Basic split grade printing



Fig 1
Soft test print

A while a go I was on the FADU forum in the articles section reading up on another subject, when I came across an article by Les Mclean on basic split grade printing. I had a quick read and printed a copy off to read again and give it a try. It is suggested that using this method leads to a more finely toned photograph. Is this the case?  And how difficult is it to get right?

 

Before the introduction of Multigrade and varitone papers photographers used to buy individually graded papers. This led to a working method that was tailored to what grade of paper they had on the shelf. To a certain extent I still do this aiming to produce negatives that print well at grade three. Then burning in (more light) or dodging (less light) areas to gain a well balanced final print.

 

After reading the article several more times to get the basics into my head I was ready to give it a try. I chose a negative that  had a very wide range of tones, that would normally require burning in. The negative used was taken  on Agfa APX 100, ISO 100 developed in PMK Pyro. These negs on average print well at about grade two and half.

Fig 2
Hard test print

Split grade printing requires you to produce two test strips. One at grade zero a soft test strip (Fig 1)  and the second at grade five a hard test strip (Fig 2). Quite simple until you put it into practice for the first time! It maybe an idea to produce an idiot list, for a procedure prompter,  to help jog your memory hopefully reducing the mistakes.

 

First of all it is a good idea to start with a fresh print developer as it may take more prints than you expect to arrive at the end result. For this test I used whole sheets of Foma variant 311 gloss RC 10 x 8. Developed in Moersch 6 blue tone. I will also process a print in my usual way as a reference.

 Sequence:

1.           The first test strip should always be the soft one at grade zero which in my case I dialed in to the enlarger head. You can use individual multigrade filters. I have set the enlarging lens to F8 which is what I would normally set.

2.           I have used five second intervals to obtain the right exposure for the soft print (fig 1) If you feel you need to refine the tonal separation then you can do a further test strip of two second intervals. I have kept to the five second test strip to keep things simple.

3.           Once the test strip is processed and preferably dry, under good lighting check the strips. The trick is to look at the bright tones of each segment the one that produces the best bright tones is the one to choose. In this case about 16.9 sec's. The contrast has to be forgotten about it is all about tone. (fig 1) Be careful not to over do it as it can lead to a muddy looking final print.

4.           This is the start of the hard grade test strip (fig 2). Place a new sheet of paper in the easel and expose the whole sheet at grade 0 at your chosen time (16.9 sec). Be careful not to move the easel. I also covered the photographic paper with a piece of black card to protect it from any stray light when I turned on the enlarger, so I can see the dials when adjusting them to grade five. This is where I think using pre set filters has the edge.

5.           Cover a section of the exposed paper as a reference point from which you can see the increase of contrast. Now expose the following sections at  two second increments. (fig 2).

6.           Once the test strip is processed and preferably dry; under good lighting you are looking for the best section of tonality and contrast that will provide you with the image for your taste. In this case I have chosen eleven seconds.

7.           Now you are ready to combine both the times in the one print. Begin with grade 0 the soft settings (the tonal exposure) this should always be done first as it has the most influence on the final out come; then grade 5 the contrast setting. The picture oppsite shows the result. I must admit the outcome is brilliant in more ways than one. It has an unexpected vibrancy that conveys how sunny and warm the day was.

 

The picture below, is my reference print as you can see it requires more work to produce the tones for the wall in the background and sky. I get the sense that this image is lacking in something. A subjective notion that is a very individual interpretation.

 

Conclusion

Les Mclean's article sets the process out in a way that is easy to understand. I have followed it to the letter and the result speaks for itself. When embarking on new processes there is a certain amount of settling in. Once you are past these initial stages you are only two steps away from a finely toned image, that anybody, novices included would be more than pleased with. I think it is a more efficient method of producing prints and in some cases possibly more cost effective. This is only a basic introduction to the use of split grade printing but I can already see that it has advantages over the standard grade print, achieving a better toned image more easily.

 

 

Print washing

Wash tray

For some time now I have been looking for a way to improve my print washing. This is more to do with how well they are washed when I have a batch of half a dozen or so processed prints. At the moment I use a homemade tray that is sloped, with running water coming in at the top and is dammed at the bottom to create a reservoir before flowing through holes that control the level. But this only allows me to wash a couple of prints at a time which needs to be agitated now and again by hand. The solution would be a slot style washer.

