20 x 24 photographic paper out of date challenge

I have been having a clear out in the darkroom. More like seeing what printing paper I have in stock and how close to date they were getting. While checking I came across a pack of Ilford multigrade 4 peal RC 20 x 24 to large to miss but I have managed not to notice it for a long time.

It has been over looked all this time partly because it is pearl paper and that I am unable to use paper this size. I know why, then why have you not cut it down to size? Without trying to make excuses it is difficult to cut any size papers when you only have enough space on the dry side of the darkroom for your enlarger and I did not want to waste it if I could help it. A sort of unintended waiting game for the right project only I did not think it would take about 15 years.

A few days ago I was setting up the enlarger to make some 9.5 x 12 prints from Kentmere 100 35mm film. That had some images of poppies made in the garden. All though they all turned out well. I had noticed, I was loosing about an inch or so off the side of the negative.

I started to speculate wouldn't it be nice to include that missing edge at the same ratio of enlargement without having to down size it to make it fit. This idea was going to be difficult to fulfill as my main sizes are 8 x 10 and 9.5 x 12. This left the 20 x 24 this maybe it's finest hour. 

After a certain point in time old paper starts to increase their latency. This means you need to start adding more exposure time (light ) to the paper to receive the same results you would get with the fresh stuff.

With paper this old you may as well chuck it in the bin. Yes! it is coming, if it was this article would be at an end. But! while I am processing anyway I may as well see if I can get any sort of image.

Where to start? a Segmented test print. Where you increase the amount of exposure at set times. The problem with this is you have no idea how many increments of light will be needed to arrive at the exposure. I short cut it by using the exposure time from the negative already set up using that exposure time as a starting point.

Fortunately the developer was fresh in that it had only half a dozen prints through it. To allow for the sluggish latency I would develop the print for two minutes. Twice normal for RC papers to give it a chance to produce tones.

Before we go any further we need to look at the negative I was using. It had been exposed to Foma 311 RC paper. It took 27 seconds at grade 3 with the lens set to F5.6. This would be the starting point then with one change the enlarger had to have the filter setting changed for multigrade 4.

After a little bit of contortionist cutting, the paper was in two bits of equal size well almost and the easel adjusted to allow for the new size, the paper was exposed. 

Surprisingly when I remove the paper from the processor after 2 mins there was a soft image, emboldened I increased the exposure to 30 secs. A slight increase but not enough. Time to get radical and doubled the light by opening the enlarging lens to F4.

The print was darker again but not enough to get a good black, so I opened the lens to f 2.8 at 30 secs. Effectively four time the light from when I started. When the print came off of the processor this time it was nearly perfect. I did another print adding 15 sec burn to the highlighted poppy. Done.

I did consider pre-flashing the paper this is where you add light to the point just before recording a tone to overcome the latency. I explain how it is done in a previous article link at the bottom of the page. You will properly have to make time changes from part seconds to seconds in the case of old papers. A case of testing to see what works to get the right result. There is also double grade printing a link at the bottom of the page explains this method as well.

A note of caution what works well for one pack of paper may not for another keeping your grey matter on its toes. It will be the case that no matter what is done you will not get the result you are looking for it is at that point a decision needs to be made to bin it.

I am pleased that I had a go with this paper. It has introduced me to a new format size for 35mm printing. I feel it is more pleasurable to look at with that bit of extra width. A sort of shortened panoramic feel.

When the same image is compared with the Foma 311 version it has a slight warmth to it which could be down to its age, if anything this adds to it. Making the Foma composition a little clinical looking. It is a unintended consequence of mixing different papers and throws up a question about creative choice. Which I'm go to leave you with to ponder.

All the photographs were reproduced using a phone camera and edited in Photoshop.

The first four pictures were made using Ilford multigrade 4 pearl RC.

The fifth is on Foma 311 gloss RC.

Links 

Paper flashing

Paper flashing more examples

Double grade printing

  

 

Picture post Tenth floor.

All the photographs you see here were made on the tenth floor of the Tate Modern It is a great place to visit. I have been many times and have always had a good day.

Technical Data:

Bronica SQAi with 80 mm lens, 120 format 6x6 negative Fomapan 100, iso 100, developed in RO9, printed on ilford multigrade develop in multigrade.

Fading face?

One day later

I don't know about you but sometimes my mind wonders when I am processing photographs in the darkroom. I just can not help it, especially when an FB paper is involved, as sometimes it can be minutes till it is fully developed.

It was on one of these occasion that I started thinking about how long it would take for a developed image, but not fixed, to disappear. I have always thought it would be seconds once you turn on the light. Don't ask me where I got this notion from it is almost folk law among film uses. It is known that if you accidentally do it with film it all go's black straight away. Well the truth is, it can be saved if you are quick.

