Contact prints why?

Contact sheets

The humble contact print is a very powerful tool when creating an enlarged photograph. It passes on a wealth of information in its imperfect way. It is not just a positive record (proof) of all the images on the film but a starting point for the perfect print.

Not everyone agrees that a contact print of your processed film is needed. Instead, they like to work straight from the negative. I do not have a problem with this approach except on a practical level you need a light source to view them. I use the contact print not only as a reference for all my negatives but as an indicator as to which images are going to be more of a challenge to print. It is not always possible to see this when looking at the negative.

Making a contact print using a sheet of
glass to keep the negatives flat and in
contact with the paper. 

It is not a case of one, (the negative) or the other, (the contact print) but both together. By using them in conjunction you have all the information you need about the image you are going to print leading to a more judicious use of your time in the darkroom and a greater likely hood of the first proof print being closer to what you had in mind as the final print. A couple of tweaks to the next print may fulfil your vision. 

35mm contact printer

Contact printing does not require an enlarger or any special equipment. A darkened room, a frosted light bulb suspended from the ceiling and a sheet of glass to keep the negative[s] in contact with the paper and flat. Edward Weston used this simple method for his prints. During the timed exposure he would dodge the image where necessary. Once this time had elapsed, he would burn in where he thought it was needed. This method can be a bit uncertain, as you cannot always see where you need to make the adjustments unlike that of the image projected by the enlarger. A number of large format photographers still use contact printing as a way of making their final print from their negatives.

120 format contact sheet.
 This indicates that the negatives on
 left sides are overexposed. 
 

When contact printing I use my enlarger set to white light, with the lens fully open. The projected light is greater in size than the 8 x 10 paper I'm contact printing with. For 35mm film I use a contact frame and for 120 format and above a pane of glass with a ground edge, so I do not cut my fingers.

There are varying opinions on whether you should set white light, use grade one or your preferred printing grade. I have always used white light with multigrade and varitone papers and yes it works very well. You get a full range of tones.

The enlarged image shows that this negative
would enlarge without adjustment.

Remember a contact print in its simplest form is a work in progress not the finish article. I have found that some of my negatives print better with white light than they do graded. At one time I used to produce all my enlargements with white light and was very happy with the out come. With experience came sophistication and now I use graded and split graded printing methods to get the best out of the negative.

You should do what you feel is best creatively for your negatives and not let others dissuade you from that path.

New header picture.

As you can see we have refreshed the header picture and title with some fancy Text. I have been wanting to change this picture for some time but could not make up my mind as to which picture to choose. Until recently. Funnily enough It's been on display in the lounge for months. Even as a test strip I find it engaging. I have had a number of test prints over the years that I feel have worked better as an incremental image than the final result, so I thought why not! it is in keeping with the ethos of the blog.

The picture is of our 'trolley' sticking his head out of the rear window of the car. He is exceptionally pleased with himself as he has spent the afternoon up to his ears in water and soft gluttonous mud. So much so that instead of being tricolour his fur is slicked down with brown mud so badly he looks like he has used styling gel. Fortunately for us the back seat is covered with several blankets for times like this.

For a dog that loves to play in the water all day I find it strange that as soon as a bath is mentioned he go's and locks himself in his cage and then plays up no end when he is in the bath.

The picture was made using a Bronica SQAi producing a 6x6 negative on FP4+ developed in ID11. It is printed on Kentmere Paper 9.5 x 12 developed in Ilford multigrade. It happens to be one of the first batch of photographs I produced with this new paper. 

 

 

Recently this wonderful individual passed away.

 

He was a kind, cheeky, mischievous and above all of this very happy. He has been a painful lose.

 

 

update 2014 

FADU 2014

The year book is out.

Hopefully this is the start of a new era of year books from the film anddarkroom users forum (FADU). Earlier in the year Ian a member of FADU expressed his desire to have the year book started again and enquired if any of the other members would be interested in taking part. To his surprise there was a ground swell of enthusiasm for it to be reinstated. A boost to its reincarnation was Les Mclean's offer to curate and edit the book on behalf of the members.

This is the first book since Dave Miller the forums owner bowed out of producing the book back in 2012. There have been a number of calls by different members to get it going again but were not able to find anyone who had the time to get it off the ground. One of the main differences is that a number of members have gotten together to form a group to over see the submission process for the year book.

