Taking the stop out of printing?

An acquaintance recently posted that he was having trouble with his photographs. The prints were producing brown stains on the edges and face of the paper which he had not seen before. He went on to describe a process that does not include stop bath. I have always accepted that stop was essential when printing.

This revelation made me stop and think about all of the books I have read over the years on photograph production. As far as I was aware none of them said that there was a choice. Just to be sure I went back to the reference books on the subject I trust most. After consulting Tim Rudman  Master Printing course, Michael Langford Basic Photography and Ansel Adams The Print - by the way this is the only book to explain what happens when stop is omitted.

Ansel Adams writes: That stop bath is a weak solution of acetic acid that neutralizes the alkalinity in the developer stopping development straight away. Fix being acidic would have the same affect as stop bath but it prevents the contamination of the fix from the alkaline in developer which quickly exhausts the fix making it more likely that the prints will stain.

I should point out that my acquaintance has been producing prints that have not shown any signs of staining till now. It turns out that it was a lack of proper washing before the fix that was causing the problem and not exhausted fix.

The question that keeps coming into my head is why wouldn't you use stop? It makes no sense from my point of view. I spend a lot of time in the darkroom making test prints carefully choosing the right amount of light for exposure. Once in the developer I watch and wait for what I judge to be the right amount of development so I can remove it to the stop, freezing it at that point in the process. If this was substituted for water this would not be the case it would only slow down development making a mockery of all the careful planning gone before and adding a degree of uncertainty as to whether or not it was going to stain.

This is one of the main issues I have with not using stop bath which for me translates to film as well. You spend all that time getting the time, temperature and inversion right, - for what? Because you can not be bothered to use stop?it's to expensive? I will admit to not using stop at one point but not for the reasons given earlier when developing film. I reverted back to stop mainly because I did not like the look of the negatives it was producing. They seemed to have a soft look to them.

I know that this must sound like a bit of a rant and to a certain extent it is. Sometimes it's good to get things off your chest. As far as I'm concerned there are many different paths to creative nirvana and how you reach it is up to you.

Since writing this I have discovered a number of print developers that do not require a stop bath. As long as you use running water in its place for at least thirty seconds. These developers use Amidol in the formula. They can be found in The darkroom cookbook.

You maybe interested in this article on Fixing faults

 

Oh for the grain.

It is a fact of life for film users, if it was not for the those tiny light sensitive particles we would not have some of the world greatest pictures. All the same overly grainy negatives are a pain if you have not planned for it to happen it's a big let down. You must not forget that it is not all about the journey it is about the results as well and what looks like rubbish to you now. Maybe an inspired choice to others.

The fact you have a negative to look at is a result and something that will print and or scan. At one time grainy pictures were all the rage. Producing some wonderfully expressive images. Admittedly they are not everyone's cup of tea. In other words keep an open mind.

The object of developer is to bring out the latent image held in the emulsion. This is achieved by a chemical reaction, acting on the silver, producing dark areas where it is light and bright areas where there is shadow. The negative is reversed later with the print. There are three important things to keep at the front of your mind are: the development time, the temperature and dilution. It is these three factors that ensure the ultimate image quality when it comes to printing. Too short a development time will produce too thin a negative, like wise too long a process time will make the negative too dense, leading to very short and very long print times respectively.

Agitation is important as well and one of the most over looked parts of the film development, it can in some cases make the difference in how well your negatives turn out. As the developer interacts with the emulsion of the film, it vigorously attacks the silver it comes into contact with and becomes exhausted. By inverting the tank you refresh this action, producing evenly developed negatives. It is important to get this right. To little agitation will allow by-products of the process to build up, leaving pale-toned streamers as they slide to the bottom of the film. Likewise excessive inversions will produce currents in the developer, creating uneven development. Most process times allow for agitation.

Developers:

The first thing to look at is the developer. This has the most influence over how your negatives will look. Before you settle on one in particular make sure you understand its attributes. On a practical note you also need to know how often you will process a film. If you are going to process a film every week or so then it may be better to use one in powder form like ID11 or D76. Or a one shot liquid for occasional use, like Ilfotec HC or Kodak HC110. I have suggested these developers because they are main stream fine grain developers. RO9 is not recognized as a fine grain.

For example:

Ilford ID11: A full speed developer with fine grain. Supplied as a two pack powder. Down side is that you have to make up 5 liters of stock solution. This then leads to question over it's keeping qualities. ( I have taken a year to use a 5ltr batch without any loss of quality) It can be used as one shot or multi use with allowance for depletion. ( I have only ever used as a one shot.)