This has been a thorn in my mind for sometime, that now needs to be removed. So before I build a new one I should do some research. I started off by asking a question on FADU

First of all we need to go back a step to the fixing process, because what you do here has a big bearing on how well and quickly your prints are washed. I prefer to use a rapid fix which is a plus point but it needs to be timed correctly. Next it is a good idea to place the newly fixed print straight into a water bath and agitate for a minute before placing in the hypo clearing; which is a must for FB papers in reducing wash time. ( I no long use Hypo clearing because my new wash method has shown it's not needed) When it comes to RC papers I exclude the Hypo as the papers absorption rate is next to nothing.

It is a myth that it takes longer for the salts to be removed from the fibers of FB paper because it gets embedded. In fact it is the emulsion side that resists their release.

When I embarked on this research I had not envisaged how complex the wash process was. I suspect not many others give it the consideration it needs either.

To be sharp or not, how is the question.

Fg 1.
Film FP4+ developed in ID11 printed
on Ilford MG RC gloss.

A subject that is talked about by all photographers. No matter how you like to label it DOF or boken I am surprised that depth of field can be expressed by some in the terms of good and bad. Surely it is subjective and down to the person who has composed the picture.

So what is depth of field and how does it work?

Depth of field relates to the area of the image that is sharp. So the subject  you focus on in the view finder will be in the middle of the sharpness. How much this extends in front of or behind it, is dictated by the aperture you use. Small F number (large opening) very shallow, large F number (small opening) very wide. The other factor to have a bearing is the focal length of the lens used.  For example, with a wide angle 28 mm lens you would not require the focus to be exact because the depth of field would be quite considerable in front of and behind the point of focus even at small f numbers (large apertures). But with a Telephoto lens of 200 mm the point of focus needs to be precise as the depth of field is quite narrow even at large f numbers (small apertures).

Fg 2.
Kodak colour plus negative. scanned
 from print.

In understanding the way depth of field works you need to know that when you focus on the subject it is at that point the reflected light arrives at the focal plan as fine points of light (sharp). The subjects closer to the lens do not resolve as sharp until they are beyond this point and those further away reach pin sharp before they arrive, because of this they arrive as discs known as circles  of confusion. The larger the circles the softer the images appearance. By making the aperture smaller (large F number) you reduce the circles of confusion giving the picture the appearance of full depth of field. (sharp from front to back). The eye considers points of light as large as 0.25 mm diameter as sharp. The same applies to the dot pitch of a computer screen. When it come to the manufacturer of lenses for 35mm format cameras this figure is much smaller 0.08, this is because the maker has worked out  that on average a 35 mm negative will be enlarged by twenty times (a print size of 10 x 8.)

The good thing about using a film camera is that  you can check on how heavy the points of confusion will be by pressing the depth of field preview button. The advantage I have is I know what to expect from my lenses at particular apertures. This allows me to compose the picture with the amount of soft focus  I think will enhance it.

For example the three pictures included with this post.

•         Fg. 1 The main reason for the cats paw being out of focus is to add depth and a sense of being very close.

Fg 3.
FP4+ developed in ID11 printed on
Iford MG RC gloss

•         Fg. 2 The main reason for blurring the background is to exclude a large group of people walking towards me. They did not add anything to the picture I had in mind. By adjusting the aperture to a lager one (small F number) they have been removed making for a much better shot.

•         Fg. 3 The depth of field in this picture is very narrow. It took a bit of time in making sure that the whole of the ball was sharp and nothing else.

When taking a picture I consider the 'out of focus' as important as the area to be sharp.

 

The perfect print; possible?

It is still one of the most talked about subjects Visit any forum to do with photography digital or traditional and you will find threads relating to the perfect negative or capture. What developer to use, how to manipulate the raw file, what does a well exposed negative or histogram look like and so on. But this post is not about our digital friend or for that matter the negative it is to do with the photograph - the positive end of the process. I cannot get there without some negative chat first though!