What makes this year book different from others, and the forum for that matter, is it's strict adherence to all pictures being scanned from photographs. Likewise for a picture to be included in the book, each associate was allowed to submit up to four photographs no larger than 8 x 10 in size. To be mailed to the submissions member no later than the end of October. They were then sent on altogether to Les Mclean for editing.

Another good thing about the submission process for the book was any member no matter what his or her level of experience, was invited to take part. I have to add that FADU is a very friendly welcoming forum who's members are always very willing to share their knowledge no matter who or where you are in your analogue journey.

So to the 2014 edition of the year book, i have to say there is a wonderful selection of photographs reproduced in the book. In the end, nineteen FADU supporters provided work for inclusion in the book. Not as diverse as previous years editions but a good number to start things going again. Of the seventy six photograph’s entered forty have been chosen. Representing all genre of photography.

Thanks goes to all the members who helped to make it a reality and a special thanks to Les McLean for taking on the editorial role. I think his involvement gave the project the impetus it needed to make it a reality. 

My new print washer at last.

When I started looking for a new print washer I did not think it would take the best part of two years for it to arrive. Basically I was looking for a new way to wash multiple prints at once without having to stand there and agitate them. Giving me more time to print. It would have been quite easy to go down the road and buy one off the shelf, but I wanted to put some of the knowledge I had gained into building my own.

I was not expecting it to take so long to arrive at a design I was happy with. It was always going to be a slot style washer which meant it would be a little more complicated to build. I was up for the challenge. The easy part was choosing the materiel it would be made from one of two plastics I had in mind. The next was settling on the size, it had to be the same as my slot processor 18” (460 mm) by 14” (360 mm). When starting a project like this you do not realise how many questions need to be answered before the project get off the page. For example: How many prints did I want to wash at once? How far apart should the slots be? What style of slot divider? For each set of questions I solved so another set would take their place. The most difficult ones to answer were what tooling would be needed.

Making sketches of what the washer should look like helps no end in solving some question quite quickly. By doing this it gives an insight as to what will be the difficult parts to put together. One of the difficulties turned out to be the design of the dividers and how they would be put together. This question remained a sticking point right up to the point of having to make the divides. In the end I settled for ones that could be removed, just as well I did because I'm not happy with the design. Having said that they work really well.

Since it's completion it has been in regular use and now I would not be without it. It has done what I wanted it to do - free me up from having to stand and wash each print by hand.

This post looks into Print washing

Four Film Positive results

Printing

Figure 1

Before any of my negatives see the enlargers negative carrier they all get contact printed, for me this is the first indication of how they may print when enlarged and for some the only time they become a positive. It also serves as a reference.

The contact prints for the Adox and Rollei show under development, to what extent will only become clear when the test strips are produced. The Fomapan 100 and the FP4+ show as well toned. In the case of Ilfords FP4+ it may be over developed.

Once more I step into the the red world of the darkroom and the smell of chemicals. Only there are none! The developer, stop and fix need to be mixed a fresh. This is due to a problem with the fix turning the slot of the Nova processor black. Still not completely sure why!

   

Figure 2

 I set the light boxes height on the enlarger so it will  generate a print 9”x 12” in size. This means the the 6x6  negatives are going to be brutally cropped; maybe that  should be less dramatic and say 'creatively cropped' to  fit  a landscape format but also serves to increase the  magnification.

 I have set the enlarging lens to F8. All the negatives  will be exposed at this setting, it allows a comparison  to be made as to how over or under developed they  maybe with each other. In the past when F8 is set I  find that it gives me a time in the region of 30+  seconds exposure time. Which for me is about average.

Figure 3

I have set grade two and a half to start with, if this proves to be to hard I'll drop it to two. The paper being used is silverproof matt limited grade paper. Being limited does not mean it has not got a full range of tones. It also provides a certain look to the prints that I like.

The first negatives to be exposed are the Fomapan 100. Looking down the focus finder the film  has a regular fine grain making it quite easy to get it pin sharp. The test strips for these negatives are indicating an exposure of twenty one seconds. The picture of the  woods (Fg1) was to hard for the 2.5 grade I set, so reduced it to 2 for the second exposure. Figure 2  the shadow of the tree reflected in the  puddle. Printed straight, was a little flat, so I printed it a second time at grade 2 but burnt in (added exposure)  to the areas around the puddle to lift the puddle area.

