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

A bit of a surprise.

There was a new kid on the block, a brash whipper snapper that goes by the name of Fisheye 2. This little fellow punches above his weight with the quality of pictures he produces. I'm not sure why I am surprised at this. I can only think that my view of the toy camera market has been tainted by the snobbery of professionalism! It is a brilliant piece of kit that allows a further string to the creative bow.

Let's be honest it is not my camera. My wife purchased it because she loves the fish bowl effect it produces when printed. She also thinks that the double, triple and many more exposures on a single frame are awesome. But the main thing is ease of use. 

This can lead to a bit of a dispute over who took what, especially when both of us are using it at the same venue! The only rule, once a film is finished we agree that colour or monochrome film is loaded. My wife prefers colour but more black and white film has been exposed.

Basically it is a point and shoot camera with a 170 degree field of view. With a couple of important buttons the most important as far as my wife in concerned is the little one on the back that allows the shutter to be re-primed for multi exposures and the other on the top right front by the shutter release ( which i think is the most important), this controls exposure the; L position locks the shutter so it is not tripped accidentally; N is the standard setting of 1/100 sec @ F8 and B a bulb setting that allows long exposures.

  

I must admit it's good to get away from all those decisions an SLR brings to the picture taking process. Just concentrating on the composition is  unexpectedly liberating knowing that if it all go's wrong it is a minds eye fault and not a technical one! when it comes to multiple exposures where serendipity influences the mix, some are far better than others.  Nevertheless  always interesting. I felt that I had been taken back in time to the excitement and wonder I experienced with my first camera.

It was a surprise when Elizabeth Roberts editor of  Black and White photography magazine got in touch asking if it would be OK to publish some of these pictures in the portfolio section. An unexpected boost to what has been a bad news year.

These pictures were taken in and around Baton upon Humber area, over a number of visits.  They are a mix of pictures  all made playfully exploiting the advantages of the lens. I had not intended to create a series. It just so happens to be an interesting part of the river Humber with its nature reserves, the bridge and foot path that extends to the estuary.

Three makes of film were used Agfa APX @100 ISO, out of date HP5 @400 ISO and out of date Fomapan 200 @200 ISO all developed in ID11. The pictures have been printed on a number of different photographic papers. The ones that appear in the magazine are printed on silverproof matt. Developed in a mix of Moersch SE6 blue and Ilford warmtone.

Silverproof and split grade printing

Split grade printing will work with all multi/variable grade papers whether resin coated or fibre base. But will it? Silverprint a London based company produce a limited grade paper that is very cost effective but is only produced in small batches.

Silverproof paper is still classed as a multi grade even though it does not have the full range of grades of the major manufactures. The paper is marketed as a proof paper for contact printing. Which I initially used it for. Until I up graded my processing tank to a 16 x 12, it was the only paper on the shelf of the right size to give this new bit of kit a workout! ( mentioned in an earlier post). It was then that I discovered it was more than a proof paper. I liked the tones it produced; admittedly these were graded prints.

After spending sometime getting to know what the paper could do at different grades with dodging and burning (some hundred sheets later); I started to play with the idea that it maybe possible to use the split grade method with Silverproof paper. The next time I was in the darkroom I set about testing the idea. Before I started I had to make my mind up as to what grades should be used with this paper. I settled on the basic method (as described in an earlier post) of using grade zero and five as a starting point adjusting the grades if necessary.

 

With the soft test print floating in the holding tank, I had to study it carefully when looking at the segments - it looked like a standard grade test print. I did wonder if this would be the case. Unperturbed by this I looked to the highlights and made a decision to expose for 27 seconds and then changed the enlarger settings for grade five. I felt that I needed to carry the test to its conclusion to be sure that the split grade method would not work. Fifteen minutes later the hard test print was floating in the holding tank. It was quite difficult to see the degrees of contrast between each segment making the decision to choose 12 seconds a educated guess. Looking back it was not the best subject to use for the first test, as the light was striking the scene head on.

Once the print was developed I studied it against both the test prints and felt that the split grade method had worked well enough for me to go forward with a second negative. This time the highly contrasty negative of the trees was used. With this picture it was easy to see the split grade method at work. I was almost side tracked by the amount of contrast the longer timed segments were indicating. I had to remind myself it was about tonality and chose accordingly.

Conclusion:

When using this method with Silverproof paper you need to choose the negatives you wish to print on the paper with care as it can be quite difficult to see an advantage over straight grade exposure.

Related post:
Silverproof paper

updated 2021

Please note that since writing this article silverproof paper is no longer made but the method is the same no matter what paper is used.

Out of date HP5+ develpoed in ID11

Lomo Fisheye two

Now that my brain is back in gear I can get on with developing that errant 35mm HP5+. Hopefully it should go without a hitch.

As far as I can remember (going by recent events that’s a bit dubious) this film is about seven years out of date. With this in mind you would of thought I should have picked a camera that allowed ISO adjustments. I didn't! Lomo's fisheye 2 was the camera chosen meaning that the HP5+ would have to be exposed at box speed (400 iso) Unlike a lot of people I don't have a problem with box speed and anyway it is in the best tradition of the toy camera cult along with Light leaking cameras, plastic lens, unpredictable focus and a lot of fun.

When it comes to box speed Ilford suggest that HP5+ should be developed for thirteen minutes at 20 degrees C. in ID11. From what I can remember of this all round developer it should produce negatives that are not very grainy. Normally I would have developed the film at the indicated time and be dammed. But something at the back of my mind said that fifteen minutes would do a better job and I prefer the negatives to be a bit on the dense side which translates to clear defined rectangles of tone. This must not be over done though as increasing the printing times could lead to over heating the negative making it buckle in the negative carrier of the enlarger. Leading to out of focus or soft pictures.

After all these years I still get the little bit of apprehension as I do a quick check of the film just before the wash stage. I need not have worried as I remove the reel from the developing tank I can just make out a line of rectangles along the film. The proof of the pudding will be when I print them.

 
I am very pleased with the way these negatives have printed. There is no sign of grain even though they have been enlarged to fit 9.5”x12” paper. I have used Silverproof matt paper at grade three and processed in Moersch 6 blue tone developer. Which produces a rich blue black that does not translate very well from scanned pictures.