up underexposing it instead.

 

[skahde]

This fear is only justified with slide-film. With negative-film, a stop overexposure usually does more good than harm. It's underexposure you should avoid like the plague!

 

[ChristopherCoy]

That's good info. I'll keep that in mind.

 

[markbarendt]

Given the detail that appears to be available in the shadows and the lack of detail available in the highlights and the small print size in question, I don't see why under-exposure of the film is being suggested.

What am I missing?

 

[al5256]

HI, I use 2 stop ND (+ 00 to 3.5 contrast filter) to get f/11 for 5x7 and 1 stop ND for 8x10 for medium format negative. My usual exposure time is 15 sec in my Beseler 23C with a new bulb (PH140 75W). I bought a 20x24 ND sheet from BH to cut the filters for Beseler 23C filter housing.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/166161-REG/Gam_GC1515_GC1515_Cine_Neutral_Density.html

 

[ChristopherCoy]

Christopher,

I suggest running a test to establish your personal ISO for the film/camera you are using. Briefly, cap the lens and click off three frames, take an 18% gray card and in a constant light and at box speed take a meter reading, without really focusing cover the frame with the gray card and no background. Then take exposures starting at +2 stops, +1 1/2, +1,+1/2, as metered, -1/2, -1, -1 1/2, -2.

This post stuck with me, and today I went back to read it. And then I read it again. And then again. And I think after the fourth time I understand how to go about the process, and what its for.

But when you say 'personal ISO', what does that mean?

I have typically been using TriX-400. The negatives in question were shot on my Mamiya C33, but I now have a Hassie 500cm. I could be wrong, but the Hassie doesn't have a dial to change the camera from one ISO to another, so I dont understand how I can shoot 400 speed film at a different speed. Except to shoot it at different shutter speeds and then pull/push process. I vaguely get the meaning of push/pull processing, and understand that its either lengthened or shortened times, but I'm not at the point that I understand it enough to pull it off.

 

[MattKing]

Christopher:

"Establishing your personal ISO" (more properly "Establishing your personal EI") is a shorthand reference to an approach to metering.

EI means Exposure Index. Different photographers will use different EIs, in different situations.

The number on your box of film - the ISO speed - is a measurement of the sensitivity of film under ISO specified conditions.

The conditions you work under will be similar to ISO specified conditions, but not identical.

Establishing a personal Exposure Index allows you to take into account a number of factors particular to you, like:
- the sensitivity and calibration of your meter
- your metering technique
- the accuracy and tendencies of your shutter
- the accuracy and tendencies of your apertures
- the film you are using
- the developer you are using
- the accuracy and tendencies of your thermometer
- your timing scheme
- your agitation scheme
- the type of enlarger you are using
- your subjective preferences respecting shadow details and highlight details
- and a few others ...

All these factors have an effect on the density of the shadows in your negatives. Adjusting how you set the film speed (EI) on your meter can either offset or take advantage of those effects.

Many of us find that, when setting the film sensitivity on our meter, using an EI of, e.g., 320 or 250 for Tri-X (1/3 to 2/3 of a stop more light hitting the film) results in negatives that work better for us. But others might get better results from their meter using an EI of 500 for Tri-X (1/3 of a stop less light hitting the film).

And of course many photographers end up with a personal EI identical to the "box" or ISO speed.

The important thing to realize is that the film itself doesn't change from photographer to photographer. What changes are the conditions under which the film is used.

With respect to questions of push/pull developing, those questions actually relate more to the contrast (not intensity) of the image forming light. You can use those controls to adjust for unusual light situations. You can also use them to help rescue (to an extent) the results from under-exposed or over-exposed film.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

Thanks Matt. I guess I hadn't a clue then! LOL I really like how you explain things. A natural teacher you are!

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Very well explained, Matt!

It's very important to do some basic testing to come to grips with the equipment and materials we use.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

Well I went back for more practice today. I received a paper safe from eBay that had paper in it. So I chose to use the old paper since there was a stack of about 100 8x10 sheets in there. I used a #2 filter, only stopped my enlarger down to f/16 this time, and used the unknown paper. I made a few prints but this was my favorite from the bunch. Its because its from the first roll that I put through my new Hasselblad during my trip to Mexico last month.


WoodFence by ChristopherCoy, on Flickr

 

[MattKing]

Christopher:

I am seeing progress

Keep having fun!