What's wrong with higher grades?

[Donald Miller]

David,
I do use Azo. My work flow is quite similar to yours. But thus far my experience with the material has been much more limited then my experience in enlarging. I love the paper, especially in conjunction with Amidol. In my opinion, nothing comes close to an Azo print in terms of tonality and depth.

The consideration that enters for me is that I shot 4X5 for so long that most of my negatives are in that format. While a 4X5 contact can be intimate, it is also sometimes limiting. That is why I have been exploring the option of a light source that will allow enlarging. The other option is to make enlarged negatives and my experience has been limited in that regard.

I just bought a 12X20 camera last week, so everything has changed again. Azo will definitely be the paper that I will use with those negatives.

One more thing. When you think about the weather where you live today, just wanted to inform you that we were at 4 degrees F this morning with about 6 inches of the white stuff on the ground. Good luck and have a wonderful day.

Regards,

Donald Miller

 

[David Hall]

Donald,

4 degrees??? I live in Southern California, where people are depressed because it *might* rain. It's probably 65 right now. WHere are you?

I saw earlier that you got the 12x20. Congratulations! I am envious, and constantly fantasizing about getting either a bigger camera or an 8x20 back from the Wisner.

Also, like you, I have years and years of work on 4x5 or smaller. And I wonder if you have had the same experience...now that I am using Azo and contacting, I am looking at 4x5 differently. Now there's 4x5 specifically for enlarging, usually more intricate scenes, and 4x5 for contacting, which are very simple scenes, form more than anything else. Or a face. And, like you, I still use the enlarger for all those older negatives.

As for the Zone VI comp timer with the Azo...that IS a great idea. I would not know how to make it work. I will try to figure it out tonight when I get home.

dgh

 

[lee]

Donald,
I have a Metrolux II that has a probe much like the zone 6. If I could find the instructions I would copy them and email them to you. Essentially it is lay the probe near the work to be exposed and turn on the timer. I wish I could be more specific but that is all that I remember. Hell, try it and see what happens that way. I would set it up and then make a test strip noting where the timer is at each strip and then set the timer for the strip I liked and see what happens. If that works to your satisfaction then to figure the dry down I would make a strip at 5% less 7% less and 10% less and see which one looks the best. That will be the dry down time used only for the final prints. My problem is remembering to turn on that feature.

lee\c

 

[Donald Miller]

David,

We haven't seen 65 since last July 4th...LOL....Seriously our high temp for the day is going to be in the 15 degree range and I live in the SE part of Kansas. We have two seasons here "Cold as a hell and Hot as hell"

Whatever you come up with in your considerations about the drydown feature would be appreciated. Thanks.

Lee,
It would be great if you can come up with the instructions on the Metrolux unit. There is no need for me to "reinvent the wheel" if the method that Metrolux recommends for contact printing works. Thanks for any help on this.

 

[glbeas]

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (SteveGangi @ Feb 23 2003, 01:47 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Off the top of my pointy head, the risk in a thin (underexposed or underdeveloped) negative would be the loss of details in the shadows. I think most people here prefer a &quot;fat&quot; or dense negative for that reason. </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
Maybe you are used to your thin negs being the result of underexposure. For the most part the shadow detail develops in fairly quickly and the highlight density comes up with the extra developing time. Therefore with a properly exposed neg given an n-1 developing time the shadows pretty much stay the same while the highlight density is reduced by a certain amount. (think Zone System here)
Remember the old adage expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights? Thats what this is all about.
A couple ofpitfalls to using higher contrast paper...
-your enlarger needs to have really even illumination, the higher the contrast the more any unevenness shows.
- cleanliness is even more important, a speck at lower contrast may not be as noticeable as it is at higher contrast.

 

[glbeas]

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Aggie @ Feb 23 2003, 08:42 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Don Like I said seat of the pants. We all get used to our enlargers. I am so used to looking at the image before printing, and getting with in at least 1/2 grade of what filter I need. Then when I stop down the lens, I never look to see what setting it goes to, I look at the image and when it hits the right value, I start my test trips from there. </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
Aggie thats a lot like I used to print in my old darkroom when I was a kid. Had no meter at the time just a few pieces of equipment. I figured out I was comparing the projected image to the safelight illumination, kinda like the old extinction meters I guess. I could throw a neg in the enlarger and set the aperture and get a decent print in one try most times. It was kinda neat doing it as the colors of the B&W image would start swimming around from bluish to reddish at the point I set it, and it could be pretty precise and repeatable.