Ilfords Ilfotec HC: A highly concentrated, fine grain liquid developer. It is suggested that this is the liquid equivalent to ID11.

Kodak D76: Fine grain developer recognized as Kodak's ID11. It has been reformulated as a one pack powder. The down side is that it needs very hot water to mix it easily.

Kodak HC 110: A fine grain sharp working developer. In a highly concentrated liquid syrup form. This is Kodak's answer to ID11/D76 as a liquid.

One more developer to what could be a very long list and that is:

RO9 Special/ Studional. These are the finer bred brothers of RO9 and Rodinal. They are very concentrated liquids with the good keeping qualities you would expect from this family. 

The unexpected.

It is the developer you choose that has the most influence over what your negatives and grain looks like. Inter mixed with the way you apply the agitation method you adopt and making sure that the temperature is right. Master this and the rest will fall into place. Yes you will make mistakes we all do even with years and years of experience it is all part of the rich tapestry of processing. It is and can be a pain when the results effect that special set of negatives. I know, it's that spanner that has landed with a big thud at times. The trick is understanding what went wrong, then put it right and move on. Now a days there is no such thing as a bad set of negatives - just conceptually challenging. You just have to look at all the apps you can get now that put back all things analogue photographers try to avoid. So what maybe unacceptable at first will change over time.

Really what I'm saying is to keep an open mind, the analogue process can, if you embrace it, give an unexpected creative lift to your images. Which today is more acceptable than it used to be. 

Trimming prints a method

I don't know about you but over the years I have found no matter how careful I am setting the printing paper in the easel before exposure, it can still come out wrong. I'm talking about making sure the the picture is parallel to the sides of the paper. It is something we all have to deal with at some point. The problem being you can not tell this until the paper has been processed by which time it is to late.

This means that the paper has to be trimmed true again. To allow for this I have increased the margins around the printed area and even the size of the paper. Which I think is a waste as I would prefer to use the whole sheet to print on. But aesthetically speaking I think the margin around the picture adds to the overall effect and stops finger marks getting on the image. Which leads on to another skill that needs to be mastered, the art of trimming your print parallel. At one time it did not matter what I did I could not get it right, that is until a friend introduced me to the cut edge principle. This is where you use the freshly trimmed edge as your straight edge for the next cut and so on round the print. Wow! what a difference it has made over the years.

The knowledge of this method has helped with the trimming of my FB prints that I stick to a pane of glass so they dry flat - described here in another article. 

Avoiding graininess

If you like your pictures smooth and grainless then you need to pay special attention to its avoidance throughout the process. The best approach is correct exposure, development and method; once mastered graininess will not be a problem. When you start using film speeds above 200 ISO it becomes more critical to get the exposure right in some cases a faster film has been used when a slower one would have done the job just as well. In this instance a fine grain or ultra fine grain developer will go a long way in inhibiting the clumping of the silver hilade crystals during the processing, allowing quite large prints to be made without the grain showing.

The main causes of grain growth are:

• Over exposure.
• Too highly concentrated developer solution.
• Too long a development time.
• Too high a temperature.
• Too much agitation during the development process.
  
  
  

  

  
  
  
  This picture was taken using Rollie's R3 variable ISO film set at 1600 ISO developed using R3 developer. If I had used a fine grain developer the grain would not have been this exaggerated. This picture was taken late almost to late as the sun was just off touching the horizon. If I had set 400 ISO it would have been a blur. Apart from that I think it is a good shot caught just at the right moment.

Mistaken identity Agfa APX developed in ID11



Agfa APX negatives developed in Ilford ID11

This is not the post I was expecting to write. I recently made up five litres of ID11 so I could develop a roll of out date HP5+. An extravagance you may think but really it was the catalyst for me to bring back an old friend into regular use. 

The other day I processed a roll of 35mm monochrome film but there was something wrong with the results. For starters the negatives looked wrong they didn't have the round look you get with a fisheye lens.  I could not get my head round how the fisheye two from lomography could change the look and shape of the negatives so completely. I'm going mad! a senior moment! brain in neutral! I need help! Up to this point I had been completely convinced that it was the roll of HP5. Then I noticed a black film canister on my desk, opened it and found a reel of HP5!! What the ...! what was developed then?? It turned out to be a roll of Agfa APX 100, that I had forgotten all about and mistakenly processed as HP5. Now this is a first for me, get it wrong and land on your feet! this has got to be one of the jammiest balls up ever!

