What is your "normal" printing routine?

[RalphLambrecht]

... However, I am always striving to improve my practice and become the best printer I can and appreciate constructive ideas.
I hope this discussion does not get too hung up on semantics.

Of course not. Just needed to clarify the dodging & burning part. All the best.

 

[nworth]

...

Once I have everything set up, print washer full and running, trays ready (1 dev, 1 stop, 1 fix only)

1. Turn on lightboard to select negative to print
2. Using light from lightboard, load neg into carrier and dust off
3. Load carrier into enlarger, lights out
4. Focus in the easel on a used piece of paper
5. Guesstimate exposure from light hitting on paper and adjust as necessary
6. Enlarger focus off, into papersafe, load paper in easel
7. Expose paper 10-20 secs
8. Into to developer for about 35-45 secs
9. Into stop for about 5-10 secs
10. Into fix for about 30-45 secs
11. Quick look under white light for evaluation
12. White light off, into washer
13. Repeat for next negative, or for adjustment and reprint (if grossly off)

...

My routine is pretty much the same as yours up to step 5, where is deviates pretty radically. For the initial negative in a batch (and anytime I'm having trouble), I make a test print using a Kodak Projection Print Scale. I try to set the lens to about f/8 so that I will have adjustment room. That usually gives me an exposure time of 40 to 60 seconds, which is fine because it allows time for dodging, if needed. The test print is processed the same way I process production prints, except that it only gets about 30 seconds in the fixer. The test print gets me in the ballpark with regard to exposure and contrast. I set the required contrast filter into the colorhead and adjust the timer. I sometimes use my color analyzer as a photometer, and take a reading on a Zone VI area, like the sky. That permits me to adjust the exposure for varying color filters. Then I try to make a real print, using the estimated settings. I usually use Defender 54-D as the developer. I develop for about 1 minute and 50 seconds for just about all papers. Full development is important. I use a 2 percent acetic acid solution for 10 to 15 seconds as a stop (but mostly as a rinse), and fix for 2 minutes in Kodak F-34 (a non-hardening, near neutral, rapid fixer). You don't want to fix for too long, but full fixing is also important. I turn on the print viewing light about 20 seconds before pulling the print from the fixer, and start evaluating it. After fixing, I rinse the print, front and back, in running water. If I will keep the print, I then put it into a dry tray until I am ready to wash it. As I evaluate the print, I estimate the changes needed in exposure and contrast. I also estimate any dodging and burning that needs to be done. If dodging and burning is required, I rehearse these before making the next print. I make the exposure and contrast changes that are needed and try to make another print. With any luck, that one will be satisfactory. Otherwise, I iterate until I get it right. Then I continue on with the next negative. If the negatives in a batch are similar, I can make an initial estimate of the exposure from the previous one. The color analyzer (as photometer) comes in handy here. I can set it on a similar Zone VI area and adjust the aperture to set the exposure. When I accumulate a half dozen or so prints in the holding tray, I wash them in the archival washer. If I am using FB paper, I dry them on a heated drum dryer; for RC, I hang them from a clothesline in the darkroom.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

In another life I worked in a large B&W and colour lab
In a normal workday when in the groove, one can usually whip through a few hundred prints. These prints are done in batches, maybe 25-35 or so 8x10” sheets of paper, then a walk to the paper processor,

OK, I'm impressed.

But there is a bit of automation involved here: auto-focus enlarger; enlarging meter, paper processor with a sheet feeder.

I certainly agree with you that too much automation just slows things down.

 

[Mick Fagan]

Nicholas, The paper processor wasn't automatic, one had to stand in the dark and feed the sheets in one at a time, you forgot about the coffee in-between printing batches, this really makes a difference, believe it or not.

Actually it can be coffee, tea or iced water, you just need a break from the intense concentration, otherwise one tends to make silly mistakes.

When we switched over the colour neg print processor from EP2 to RA4 the time difference was amazing, RA4 was so quick.

Mick.

 

[Exeter2010]

Thanks all of you for your comments and feedback to my original question, many of you have given me lots to consider - RalphL, nworth, Nicholas especially - and I am already making some changes to my printing routines and practices from what I've read here.

There is one thing I cannot get past though: I think the longest time I've ever spent on a "finished" print, was probably a couple hours and maybe 8-10 sheets of paper. That's without toning, spotting or any "post" printing manipulation. I definitely make no claim to be any great, or maybe not even very good, printer, but if I pick those dozen or so prints that I am truly happy with and that I personally feel can more or less compare technically (tone, contrast, range, etc.) to a print that I admire by a great printer, I can't see how I could have spent much more time on it to make it any better.

I gotta qualify the previous statement once more - I REALLY do not think that I can hold my own in the darkroom against the likes of any acknowledged master printer and maybe I just haven't had enough feedback from other printers. I am truly just an amateur and a relative noob to boot when you get right down to it. All I'm saying is, I think my best prints (probably 'bout 5-6% of total) are pretty dang nice and I just can't see what I could have done to make them any better by putting more time into them.

 

[Jeff Kubach]

It certainly helps if your negatives are similar in density and contrast, makes the guestimation much more accurate.

When I want multiple prints of the same negative, I just work until I get the final print that I want, then expose the paper for the rest of the prints all at once and run them through the chemistry 2 at a time.

That's what I do!

Jeff

 

[RalphLambrecht]

... All I'm saying is, I think my best prints (probably 'bout 5-6% of total) are pretty dang nice and I just can't see what I could have done to make them any better by putting more time into them.

I learned this from John Sexton:

Take those prints and hang them temporarily in your house at a place where you walk by all the time. Let them sink in for a few days maybe weeks. The improvement opportunities will become obvious. If not, maybe they are perfect!