After the recent deluge it is nice to be sitting back in the garden office writing this post and enjoying the late afternoon sun with my friend the cat. It is quite surprising how peaceful it can be in such a built up area. Not as negative as you thought but I digress.

It was Ansel Adams and Fred R. Archer that gave us a proven method of producing a properly exposed negative every time with the zone system. They divided the black and white negative up into eleven sections if you include zero from pure white to full black. Adams then said that really there are only nine zones if you are in pursuit of the perfect negative and then only seven of those will give texture. This is all well and good if you are using a plate camera but most of us don't. We use cassette and or roll film where all our carefully exposed negatives get a one time fits all development. In a round about way Mr Adams is saying that film sees the world in a more limited way to us. So we have all engineered ways of finding our perfect negative. What do I look for? A negative that has detail from high light to shadow and a good density above base clear in other words defined rectangles of tones the length of the film.



The day was very bright that the light
meter read a six stop difference
between the house wall in the background
and the shadow cast by the barn. I
over exposed the negative by two and a
half stops.

We all strive to produce the perfect negative but it was not until recently that it dawned on me that it does not necessarily translate to the perfect print. So what is the perfect print? One that is easy to print but what do they mean by easy to print? One that does not require a lot of dodging and burning. A single exposure success wouldn't that be the perfect print! With the way the negative sees the scene in front of it and all the variables in its path is it not inevitable that you will have to manipulate the image projected onto the base board of the enlarger to produce the perfect print? 

 

Recently I came close to my interpretation of the perfect print, one that does not require a lot of manipulation. By placing the test strip in such a way that the area that needed burning in was exposed to several different timed exposure segments this allowed me to add the extra time for that area to the first print. With experience the hit or miss aspect of the test strip process is lessened. It still doesn't take away that bit of a buzz when it all falls into place. Something I've never had with digital.

Stop not buffer.



One of the most popular over the counter acid stops.
Made from citric acid with colour indicator.

Stop is the second part of the development process, but how many of us give it a second thought. Most of us when we come to developing our first film tend to do what the manufacturers, friends and teachers suggest without delving into what the relationship is between these elements in the process. There is nothing wrong with this approach we are all eager to get on and see those all important first images. With success, we continue settling in to a way of doing things that produce good results. It's not until we start printing that some faults with the negatives rear their heads. Dust and hair marks being the most common but then there are those odd black spots appearing in the skies here and there. This is when the controversy about how we stop the development process comes to the fore.

There are two main categories. The more aggressive with chemicals and the gentler water stop. The later is not a stop and it is misleading to call it such.   It dilutes the developer to the point where it no longer has an affect on the emulsion this can and does lead to unevenly developed negatives and I cannot understand why it is recommended (for film only) other than to increase the longevity of the fix, a buffer or as a way of creating a certain style to the negative. 

Have been processed using a citric acid stop.

I personally prefer the more aggressive chemical route, when the stop go's in, the developer is stopped in its tracks producing a clean crisp negative but you need to be careful.

A popular choice in the make up of developers is Sodium carbonate, an alkali. When this comes into contact with an acid based stop it produces carbon dioxide gas that leads to blistering of the more sensitive film emulsion,( not the case with enlarging papers). It manifests its self as a pinhole in the denser areas of the negative. There are ways around this by using developers that are formulated from mild alkalis either balanced or borax which do not produce the damaging over heating or gas when used with acid stops.

A reflection of St Pauls in London.
Processed and printed using all Ilford products

Stops are made from several different acids the most popular is acetic with a pH dye indicator. The others are citric and boric. You can also use a simple solution of sodium bisulfite. Be careful which stop you choose as some produce green staining with some enlarging papers. Another precaution is to use the stop bath at a lower working temperature to the developer; I know this is a controversial move but I have used this method for years without any of the problems suggested by others.

Sinkings in the Orkneys

German Fleet at Scapa flow

It is a grey day as a young lad stands near the cliff edge on Hay one of the Orkney islands. He looks out over Scapa flow that is crowded with ships. The German fleet has been interned. He has heard that the war is over and that is why they are all here at the Navy’s most northerly base and guard to the North Sea.