Now I'm over the shock, I do not know why I should be surprised that they are a good set of negatives. Film emulsion has a large latitude of forgiveness before it looses its temper.  I checked what the timing should have been for Agfa APX and believe it or not my notes say that APX in ID11 at ISO 100 should be developed for thirteen and a half minutes at 20C. I had decided to process the out of date HP5 to fourteen mins.

Agfa APX  Film ISO 100
Developed in ID11 for 14 mins
Printed on silverproof matt
Developed in Moersch 6 blue tone.

So this has turned into a post about Agfa APX 100 developed in Ilfords ID11 results!

The method used:

•         I did not use a pre-soak. 

•         Develop for 14 minutes instead of 13.5. It would not have made much difference to the quality of the negatives.

•         Invert for the first thirty seconds and then for ten seconds every minute (which is about four inversions)

•         stop, fix and wash as usual.

The main test of a good negative is when it is printed. Showing you how much detail there is to be coaxed out of the high lights and shadows by dodging (holding back) and burning in (extra exposure) to arrive at that stunning final picture. 

  

For a film I had mistaken for another make, the results are excellent, I have no complaints!... except one; check what's written on the film canister first!

Alternative way to check your fix is still fresh.

Here are two simple and easy ways of checking that the fix is not exhausted. The bottom line is if in doubt, throw it out.

1. Take a drop of fix and place it on some blue litmus paper, if it turns red the fix is still active, if the paper remains blue it is exhausted. Rapid acting fixes by their nature will get exhausted more quickly than an ordinary one. When fixing paper you may expect to get thirty to forty 18 x 24 cm ( 8”x 10”) sheets per litre.
2. Take ten ml of fix and add ten drops of potassium iodide solution to the measuring jar and stir. If the milky solution does not clear after it has been shaken then the fix is exhausted and a new batch should be made up. If it clears the fix is OK to use. Make up your Potassium iodide solution from two point five grams of powder and add a thousand ml of water and mix. This method does not apply to rapid fixes.

These methods will work for your film fixes as well. But the milk test you do for film will not work with paper as you cannot see this stage with paper.

FP4+ developed in PMK Pyro method update

Zero camera, FP4+ developed
in PMK Pyro

The first permanent change is to go from two inversions every twenty seconds to one every fifteen seconds which is a reduction of two per minute. When I did this I wasn't sure if this would make the density of the negative less, as it turns out it has increased it, making for better toned prints. My conclusion is by decreasing the time between each inversion the developer in contact with the film surface is fresher for longer hence the increase in density. 

Zero Camera  FP4+ developed in PMK Pyro
Pelham bridge road Lincoln

I have also used an after-bath  (only with 120 FP4+) which does change the colour of the film base and seems to make them easier to print and at a softer grade. It has been suggested that the bath can reduce the sharpness of the negatives. Is this reduction noticeable? That's an answer you will have to find for yourselves as  I have only been using it so far with the film that's been exposed with the Zero pinhole camera, which is not known for it's ultra-sharp negative production. I will not be introducing it across the range of other makes of film I develop in PMK. I'm happy with the fine toned negatives it produces and see no reason to add the bath. 

Zero Camera FP4+ developed in PMK Pyro

Those of us who like to go against the mainstream will use it for creative or pictorial purposes but you need to be sure that the grain is sharp across the negative, it may add that extra something you are looking for to the final photograph.









Related posts:

PMK Pyro after-bath
PMK Pyro developer part B
PMK Pyro working solution

Mirror -image reversal

This is where the film is placed in the negative carrier with the emulsion side upper most obtaining a left right inversion, a mirror image. Negatives suited to this treatment cannot have any writing in them otherwise it gives the game away.

Which one of these images has been reversed?

PMK Pyro after bath.

I have been developing Ilford FP4+ 120 format in PMK Pyro for ten minutes for quite some time, without an afterbath. With my latest use of this developer I decided to change part of the process, instead of inverting the tank every twenty seconds I changed it to every fifteen seconds to see if this increased the density of the negatives. My reasoning is that previous negatives have looked a bit on the thin side. Yes you are right! I could have increased the developing time but wanted to find out how much influence agitation has on the process.