Figure 4

Figure 5

The next negatives to be exposed were from the Adox film. Looking down the focus finder to sharpen these negatives brought a smile  as it looked like someone had gone mad and splattered the grain on by flicking a brush. This may have been the result of under development. The test strips were also saying that the negatives were thin, suggesting an exposure of ten seconds, half that of the Fomapan. The two negatives from the Adox film are the complete opposites to each other. The fence post picture (Fg 3) had no detail I could see in the shadow when held up to the light. So when it was being exposed  I dodged the shadow area for a couple of second to stop it blacking right out.  Once it had dried I was surprised to see lots of detail. The two tree picture (Fg 4) was always going to be a landscape crop as there was to much foreground in the negative. It also looked the best picture negative wise.

Figure 6

The Rollei 400s was up next I had trouble picking two negatives that I could see enough of to print. These negatives were thinner than the Adox with some of the frames not showing at all. When looking  through the focus finder at the grain it revealed it to be patchy and shows up on the prints as white blotches. Lack of  proper development is evident maybe?. The picture of the rain on the window (Fg5) was a difficult print to get right.  Keeping the detail, what there is of it, of the door handle and leaf on the left. It was down to six seconds of exposure. The cat (Fg6) picture was the same six seconds but shows up the blotchy grain more. If I had shut the enlarging lens down to F11 or F16 I would have had more time to manipulate how the pictures looked by dodging and burning.

The last negatives to be worked on were the FP4+. Looking down the focus

Figure 7

finder it displayed a fine regular pattern I have come to expect from this film when developed in ID11. I had been looking forward to printing them but was thrown when the test strip revealed that a thirty second exposure was no where near enough. A further two tests revealed a time in the region of fifty seconds. You could say they were the best developed or over developed depending how you look at things. I printed an number of negatives from this film. I was really taken by the smooth tones of the pictures and the intensity of the sky. It was a bright, warm cloud less day. The prints show what a great morning it was at the bridge.  Figure seven showing the superstructure of the bridge gives a good indication as how good the sky was and Figure eight gives a good idea of how strong the sun was. Both pictures were printed at grade two but could quite easily have taken a softer grade.

Figure 8

Conclusion:

I am disappointed that the Rollei 400 was not developed correctly, I know it can produce some very smooth well toned negatives which would have lead to some great prints. As for Adox film, I am coming to the conclusion that we do not mix as this is the second time it has failed to present a good set of neg's. The Fomapan 100 classic was a surprise, if you are looking for a substitute for FP4+ then you will not go far wrong with this emulsion in my opinion. I have noticed that it is slightly more grainy than the FP4+ if you have to burn in the high lights heavily. I use both these films regularly now in rotation as their characteristics are almost identical.

Links to others from series in case you missed them.

Four film

Four film What developed

Ilfords new darkroom paper.

The old Multigrade 4 FB.

Ilford have launched an upgrade to its popular Multigrade 4 FB darkroom papers called Multigrade FB classic suggesting that this is the best light sensitive paper they have produced so far. If you judge it on sales alone and the fact it has sold out you maybe right or they could have simply under estimated it's popularity. It comes in gloss and matt surfaces offering greater sharpness, shorter development times and improved Max D – could this mean less time in the wash? Available at all the usual sizes. The classic paper has a white base tint, neutral image colour, good mid tone range and deep blacks. It has also been made more sensitive to traditional toning techniques but then I didn't find the original that difficult, even with toning developers. As part of the changes a cool tone FB paper has been introduced to complement the warm tone FB papers. This has crisp whites and nicely separated midtones. One of the surprising things about this paper is that Ilford has kept the price of the paper at multigrade 4 FB prices so far.

Technical sheets from Ilford:

FBClassic PDF

FBCool tone PDF

Local Darkroom.

120 format FP4+ developed in ID11
Printed on Kentmere VC
Develop in Ilford multigrade developer

I received an email from Harman technologies (Ilford products) recently about a new initiative that is to be launched worldwide.

The email was sent because I took part in a survey about darkroom use. It had a large response with fifteen thousand people taking part with over a thousand replies on the first day.