While the boy is sat a top the cliff eating a bread and dripping sandwich, his eyes are drawn to some flashing lights, it looks like all the ships are winking at each other, little does he know that this is the order from rear admiral Von Reuter to his commanders confirming orders to scuttle the fleet. He looks on day dreaming about what life may be like now that the war has ended. He suddenly notices that all the ships he can see are flying the Imperial German Ensign from their main masts. While he looks on there are lots of small boats moving between the ships, if only he had a telescope he would be able to see what is going on in more detail but he still hasn’t got enough pocket money saved.

Whaling boat stranded on Battle Cruiser Moltke

The German sailors had been preparing for the scuttling for some days by  drilling holes in the bulk heads to help the passage of water through the ships. Once the order was given sea cocks and flood valves were opened, internal water pipes were smashed and all water tight doors and portholes left open. It was not until midday that  the scuttling was noticed.  Friedrich der Grosse was seen listing heavily to starboard. What remained of British naval forces at Scapa flow navel base sprang into action, but they were limited in the force they could take since the leaving of the fleet the day before . It was not until twenty minuets after midday that Admiral Fremantle on manoeuvres with the fleet  received a message that the German fleet was sinking. He immediate turned round and steamed back at full speed to Orkney. He radioed ahead to order all available boats to try and stop as many ships sinking as possible. By the time Admiral Fremantle returned it was only the large battle ships that were still partly afloat. The last ship to sink was the battle-cruiser Hindenburg at five o'clock.

Battle cruiser Seydlitz

The young boy up on the cliff had lost all track of time it was getting late, he would be 'for it' by the time he got home, with a clip round the ear from his mum. He had resigned himself to it but had a great story to tell his friends when he got to school the next day. On his way home he wondered what those faint popping sounds were. The tragedy of those sounds were that nine Germans were killed and sixteen wounded when the British boarded their ships to stop the sinking's. 

Battleship Bayern listing heavily

I know you are probably thinking what has this got to do with photography. The funny thing is this was all sparked off by an article in Black and white Photography magazine about post cards. Which lead me to a box of  cards that was given to me by my Gran. In among them are a collection of twenty pictures of ships, of these fourteen show the sinking of the German fleet at scapa flow at the end of the Great War. The photographer who took these shots probably used 127 or 120 format film in a box Browne or fold out camera of the time.

For more information on the Sinking of the fleet.

The Focus finder.

This is a wonderfully simple piece of darkroom equipment. Basicly it is a magnifying glass and mirror. It provides the user with the optimum sharpness for the enlargement by focusing on the grain of the negative. 

Also known as a grain magnifier it rests on the masking frame where it diverts a small amount of light from the projected negative to your eye as you look through the small magnifying lens. With one hand on the focusing control of the enlarger you gently turn the knob until the grain becomes sharp in the mirror. This translates to a sharp image at easel level; to maintain this accuracy a piece of waste photographic paper should be placed in the masking frame with the magnifier on top. It is easiest to focus on the grain with the enlarging lens set at its widest aperture and then re-checked at the working aperture. To make sure that the focus has not changed. 

Some focus finders can only be used in the central area of the projected image. This is because the angle of the light is more severe at the edges and corners. If you wish to check these areas to make sure that the whole negative is in focus you will need a magnifier that allows for this with a wider mirror and tilting aim.

Silverproof paper

This is the second run of budget priced paper marketed by Silverprint and has a matt finish. The first run was gloss. I have used the later and was impressed with the photographs it produced. With its grades being limited to two I was not put off.

Ilford FP4+,120 fromat 6x6 negative, Developed
in PMK Pyro and printed on
Silverproof paper Matt.

I originally purchased the gloss paper for contact prints and didn't really take much notice of how well they were being produced until I obtained a 12 x 16 slottie (Nova paper processor. which was the dirtiest bit of kit I have ever purchased second hand, a story for another post). The silver proof paper was the largest sized paper I had on the shelf and I was  impatient to see how well this new piece of kit worked. I was surprised by the tonality of the paper which lead me to make a series of photographs. It is a shame it was a limited retail run. It will missed.