FG 1
Film FP4+

When changing or adapting a method that works well, it is better to change one aspect of it at a time so that it makes it easier to judge whether it is an improvement or not. So what did I do introduce a re-bath of the film in the developer after the fix. The after bath is part of the full process when using PMK pyro that completes the staining. Up to now I have not felt the need to do this but was curious to see how much stain would be added and if it improves the print quality. I did this for the two minutes suggested which I agitated for thirty-seconds at the beginning and ten seconds one minute later.

FG 2
Film FP4+

There has been a marked difference in the density and the colour of the staining on the negatives. The picture marked Fg 1 shows the negatives developed with the afterbath, they have a yellow-brown look to them. Fg 2 shows negatives without the bath and they have a purplish look to them.

These results would suggest that an increase in agitation has just as much effect if not more on the density of the negative than an increase in the process time. The afterbath also produces a significant change in how much stain is deposited which is supposed to help in making these negatives easier to print. I have found that even without the extra staining I have been producing some wonderfully toned photographs. I have not printed this latest set of negatives yet but hope to do so soon.


Related Posts:

FP4+ PMK pyro method update.
PMK Pyro developer part B
PMK Pyro working solution

Idiot list!

I've been clearing out the closet that I use as a darkroom. Whilst I was moving out some old photographic paper the bottom of one packet opened and on to the floor dropped a clear plastic folder. To my surprise it's my original film processing list; a step by step reminder for the developing process, showing what quantities to mix and how long to develop each of the makes of film. At the time it was Ilford PanF, FP4 and HP5. The developer is the recently reintroduced Paterson Aculux. The only film from the list to stand the test of time is FP4; the only film I use from Ilford regularly and remains my all time favorite.

When starting on your journey to develop your own film it is a good idea to make up an idiot list. It is there in writing to prompt you on what to do next; it is a way of ensuring that the process goes smoothly and that the negatives are properly developed. As you become more proficient you should update your list with the changes you make - ie: film development times, solution quantities etc. I still use one but now it's divided into two. One page shows the developing method needed for each of the developers I use and page two is a prompt for the stop, fix and wash procedure. I know it backwards but old habits die-hard.

So what has changed over the years? The developer for a start. The stop time has increased to two minutes. I no longer check to see if the film has cleared and the milkiness has gone after two and a half minutes when fixing. I had forgotten that I even did this! The wash time is down to fifteen minutes and I do not add fourteen drops of wetting agent - thats way to much!

Agfa APX sorting out the test strips for development..

With the test film exposed it's finding the time to process the strips. I have enough equipment that allows me to develop them one after the other. I will need at least a morning for cutting the film into lengths, setting out the chemicals and kit, develop,stop, fix and wash. Not forgetting that PMK Pyro developer can only be mixed in each case just before use.

The film was inserted into a Nikon F5 with automatic load which is a bit of a pain. If it was manual loading you would be able to mark the film before you shut the back and wind on to the first frame. I know from experience that the F5 has about 150 mm (6") lead before the first frame which would be an extra two shot if it was manually loaded making Agfa's APX a forty picture film. Each test strip is five frames long with two blanks to allow for error when cutting it to lengths of 235 mm (9").

This is the first time I have had to use my new darkroom in full black-out as I usually use a changing bag to load film into the process tank. I'm pleased to say there were no light leaks. So I could see where to cut the film in the dark I laid a rule on the work top with two bits of tape attached to it at 150 mm and 235 mm respectively. All I needed to do was pull the film from the cassette and cut to length at the tape marks. It surprised me how well this method worked. The remaining exposed film I wound back into the film holder to be processed later when I know the development time is right.

My working method for producing the test negatives:

• Add Part A of the developer mix to 250 mls of filtered water (tap water will do) and wait till the temperature reads 21 degrees C.
• Pre-soak for 1 minute. I have found that PMK Pyro developer is prone to air bells/bubbles forming on the film that are not always dislodged by taping the tank on the work top.
• Add part B of the developer and make up to 300 mls in doing this it will bring the temperature down to its working level of 20 C. stir and pour into the processing tank.
• Invert continuously for the first minute and tap tank on work top at the end.
• Invert once ever 15 seconds. For 6.5 minutes.
• Stop, fix and wash as normal.
• Repeat the above twice more with developing times of 26 and 13 minutes respectively.

If all goes well you will get a set of beautifully toned negatives.