This is a summary of the statistics:

• 69% shot film weekly
• 35% did not use a darkroom but were using black and white film.
• 35% without a darkroom were asked would they like access to a local darkroom 78% of them said yes and of those 32% would like some training.
• 65% said they had access to darkroom facilities provided by work and community with privately owned being the majority.

A second survey for privately owned darkrooms was done with thirteen hundred responses being received. They were asked if they would be willing to share their darkroom and 56% said yes.

With that encouraging result Harman have set up a new free online community www.localdarkroom.com They have already invited tutors and community/ public darkrooms to list themselves on the site. There is also a section for those that have a private darkroom who are willing to share their private space. You will need to be a member of the community to access any of these services, whether training or darkroom in the local area, as there has to be some sort of vetting when allowing people you do not know into your home. For FAQs and more information visit the web site.

I hope this venture is a success and praise Harman for their initiative. But from experience I note that there can be a big difference between what people say on a form and then taking part.

On a personal note I would have liked to open my darkroom to other enthusiasts but it is not practical at the present time. 

Paper Flashing the pre-flash.

High contrast negative
printed normally.

After my last post you maybe wondering if this is going to be saucy, you will have to read on to find out.

Types of flashing:

Paper flashing is divided into two types, 'pre' which is done before the negative is exposed to the paper and 'after' which is known as fogging. This article is going to deal mainly with the former as it is a good way of controlling the contrast of hard to print negatives and adding a finer quality to others. It is also the one I have used most often.

How it works:

The first thing to do is explain how pre flashing works. All photo sensitive papers have a built in inertia to light, this means that the paper has to absorb a certain amount of white light before it starts to tone or show detail. When a paper has been pre flashed and the negative is exposed, all the light shining through produces tone and detail, because of this the amount of exposure needed is reduced, in some cases by 20%. This makes the lower values less likely to black out producing better separation in the shadows. It also affects the other end of tonal scale - the highlights, which receive more light, improving the detail and tone being recorded. With the inertia overcome, all the light passing through the negative is working on producing detail and tone. A consequence of this is a lowering of contrast making a finer balanced print.

Print after pre-flash

When to Flash:

Since flashing is a way of fine tuning contrast, it can be used to produce half grades with fixed or variable contrast papers. You do not have to flash to the maximum but can use it incrementally up to the point of tone. You do not have to flash a whole sheet of paper, it can be helpful where a sky in a scene is over blown to just flash that part of the paper. This is done by Dodging (holding back) with a piece of black card the other section of the paper preventing it from receiving any light. Remember that you should keep the card moving otherwise the final picture will have a black line going across it. Most negatives will not require flashing. If used inappropriately it can produce flat and unnaturally long toned prints. So be selective in your approach.

If you're a split grade printer you should not be afraid of pre flashing the paper as it has no adverse affect on this method, but can aid the production of better photographs.

Equipment:

Your enlarger and a reasonable accurate timer. For those who have the space you can set up a second enlarger just to do flashing or you can use a paper flasher by RH Designs.

How to Flash:

The main thing to note about flashing is the method you use has to be precisely duplicable so you can reproduce predictable results time and time again. One method is to set the enlarger light box at maximum height and close the lens down to minimum aperture (F16) with a timer connected, timing the segments at intervals.

For those who don't have a second enlarger things become a bit of a pain having to move the light box up and down like a yo-yo during the printing process. But there are ways round it. You can batch flash your paper keeping it in a separate box but only produce enough for that printing session. Secondly, find your own method of flashing which is what I have done. I move the light box to a height where the light from the lens covers an area larger than the paper I'm using, which is slightly higher than what I would use for printing (don't forget to make a note of the height for future reference). Set the lens to F8 and then time the segment at tenths of a second. You can increase the timing by closing down the lens. Don't be afraid to experiment to find a method to suit. You can do all this with the negative in the carrier and use a diffuser under the lens that scatters the image enough not to make an impression on the paper, but this can lead to overly long exposure times.

Making a test strip:

Test strip

The method is the same as making a test strip for printing a negative. You need a strip of light sensitive paper and a piece of black card so you can expose sections incrementally. The only difference is you will need to mark the test strip with a pen so you can see how many segments have been exposed before the paper starts to tone. The paper is developed in the normal way. To check the test strip properly it needs to be totally dry to allow for dry down tones that may appear in segments that look clear when wet. You can force drying by using a hair dryer or the microwave. If you use several sorts of paper the test should be done for each and then stick the results to the front of the box for reference. It also means that each new box you purchase will need a test, as each new box is a different batch.

