Pages

Wednesday 2 January 2013

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.
 
 

Sunday 30 December 2012

Fuji GW690III Overview-Review




These cameras were the last to bear the name Fujica. First released in November 1978 as a professional unit with interchangeable lenses that were subsequently updated to a fixed lens.  They came in several formats from 4.5x6, 6x7, 6x8 and 6x9. The GW 6x9 was first released in 1985 and came with a fixed lens. The video above gives a nice insight into a range of camera that became known as the Texas Leica.

 Like to thank Mike Thomas for his insight into this camera.

Friday 30 November 2012

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.

Thursday 8 November 2012

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.

Tuesday 30 October 2012

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!

Monday 15 October 2012

An insight into making up ID11


Ilfords ID11
Ilfords ID 11 is the starting point for many a photographer wishing to develop there own monochrome negatives. It is one of the most popular pre-packaged powdered developers on the market along with Kodak's D76. The attributes of these developers are almost identical. Some photographers are put off initially from using these developers because it is in powdered form, but you needn’t be, they are straight forward to make up.


I have used both these developers before and for a long time almost exclusively when it came to processing my film. I recently exposed an out of date roll of 35mm HP5 film. I decided to make up a new batch of ID 11. I know how good or bad these negatives will be without having to do a test.


The kit: (to make up five litres)

    The mixing kit.
  • Measuring jug, that will take at least Four litres of fluid.
  • Thermometer.
  • Mixing stick
  • Five litre storage container
  • Bucket if you do not have large enough measuring jug for mixing.
  • Disposable gloves, Face masks if you think it is necessary.
  • Ilfords ID 11, in this case.

If you are new to making up ID 11 take your time.


Remove the two packets from the box and then tear or cut the box open. On the inside are the instructions for making the powder into a fluid. What follows is how I made up the developer from those instructions.



Adding packet A of the waterr
The box of powder I have purchased will make up five litres of stock solution enough to process fifty roll 35mm or 120 film (medium format). Once I have all the equipment in place, I warm the measuring jug and bucket with boiling water to stop the water loosing heat to the containers by conduction. Then bring the water to a temperature of 40 degrees centigrade (104 degrees F) making up 3.75 litres. Which I transfer to the bucket ( do not forget to remove the boiling water first) for mixing, checking to make sure that there has been no heat loss with the thermometer. I use this method because my measuring jug will only make up 2 litres at a time. Once the water is ready open packet marked A and pour in the powder slowly, while you stir, making sure that the powder does not clump together. Keep string until it is all dissolved (Always pour the powder into the water and not the other way round and add the powders in the right order) it will not take very long to add the contents of packet A. Now open the packet marked B and again add to the solution slowly stirring all the time this will take longer to add as it is a far larger amount of powder (make sure you do your mixing in a well ventilated room). Keep stirring after all the powder has been added to make sure it has all dissolved. Now stir in another 1.25 litres of water at room temperature making it up to the full 5 litres. With the help of a funnel I pour the developer into its storage container and allow it to cool.

Adding packet B of the developer


I usually make up my ID11 the day before. It will take an hour to cool ten degrees depending on what material your storage container is made of.








Pouring developer into storage container after the
Final  2Litres of water have been added.
I use this developer at 1+1 in most cases and as a single shot (use once and throw away) but it can be reused as long as you adjust the time to allow for it:

  • Two film add ten percent.
  • Three film add twenty percent.
  • Four film add Thirty percent.
  • Five film add forty percent.
  • Ten film add Ninety percent do not re-use above this amount.


Developer in storage container
coolling down before cap is
secured.
ID11 can be used with the following film from the Ilford range and many other makes besides: HP5+,Fp4+, Pan F+, Delta 100 Pro Delta 400 Pro, Delta 3200 Pro, SFX 200. It can also be used at three different dilutions: stock, 1+1 and 1+3. So the times for HP5+ exposed at 400 ISO, developed at twenty degrees C would be 7.30 minutes at stock, 13 minutes at 1+1 and 20 minutes at 1+3.

For more film makes, developer combination and times visit digital truthsmassive Dev chart.

  
How did the roll of HP5+ turn out? You will have to wait and see.

Sunday 7 October 2012

Paper fixing faults.


This post will be short, a sort of quick guide to paper fixing faults. They are listed in no particular order.
This picture shows the fix is exhausted

         Brownish areas: fix exhausted.
 
         Print becomes yellow after a while: Was not fixed for long enough and    or  washed for to short a time.
 
         Burnt out highlights: acid fix not diluted to the right strength. Left in the fix for to long. Not timed properly.
 
         Brownish spots, Lilac round the edges: Stop bath exhausted, incomplete fixing, forgotten to wash or use stop after the developer.
 
The blue stain shows that the stop is exhausted.
         Yellowish fog over the entire paper surface: Exhausted fix, developer contaminated fix, little or no agitation while fixing.

 

It is not unusual to be caught out by some of these faults. Even when you have years of experience.