Related posts:

Test results

The results of my first use of PMK Pyro

The results are not faultless. I will come to that later, first I have forgotten to mention that the films being processed are Ilford FP4+, used at ISO 125. 120 format producing a 6x6 negative. Now I'll outline the procedure used.

1. The working solution was made up using filtered tap water at 21 degrees C and poured in straight away.
2. Once the developer was in the tank I agitated it continuously for the first minute.
3. The tank was inverted twice every 20 seconds and tapped to dislodge any bubbles.
4. stopped, fixed and washed as normal.

I did not re-dip the film in the developer after fixing to intensify the staining. This is up to you but I was advised it did not make a noticeable difference.

Whenever I process a film I find that I'm a bit apprehensive as to what the outcome will be, even more so with a new developer! so just before I wash the film I have a little look to see if there is a negative, so far I have not been disappointed.

First impression, once the film was dry I noticed there weren't any water staining marks, that's a bonus. The film base has a slight mauve colour to it which increased in strength slightly with longer development times. The negatives overall were evenly processed. The contact prints revealed that there are dark spots on the neg's which I think may have been caused by air bubbles. I have just processed another film this time I gave it a two-minute pre-soak and there are no black spots on the negs.

To re-cap: Two minute pre-soak, pour developer in and agitate for first minute, then invert tank twice every twenty-seconds, stop,fix and wash as normal. You should get some very very fine grain negs.

I have printed four pictures so far. The first two on Foma 113 variant gloss, F11 grades 2.5 and 3 and they have a cool tone to them. The next two on Ilford multi-grade gloss, F11 grade 2 and 2.5, these have a warmish tone to them. Both papers were developed in Ilford -multi-grade print dev.

The pictures that appear in this post have been scanned from prints and do not convey how well they have printed. These are straight prints with no dodging or burning in. I wanted to show how well the negatives have printed and how evenly they have developed. I will be producing a final print set on FB paper at a later date using a mix of ordinary and warm tone developers.

Will I use Pyro again? Yes! it is likely to become my default film developer. The grain produced by this developer is minut to the point of making it difficult to see when focusing the negative for enlargement. I feel that the twenty-second double inversions of the tank is a bit fraught but I think it will get better the more I get used to it. Without Trevor's advice it may have taken a few more films to get it right. Thanks Trevor!


Other articles from this blog on PMK Pyro

What next?

Agfa test strips.

Working solution

Solution B

After bath

FP4+ development

Adox art 

PMK Pyro raw

Making up PMK Pyro from raw

Adox results

Negative comparison with PMK Pyro

PMK Pyro grain comparison

Experience

There is no substitute for..................

In the initial stages of your quest to produce a good set of negatives with your first film, you are starved of knowledge and information and read everything you can lay your hands on. This is counter productive and becomes confusing as different people have their own method of arriving at the same result. Pick one practitioner with a simple method and stick with them, forsaking all others until you know what results will be obtained when you pull the film from the developing real.

The more straight forward the method the less things need to be checked when something go's wrong. What people do not tell you is that film processing is very forgiving and if you don't quite get the time right, the temperature is not spot on or you forget to invert the tank the right amount of times it will not make a vast difference to the final outcome. Possibly they will be slightly thiner or denser than normal but what is normal in your case? It is not until you have processed a number of films that you will truly know. Once you know what to exepect you can then personalise the method to get the negatives that suit your own taste.

Checking development times?

How do you know that the negatives you are looking at are correctly developed and not under or over exposed. The only way to be sure is to do a test. What follows is a method to help you achieve this:

•   Choose a subject like a view or still life to take a series of photographs.

•   First you will need to determine what the correct exposure should be.

•   Then set the camera settings to two stops under and take the picture.

•   Follow this by setting it to one stop under and take another picture.

•   Now enter the correct exposure settings and press the shutter.

•   Next, one stop over and two stops over respectively.

•   Once you have done this wind the film on two frames and repeat the procedure, once done do the same again with a two frame separation so you now have three test strips.

Once back in the darkroom cut the film into three strips. Give the first section of film half the recommended development time the second set twice the time and the third group the suggested process time. Then compare the combined results of exposure and development and you will be able to clearly see which was developed correctly. It's worth the cost of a film to know that your films have been correctly developed.

Over development

The film has been processed for longer than it needed. The following can cause this:

• Too long a development time.
• Too high a temperture. ( thermometers can go wrong.)
• Too much agitation.

Attention to these factors should avoid this. If you know that a film has been under exposed then you can remmedy it by over developing.