Exposure curve.

This simplified exposure curve shows what happens to photographic paper when introduced to white light. The lower part of the curve marked 1-3 is the area of 'inertia' when exposed for this short period of time and then developed there would be no change in the tone of the paper. When timed to 4 and developed there should  be the first signs of tone 4a. If you then time it to 5 at the top and develop it, it would be maximum black. (also known as D MAX) to add any more time after this point will not make the paper any blacker than black.

Flashing is about giving the paper just enough white light to get it to 3 before you expose the negative to extend the tonal range. Further white light from this point 3 is a different type of white light known as fogging.

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.

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.

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.

Prints to hard or to soft.

High contrast

What are the signs that a print has been printed to hard? The shadow areas are jet black with no detail and the highlights are blank  (the contrast is to great). Assuming that the negative being printed shows none of these traits then it can be corrected by the following:

●         Use a softer grade of paper.

●         Make sure that the exposure time is correct.

●         The paper is in the developer for the right amount of time.

●         Don't use a high contrast developer.

Low contrast

What signs make a soft print? It looks grey and foggy with little punch. No contrast. In this case it is almost the opposite to the above.

●         Use a harder grade of paper.

●         Increase the developing time. If the development time is to short it may cause cloudy spots.

●         Make sure the developer is not too diluted.

●         Also check that it is not exhausted. 

There are other possibilities:

●         Your darkroom may not be light tight fogging the paper creating an overall grey cast.

●         The paper maybe to old or has not been stored properly. 

Once you establish what the problem is, the cure will speak for it's self.

Related posts:

Evaluating your test strips
Darkroom fog.

Dodging and burning.

A selection of dodgers 

They are darkroom tools to help bring out all the detail from your negatives when printing. 



Holding back

No matter how well you expose and develop your negatives, when it comes to making a positive you will need to equalize the exposure by holding back and burning in to keep the detail in the highlights and shadow areas. In a lot of cases it is not possible to alter the overall exposure time to take these deficiency's in to account. In these cases dodgers as the name implies will help you get round this problem. You can use your hands, fingers, pieces of card, a length of wire with a cut out of  card stuck to it and cards with holes in them. 

Burnning in

Dodgers work by casting a shadow over the area that needs less exposure than the rest of the picture. Likewise dodgers with holes in them are used for burning in areas that require more light than the rest of the photograph. This is also a type of holding back as it stops the correctly exposed picture from becoming over exposed. When using a dodger you must keep it moving otherwise it will produce a hard outline to the area you are trying to correct. It can be moved from side to side or up and down to stop this happening. The amount of time you use your dodger for will depend on what your test strip shows.  If you have not got a test strip then it will be trial and error taking a number of prints before you get it right. With experience the amount of error will diminish. 

Dodgers are not just for correcting problems, they are there also for creative purposes for example to bring out some extra drama in the scene, add a shaft of light where there was none or to bring two pictures together where one maybe lacking any sky detail.

Photograph or print

I do find the photography press a pain when it comes to describing the difference between digital and traditionally produced black and white pictures! They can no longer call a photograph a photograph, it has to be a silver print or gelatin print, why? I think they need to get over themselves as the English language describes both types quite well without having to preface the word print. A photograph is a picture produced using light and chemicals. A print is a picture produced using ink. What could be simpler.

Evaluating your print test strip.

low contrast

High contrast

correct contrast

Now that you have your test strip what are you looking for? You are looking to see which of the timed sections gives you blacks that are really black without making the whites look grey, with a good separation of the greys in-between. If the picture looks grey overall with no defined blacks then the paper grade is too soft, meaning lack of contrast. On the other hand if the blacks dominate the picture then the grade of paper is to hard - too much contrast! If you need to change the grade of paper you will need to make another test strip. It should be noted that test strip evaluation is best carried out when they are dry as wet ones tend to hold back some of the more subtle grey tones which may encourage you to pull or push the expose time needed. While checking this you should also be ensuring that the focus is accurate.

When your test strip is pin sharp with good clear highlights, defined shadows and the right amount of contrast, you are ready to make a print.