So what about photo paper? Firstly unexposed paper go's pink in day light and not black as I was expecting. The longer it is in the light the pinker it gets till it go's a pinky brown colour.

OK! a developed but not fixed image also degrades the same way but the image does not fade to black ether. In fact there is not much change a day later if left out on the table.

What is the biggest surprise of all nine months later and the image is just visible. You must bear in mind that it has not been in full day light all the time. I did notice that it had a couple of books on top of it for a time. It has well and truly surpassed any of my expectations. Just go's to show what you think you know may not bear any relation to the facts.

Technical data:

The images have been enhanced to help show the colour change digitally. The test strip appears in order of age from a couple of days to the last one nearly a year old and still going. I like the effect it has produced on the test strip. The paper is Ilford FB natural gloss. Developed in Ilford multigrade and washed, no stop or fix was used.

Last

What image looks like when processed
properly.

Studional first use.

Negatives developed
in Studional.

The darkroom is beckoning again, with the death of my father the will or the inclination to do anything connected with film photography has been at a stand still. It is as though my creative energy has been knocked out of me. It was the childhood wonder I had in his fold out camera that peaked my interest in photography in the first place. Spurred on with the little camera he then gave me. Which was later given away.

The darkroom has suffered with my long absence. It is a dusty dirty hole in need of some maintenance. I have also neglected to replace used up materials: film developers, photo papers etc. etc. It has taken time getting things back into shape, for now I will have to make do with what I've got materials wise. Which just happens to be a fresh bottle of Studional.

This is A&Os formulation of the once dead developer. It is advertised as a fine grain, clean working general developer - that can be used in deep tanks?? - or single use. I have interpreted deep tank to mean batch development where a number of film can be processed from a single batch of diluted developer. It suggests dilutions of 1+15 to 1+30 for one shot use. So I am assuming the same for batch production.

Grain pattern produced by Studional on FP4+.
The colour cast represents printing grade three.

I have been told that this developer is akin to RO9s and can be treated in the same way. This is the first time I have used it so I will do as suggested - which is not my usual way of working - I tend to do what my instincts tell me; I must still be out of sorts!!

I have a number of rolls of 120 FP4+ and 35mm Fomapan 400 to process. Checking through the dilution chart it suggests a dilution for the above films as being 1+15 with a developing times of 3.5 and 6 minutes for the Foma. (Digital truths dev chart is a good place to go for dilutions and times.)

I have made up a litre of the developer at 1+15 and intend to use it as though it was RO9s that means on the day of dilution you can process 12 film of mixed formats in a litre with no time compensation. The developer is good for three months with compensation factors for how long the developer has been stored diluted. (Adjustments: 1-3 days 5%, 4-8 days 10%, 1-2 weeks 15%, 2 weeks to 3 months 20%.) I know it sounds a bit flaky but true, I have already tested this with RO9s so I know it works, with no degradation in the quality of the negatives. Like RO9s you will need to protect you hands when using it. It has a caustic bite, this is the second developer that I have experienced this with.

On the day of dilution I processed four films: Two FP4+ and two Fomapan 400 both were exposed at box speed. I developed the Foma for the suggested time and the FP4+ at 4 minutes. Using my standard agitation method: 12 inversion in the first min and then 4 each min after that. Short developing times like that of FP4+ always makes me feel there is something missing. I think it is because I'm used to using longer times. The results are clean and crisp with a good tonal separation. They also look to have more contrast than what I'm used to.

I didn't know at the time of making up the developer that it would take a month till I would use it again. This time with a couple of rolls of 120 FP4+ and Foma 100. In this case I added the 20% compensation. After the first set of neg's had been processed I checked them. No change in the tone or quality which was good news for those that followed. In all, the developer produced ten good sets of negatives before the three month suggested time period was up, without any noticeable changes to contrast etc.

I have contact printed all of the film processed in the Studional. Out of the hundred and seventy negatives only a couple show signs of air bells (bubble marks) which is not bad, I have experienced a lot worse. The contact prints were made on Ilford multigrade RC gloss, developed in Tetanal new Eukobrom AC.

Having printed some of the individual negatives I can confirm that there is an increase in contrast and that it has a fine grain structure. It has helped to produce some finely toned photographs. It has also helped me regain some of my creative spark that has been missing over the months. I cannot say the same for writing these articles I am still finding it difficult to get started.

 

Technical Data:

Bronica SQAi Hand held, Film FP4+ @ 125 ISO. Box speed, 120 format 6x6 negative, Printed on Ilford Multigrade gloss RC 10 x 8 @ grade 2 developed in Tetanal Eukobrom AC.