Then a second batch was announced on Matt paper, which is a finish I'm not a fan of, but I'm always happy to try something new. This will also be a limited retail run, so if matt is your preference get some boxes in while you can.

Ilford FP4+ 120 Format 6x6 negative, Developed
in PMK Pyro and Printed on
Silverproof paper Matt.

The paper is completely different from what I'm used to. It is difficult to tell which is the emulsion side in the darkroom but with a little practice, the back has a slight  fibre feel to it which takes a time to get the hang of. First impressions are good, the photographs remind me of the cover page to Black and White Photography magazine in the way it looks and feels but has a depth to it that ink cannot replicate. It also does not have that richness of tone you get with gloss papers. Having said that, I like the difference and  expressiveness  it gives to the pictures it produces.   

Ilford FP4+ 120 format 6x6 negative, Developed
in PMK Pyro and printed on
Slverproof Paper Matt.

The pictures that complement this post were developed in a warm tone developer from Ilford with the enlarger set at grade two, initially it was set  at  grade three but I found that the pictures had to much contrast. On hindsight it may have been better to use an un-toned developer, but then I was not planing to use the proof paper for a full print session. I got carried away after the first test prints and I'm pleased I did.

Dust, dust and more dust.

Dust! Don't you just love the way it manages to settle on to your equipment just as you make that all important exposure? The more you fiddle about picking every speck off, those bits 'standing in the wings' charge in at increasing speed  towards  your lens, negative and light sensor; so begins a  never ending battle fought everyday over the same territory! Should someone   come up  with a device that will send those particles packing you'll feel your prayers have been answered.

 

Welcome the Zerostat gun! one shot and those pesky particles are de-charged and falling from your lens etc. But come on! Can this really be true? Well No! after a few days of using this device I discovered that it attracted more dust than ever before! It was a nice idea while it lasted. Needless to say that this pistol has been consigned to history.

Really the only way to keep these little white specks from appearing on your final pictures is to be methodical in your approach. Checking your camera, lenses and enlarger regularly. But before you start this process it is a good idea to de-charge yourself by touching something that is earthed this will take the static out of your body and stop to some extent the static building up in the item you are trying to de-dust. Whatever you do don't use a cloth to clean your film strip, the static this induces will attract every bit of hair and dust in the universe turning it into a hair ball. If this happens its time to find another negative to print. I find that a puffer brush and a Kinetronice antistatic whisk brush work the best- in most cases removing the particle/s and hair in one go without a lot of fuss. Less fuss means more pictures printed with less spotting once the photograph is dry.

 

Remember never touch the bristle of your brush with bare fingers this will transfer microscopic particles of grease which will then be deposited to whatever you are trying to clear, making the job more difficult and in the case of old lenses will attack the coating.

Schaimpflug's rule.

This is the rule on tilting the easel and carries on from my last post.  The most accurate way of correcting distortion is to use Scheimpflug's principle: This states that you should tilt the negative as well as the baseboard and that they need to be canted over in opposite directions to each other. Additionally the incline should be such that the plane of the negative and the plane of the baseboard should meet in the plane of the aperture to give maximum sharpness over the whole image. 

You will find that the more expensive enlargers allow the plane of the negative to be tilted, add a tilting easel to the mix and the results produced can be remarkable.

Related posts:

Tilting the easel.

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

Keeping to a known formular

It is always difficult to know when you first start printing, which developer and paper combination to go with. Pick one and stick with it. It is not a good idea to keep chopping and changing in the beginning.

The best way to approach this is to choose the developer that the manufacture recommends for their film and paper. They have spent a lot of time researching what works the best. Once you have become used to developing and printing you can start to experiment if you wish.

Antonov An2
Film Ilford FP4+ 6x6 neg, developed in Ilford ID11,
printed on Ilford Multigrade RC gloss,
 processed using Ilford multigrade paper developer. 

PMK Pyro solution part B.

As mentioned in this post the developer is divided into two parts as a stock solution. Part B is the larger quantity of the two and suffers from settlement where the powder comes out of suspension and accumulates at the bottom of the bottle. Before use, you should shake the bottle well so that it goes back to a milky colour. It would seem that the larger the crystals in packet B the more drop out there will be. I have not yet found a method that stops this.

