The masking frame

Also called an easel they come in different sizes. It is a good idea to pick one that is larger than your current needs therefore not limiting the proportions of your enlargements. The main reasons for using a masking frame are to hold the paper flat, to reconfigure the composition, allow the margins to be adjusted to the various format sizes you wish to use and to crop out some of those bits that creep in at edges, that you didn't see before you pressed the shutter. 

The frames come with two or four independently adjustable blades on a yellow or white base. I have noticed that some blades are not set at right angles to each other so it is a good idea to check them at various settings with a set square to make sure they are true. Also make sure that the edges of the blades are not bevelled under. This will reflect the light and produce a thin black line around the edge of the picture. It can be a nice affect but one you should have control over. The light colour of the baseboard is so you can see the projected negative, enabling you to frame the image before you put the photo paper in place.

When using single weight papers on a white baseboard, it is possible for the light to pass through the paper and be reflected back, changing the value of the exposure. You can stop this by laying a dark coloured card on the baseboard with the light sensitive paper on top.

The most versatile of the masking frames is the four blade, it allows you to mask the image by only having to move the blades of the frame without having to re-a line the whole easel each time. It also gives better control over how big or small you make the margins and in some cases gives you the ability to produce borderless prints. The versatility of these frames makes them quite expensive to purchase.

Adox in PMK Pyro results.

Test stips at twenty and ten
Minutes

The results are in! This has turned out to be one of the most exasperating tests to date. There have been problems all along the way from getting the exposures right to developing the film. Having said that there have been some surprises.

As with the Agfa test the film was exposed at box speed ISO 100 in the Nikon F5. This is where the process changes apart from the test method. The PMK Pyro used was one I made from raw material that did not include EDTA disodium in the mix and a reduced amount of Sodium Metaborate in solution B.

Sequence of development:

●         Pre-soak - it makes no difference with this film. It is not prone to air bell/bubbles sticking to the film.

●         Developer - to be made up immediately before use at 21 degrees C.

●         Development times - for this test were 5, 10, and 20 minutes respectively.

●         Tank inversions - continuously for the first minute and then once every fifteen seconds.

●         Stop, Fix and wash - as normal.

●         After bath - was not used and would have made little difference with this mix.

Notes:

Adox CHS 100 PET 35mm is not like other black and white film it has a noticeable thinner film base which is coloured blue. The cassette this film came in was not light tight which almost ruined the test. I only discovered this after the film had been exposed, when removing the film from the cassette it fell to bits. I have read a forum thread saying that the 120 roll film has the same problem. Adox you need to up your game! It is appalling quality control.

Pre-soak water after use

If you use a pre-soak the water will come out blue.

The ten minute development time is the one suggested by Digital truth, which made it the reference time the other test strips were to be judged against.

Results

All the test strips including the one thats a no show.

The test strip to show the best density of negative is the twenty minute one, having said that they are still a bit on the thin side. This does not take away from the fact that they are fully toned and well defined. There is no sign of grain when enlarged to 485 mm (19”) by 340 mm (13.5”). When printing the negatives I'm having to use grade three, normally I would expect to be using grade two, this could be due to the lack of EDTA in the mix of Pyro used. I'm also disappointed that the five minute test strip shows no negatives at all, from previous experience the shorter/half development times have a faint out line. In this case I can only put it down to the faulty film cassette. The ten minute test strip is very thin when compared to the Agfa test strips it is thinner than the half development time. Which suggests that normal development in this case should be greater than twenty minutes.

Over sized enlargment

With all the time and effort put into this test the last thing I was expecting was to be let down by bad manufacture. Of the thirty six exposures on the film around about  ten frames are unaffected by some light damage luckily the majority of these are from the test exposures that put in an appearance. If there was going to be any question marks I was thinking it would be from the developer but it did not disappoint, the only thing to note was when i poured it from the developing tank it was a lovely pink rose colour.

Will I be using the film again? Yes! only because I have a roll of 120 on the shelf if the negatives show any light damage then I will not use it again. How can I say that when I use a lot of out of date film? With out of date film at least you know that the results could be iffy. You don't expect it from new in date stock.

Used PMK Pyro.