Why no “time - temperature table” for b&w paper like there is for b&w film?

[Down Under]

I know one printer who develops at 75º or warmer for 2 minutes--he feels the blacks hit max while leaving the whites clean. On the other hand, I know another printer who will develop for 7 minutes at room temperature for deep blacks. Both gentlemen make excellent fiber prints.

I'm with the two minute guy - at 71, life is too short to hover for seven minutes over a developing tray...

But entirely correct - the backs pop up first and the trick is to expose the print so it is complete in both lights and darks in the two minutes. Exposure for the highlights, pulled back a fraction, seems to do the trick for me, a technique that suits how I expose my negatives (a tad 'soft').

You mentioned FB and not RC papers. With RC, I did try longer development times way back when - in the '90s - and found I didn't really get much good contrast beyond a set time (this varied from two minutes with Multigrade to three minutes and a bit with the then-available Kodak papers) and ended up with mostly shades of gray I didn't care for. I varied my 'experiments' with full-strength developers and various dilutions. In 2003 I lucked into two new Jobo Duolab units hugely discounted by the Australian supplier and began processing at 24C in my home darkroom. Suddenly all of a sudden, everything changed for the better - I was getting more blacks and whites as well as the aforementioned shades of gray. At the same time, I moved my printing contrast (which had been fixed at paper grades/filtration 1.5-2.5 for several decades) to 3-3.5, and this also made a major lot of difference.

With FB, I've had none of these problems, even with my very ancient papers. With reasonably careful storage (all mine is refrigerated at 2C) the stuff will last for decades. I have old Kodak RB papers from th 1950s that print tolerably well, contrast can be somewhat all over the place from sheet to sheet, but this is part of the fun - not knowing what I'll get in the final result. I use FB entirely for an occasional sale 'art' print but mostly for personal and family prints anyway, the sorts of images that get put into albums and left for a century...

All experiments I should have done long before, but well, you know. We have ways of doing things, and as time passes and we get older, the comfort factor sets in.

 

[darkroommike]

Hm. So I may well have cornered the market, at least in Tasmania, for these now-ancient papers. Multigrade III is, by today's standards, a has-been anyway, and I'm told Multigrade IV has been modified a few times over the years since its inception in the (gulp) '90s. My age and era are definitely showing...

It may be high time for me to read/reread one or several good updated books on print processing to improve my processing technique. Does anyone have any suggestions?

The developer incorporated versions of Multigrade were normally labeled "Rapid" so you could have both a Multigrade Rapid and a Multigrade (or later a Multigrade Deluxe). My experiences with MG III Rapid were limited to a couple of boxes of 8.5x11 purchased because it was a nice size for contact sheets. The back of all those prints have turned light brown over the years, is suspect to the developer still in the emulsions oxidizing. The contact sheets still look fine but the back of the prints-yuck.

 

[darkroommike]

Regardless of what Simon said, you can test for yourself.

Fog some Ilford paper. (I used MGIV.) Put a drop of Sodium Hydroxide on the paper. It will darken due to development. This shows that some level of incorporated developing agent is present for whatever reason.

PE

I use a bottle of the old Kodak Royal Print Processor Activator for the same purpose (potassium hydroxide) you might also be able to use stabilization processor activator for the same purpose or Ektaflex activator. Any very strong (caustic) alkaline should work.

anyone want to buy a Royal Print Processor? I was gifted with one years ago, I suspect so that the owner wouldn't have to haul it off to the dump.

 

[Arklatexian]

It is not significant for current papers as they can be developed by inspection. The ones for film were published because one cannot generally inspect film during processing.

PE

I certainly agree plus while you should not underdevelop,,socalled "over development" is not critical. It sometimes can yield a richer-looking print. Because of this, any "time and temperature" chart for paper would be suspect in my opinion, even some "recommended" times. I only use FB papers by the way. Don't really know what will happen with RC papers............Regards!

 

[adelorenzo]

I recall reading in a book on printing recently that if you severely overdevelop you can actually lose density in the blacks. It might have been Gene Nocon or Larry Bartlett or....?

I'm using Bromophen and modern Ilford fiber papers and they develop very quickly. To my eye they appear to be fully developed in about 60 seconds, I give them another minute to be sure.

 

[Photo Engineer]

There is a physical phenomenon in which overdevelopment or basically too much Silver causes a hazy gray appearance to blacks. This is quite rare but possible. Overdevelopment generally results in fog though if carried too far.

PE