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!

400TX: Agfa APX 400 in Prescysol

I came across this post while looking up a friends blog. It is worth a read as Jeffery Smith makes some interesting points. I must say that my use of the newly released Agfa APX 100 with PMK Pyro has not shown the signs of graininess he refers to with the faster film. But then I'm not sure that the new film is of the same make up as the discontinued one. He also did not say whether or not he used an after bath when processed his films.

400TX: Agfa APX 400 in Prescysol

Test strips before printing.

The test strip is the foundation to obtaining a good final print. Unless you have one of RH designs excellent Analsyser Pro enlarging meters. If not the most common way of producing a test strip is with a sheet of card moved at timed intervals across light-sensitive paper. There are several things you need to set before doing the test: the size of the print, the aperture of the enlarging lens and making sure you have sharp focus.

10 x 8 test strip.

Once all this is done how big should the test print be? This is down to personal choice but you should consider whether the use of whole sheet, half, third or strips give the best test results. If using a test strip of about two inches (50 mm) you need to make sure that each segment includes a full range of tones from the lightest to darkest so you can see at which timed interval gives the best high values and shadow areas. It is much easier to achieve this with the larger test strip.

What should the time separation be? A good starting point for prints around the ten by eight size is five seconds. These intervals will give you a rough idea of what the exposure should be. This can be refined with further test strips of two and/or one second if needed.

On what grade of paper should you make the test print? Grade one is standard practice. If the method you use places your negatives at a particular grade In my case it is grade three then you should do your test print at that grade unless you are using the split grade method.

Related posts:

Evaluating your test strips

Magnification on your enlarger

This is going to get a bit technical, so bear with me! This is the ratio between the print and the negative. It is calculated using the linear rule. To make things easy, lets say we are going to enlarge a thirty-five mm negative (24 x 36 mm) by a factor of ten this will give us a print size of 240 x 360 millimeters ( about 9" x 14") in size.

Magnification is related to the distance the negative is from the enlarging lens and the lens from the baseboard. So as the latter distance increases the former decreases. In other words the higher the enlarging head is from the baseboard the closer the lens gets to the negative when it is being focused and vice versa. It stands to reason that the larger the print the longer the exposure time will need to be. There will also need to be a change in paper grade to a harder one as there is a softening in the contrast.

First Rule of printing

The first rule.

Printing stark black and white enlargements will not hide a lack of technical experience. You should develop your printing technics to such an extent that it improves the expressiveness of your photographs.

Test results for Agfa APX 100.

When taking pictures for the test it is best to choose a subject that is evenly lit. This will make the light reading more representative of the whole picture area. Unlike a high contrast view with deep shadows and strong highlights forcing you to take several light readings to find the average setting. It also makes it easer to evaluate the negatives once processed.

The processing of the film went well having spent all morning shuffling developing tanks, measuring jugs and developer bottles, the three strips of film have all been consistently processed. I am very pleased with the density of the negatives, when dry I will do a contact sheet so I can judge how well they will print.

You can see from the picture above, that the 13 minutes development time that digital truths massive dev chart suggests, is spot on. The results also show that you really do need to make a total and utter mess of things before you get a negative that will not print.

The light meter read negative at the centre
of the test strip.

There is a general guide to check whether a film has been correctly exposed and developed it should produce a continuously toned negative. The subjects deepest shadow should be perceptibly heavier than the clear of the film base. The areas that represent the brightest important detail in the negative must not be so dark that you can not read the printed words of a book through them on a sunny day as shown right. Its a quick way of checking to see if your negatives have been correctly developed.

The picture below shows the prints produced by the light meter read negatives in the centre of each of the test strips.

The difference between the top and centre is one and a half stops. bottom and centre is three-quarters of a stop. It is obvious that the longer you develop the less return you get for the time spent. Meaning that you will only get a slight improvement in the quality of your negatives for each minute of extra process time you give them over thirteen minutes.

These tests represent my own personal experiences I strongly encourage each individual to check this film out for themselves. The experiments I have carried out are not exhaustive and should only be used as a starting point.






Related posts:

Sorting out the test strips