 

[David Hall]

The contrast question is about contact printing on Azo, as negatives optimized for enlargement tend to be a little too thin for Azo (or Pt/Pd, I imagine) and negatives optimized for Azo are too constrasty to deal with easily in an enlarger.

dgh

 

[glbeas]

Ah, I understand. I've read that Pyro developer was supposed to be able to cover that problem. Never had the chance to mess with it though so I can't really say.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

The current thinking, and what I'm doing these days at least with Tri-X, is PMK for enlargement (because of the grain-masking effect) and ABC for Azo (because it produces little background stain and higher contrast, at the expense of grain, which isn't so important for contact printing). I also target my development times one zone higher for Azo, so for TMX (which I develop in D-76 1+1), the N+1 time I use for 4x5" and smaller (i.e., negs I plan to enlarge) becomes the "N" time for contact prints on Azo from 8x10" (I'd like to say "and larger," but TMX doesn't seem to exist in 11x14").

 

[David Hall]

David,

I too am doing PMK fopr 4x5 and smaller, the thought being that they are more likely to be enlarged, and ABC for 8x10, as they are more likely to be contacted. The PMK is not only less grainy but also masks the grain a little, and ABC really does seem to make the contrast just right for contacting. On Azo anyway.

I have yet to try platinum, although after looking at pt/pd pictures over time it seems that you have to have a pretty highlight-heavy scene to really bring out the medium's strengths. Someone elsewhere on the forum mentioned Jock Sturges' work, which is BEAUTIFUL in Pt., but all more light than dark.

dgh

 

[SteveGangi]

You are right about thin negatives, high contrast and dust, especially when using a condensor enlarger. Even with contact printing, thin negatives have more of an obvious dust problem. But, the original question had to do with Azo (I think) and maybe platinum, hence my comment about dense negatives. Generally, I prefer to do my test strips on an entire sheet whether it is a contact or enlargement. For some reason, it gives me a better feel for what is needed overall, and also lets me get a better idea what areas need dodging or burning. It also gives me more room for making notes and scribbling. I don't have a problem myself with thin negatives, since I always meter the shadows first. That's just something that came up in this discussion. When in doubt, I meter with a spot, and also with an incident. If there is a difference between the two, I will take 2 exposures to make sure.

 

[glbeas]

Quite right Steve. I agree about using a full sheet for testing too, especially when you are nearly "there" with the tones.
The point I was trying to blunder into was that a thin negative doesn't necesarily mean a lack of shadow detail. Depends on how it got that way. Goofing the exposure being the most common thing, that will kill the shadow values. I do enough of that to know. A great exposure and n-1 development may look quite rich yet still be thinner in the highlights than a "normally done" negative. David makes a very good point about his work making the N+1 times the normal time for the AZO grade 2 printed negative. Do your work to fit your process and it's going to look great.
I'm wondering though about how Azo compares to Pt/Pd printing as Pt/Pd is usually a printing out process as opposed to Azo developing out and printing out needs a long range neg because of its self masking action as the shadow tones start to appear. Azo needs the same thing for a different reason I'm not exactly clear on. Anybody care to lay out the specifics?

 

[Aggie]

..

 

[Donald Miller]

glbeas,
In the interest of brevity, Bob Herbst has written a very good comparative analysis of Pt-Pd and Azo. The information may be accessed on www.unblinkingeye.com. Hope that this answers your questions. Good luck.

Donald Miller

 

[Jorge]

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (glbeas @ Feb 25 2003, 03:48 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>.
I'm wondering though about how Azo compares to Pt/Pd printing as Pt/Pd is usually a printing out process as opposed to Azo developing out and printing out needs a long range neg because of its self masking action as the shadow tones start to appear. Azo needs the same thing for a different reason I'm not exactly clear on. Anybody care to lay out the specifics?</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
The traditional pt/pd printing process is a developing out process not a printing out process. Mike Ware in the UK and Sullivan and Weese there in the US have created a printing out palladium process which does not use pt.

Trying to compare Azo and pt/pd is like trying to compare apples and oranges, with all due respect to Bob Herbst. Both processes have their strengths and weaknesses and both are capable of producing outstanding work. Both with a totally different feel and impact. To say that azo is a good "proofing" material for pt/pd is a disservice to azo as well as saying that pt/pd prints are "dull and lifeless". It all depends on the skill of the printer and your taste. If you like the traditional silver look, then I think azo coupled with amidol is unsurpassed in its capability to produce a good print easily. If you like a print that "shines" in extreme contrast ranges with a hint of color then pt/pd is for you.

Both mediums have a long tonal range, the difference is that pt/pd "contracts" the range to fit the paper, while with azo most of the tones fall within the long straight line of the curve, so they are more spaced out, as Herbst explains in his article. This means that azo has the ability to produce a very long range of beautiful grays, excellent local contrast in the shadows with the highlights being a little bit less well defined than pt/pd. The strength of pt/pd lies in the very rich dark and light tones, and using the grays only as accent since they, in my opinion are not as beautiful as the tones found at the ends of the curve.

If I was to "tailor" a negative for either one, I would choose high contrast negatives where most of the tones fall in the straight line of the curve for azo, I would say a density range of 1.4 or 1.5. For Pt/pd I would choose a high contrast negative where the "strong" tones are at either end of the curve and a density range 1.5 to 1.6.

 

[glbeas]

Thanks Donald! It tells what you get out of it but I really didn't see the why of it. Looks really impressive though. Might have to make some copy negs on big film, dig out the vacuum frame and try it out. Can copy negs be made with the proper tonal range from negatives with a shorter tonal range or will this result in an inferior product?

 

[Donald Miller]

glbeas,

Also located on that same site is an article by the same author on making enlarged negatives using APHS film which is available from Freestyle. Although at the time that Bob wrote the earlier article he was engaged in working with PT-Pd and the procedure that he discribes was targeted at that process. That will explain his comments in the first article about his initial intentions were to use Azo as a proofing material but he soon discovered that the Azo prints were of a quality that merited mounting and framing.

From what I have heard, Azo and Pt-Pd can both be printed from the same density range negative. Your question on the contrast issue will also be answered in the article about enlarged negatives.

Additionally there are several other sites that deal with the matter of making enlarged negatives. As I recall the sites that I found were located by doing a search on platinum printing. Some of the other authors used and recommended other films then those mentioned by Bob Herbst. So the materials used can apparently vary, but consistancy seems to be the underlying thread. I hope that this directs you to the answers for your questions. Good luck.

Regards,
Donald Miller

 

[David Hall]

At the risk of (once again) far afield from the topic...

Jorge,

Can you describe scenes that to you would be more suited to pt/pd, or Azo, since you are up on both processes? For instance, the scene of the mountains you showed me, the 17x20...would you redo that on Azo or is it right as is?

dgh

 

[Jorge]

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (David Hall @ Feb 25 2003, 08:16 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> At the risk of (once again) far afield from the topic...

Jorge,

Can you describe scenes that to you would be more suited to pt/pd, or Azo, since you are up on both processes? For instance, the scene of the mountains you showed me, the 17x20...would you redo that on Azo or is it right as is?

dgh </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
Jeez....you are asking me a hard question here. As much as we try is hard to be totally detached and judge your own work, but let me give it a shot.

If I had shown you the silver print I made of the mountains shot, you probably would have liked it more. Since I am more skilled at printing in silver there are a few things that I wish I could have done with the pt/pd print. For one the negative was not optimum for pt/pd, I am still getting the hang of this. As CArl Weese said, it is very easy to make an acceptable print in pt/pd, very hard to make a stunning print. He is correct , every time I do a printing session I find and learn new things, this is just a normal process. Having said this, I wish I had not forgotten Clays print when I met you, his is an example of a superb pt/pd print. What you saw of mine is not by any means what constitutes the best example of this process. So at this time I would say the reprint in azo with my experience in silver printing would be better, BUT I firmly believe that once you see an excellent pt/pd print, you would want to learn how to do it.

So lately I have been eating a lot of crow, and having to go back to do the things I swore I would never do again. I am having to go back and do some testing. I found out that the BTZS is the best process to test and that actually once you get past the dry reading the method is very simple. So as much as I cuss and get discourage with pt/pd at the time, give me another year and you will see what I mean. I am finding out many things which run contrary to what I believed was good in a print. This is my opinion of course, but while I always thought the blacks and whites anchor the silver print, I am finding out the middle tones are what does it for pt/pd. If you fail to print these middle tones just right then you get the "dull and lifeless" print Smith talks about, I see a lot of this on my prints, but then I also have pt/pd prints from other people that are just perfect and no silver print could equal them.

So I am finding out that the pt/pd process requires a more exacting technique and an almost perfect negative. With silver is so easy and there are so many tricks at your disposal that almost any negative will do, as long as you have enough detail in the shadows. As a matter of fact if I was printing with azo I would probably print in grade 3 and SLIMT it back down to 2. This produces very sparkling prints ( before you ask what SLIMT is, is a technique developed by David Katchel where you bleach the print before you develop it, this causes a reduction in contrast. BTW this can also be used to "make" azo grade 1, I am surprised azo followers don't use this technique more, at least those who keep wanting azo in grade 1).

So to go back to the beginning of your question, the interior of a cathedral would be a perfect shot for pt/pd, for azo just about anything that you can print in enlarging paper can be done as well or better. Of course this is my opinion and your mileage may vary....

 

[David Hall]

Jorge,'

Very comprehensive answer and just what I was looking for. I can visualize the interior of a cathedral in pt/pd, all airy and anchored in the midtones, as you say. Excellent. Thank you.

dgh