If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#121
|
|||
|
|||
LR Kalajainen wrote
Dan Quinn wrote: LR Kalajainen wrote Glad to see I'm not the only divided-developer nut in the NG. For film as well? I know of your A and B bath print processing; A for agent, B for base. I've just reviewed Howard Bond's two-bath for "Remodeling Paper Curves". His best advice is a chilled inactive A followed by a B water bath; a warm B will speed the process along. He starts with 30 seconds in A then cycles with 20. "Three cycles of loading ... with developer and placing in the water bath ..." He prefers four cycles. Have you ever done any "Remodeling"? Dan No, I haven't read Howard's article. Where is it? Without having read it, I can't really quite understand what he's proposing or what the effects might be. I don't use a water bath; apparently he does. And what's the purpose of cycling in and out of Bath A if there is only agent and no activator in A? Does he use a Bath C for the activator, or is the full developer in Bath A, but chilled so that it acts more slowly? But do send me the reference for Howard's article on Recycling. Remodeling Paper Curves, by Howard Bond; from PHOTO Techniques Vol 1. Chilled or as dilute as is workable; he mentions ice cubes, 55 F, and 1:4. The remodeling is more pronounced if little or no development takes place in the A bath. A thought just now poped into my mind. What if the B bath were a weak version of the B you use? Worth some thought and as I compound all my own chemistry an easy idea to test. Back to H. Bond. He starts with a grade higher paper and exposes for good highlights but shadows will go too dark. So the water B bath. I'm thinking of it as a method to control shadow density. Quote; " The contrast of this higher-than-correct grade of paper is retained in the highlight end of the curve and reduced in the shadow end. " A print from one of his Deardorff taken 11x14 photos certainly underscores the value of his described method of contrast control. Dan |
#122
|
|||
|
|||
LR Kalajainen wrote
Dan Quinn wrote: LR Kalajainen wrote Glad to see I'm not the only divided-developer nut in the NG. For film as well? I know of your A and B bath print processing; A for agent, B for base. I've just reviewed Howard Bond's two-bath for "Remodeling Paper Curves". His best advice is a chilled inactive A followed by a B water bath; a warm B will speed the process along. He starts with 30 seconds in A then cycles with 20. "Three cycles of loading ... with developer and placing in the water bath ..." He prefers four cycles. Have you ever done any "Remodeling"? Dan No, I haven't read Howard's article. Where is it? Without having read it, I can't really quite understand what he's proposing or what the effects might be. I don't use a water bath; apparently he does. And what's the purpose of cycling in and out of Bath A if there is only agent and no activator in A? Does he use a Bath C for the activator, or is the full developer in Bath A, but chilled so that it acts more slowly? But do send me the reference for Howard's article on Recycling. Remodeling Paper Curves, by Howard Bond; from PHOTO Techniques Vol 1. Chilled or as dilute as is workable; he mentions ice cubes, 55 F, and 1:4. The remodeling is more pronounced if little or no development takes place in the A bath. A thought just now poped into my mind. What if the B bath were a weak version of the B you use? Worth some thought and as I compound all my own chemistry an easy idea to test. Back to H. Bond. He starts with a grade higher paper and exposes for good highlights but shadows will go too dark. So the water B bath. I'm thinking of it as a method to control shadow density. Quote; " The contrast of this higher-than-correct grade of paper is retained in the highlight end of the curve and reduced in the shadow end. " A print from one of his Deardorff taken 11x14 photos certainly underscores the value of his described method of contrast control. Dan |
#123
|
|||
|
|||
"jjs" wrote in message ...
"BUT so does stand development, so does dropping an unwound length of film into a dark empty bottle of Kaiwan with D23 in Trinidad." BTW, John, what is Kaiwan? A Trinidadian rum? Somethine else? Thanks, John |
#124
|
|||
|
|||
"jjs" wrote in message ...
"BUT so does stand development, so does dropping an unwound length of film into a dark empty bottle of Kaiwan with D23 in Trinidad." BTW, John, what is Kaiwan? A Trinidadian rum? Somethine else? Thanks, John |
#125
|
|||
|
|||
Dan Quinn wrote:
LR Kalajainen wrote Dan Quinn wrote: LR Kalajainen wrote Glad to see I'm not the only divided-developer nut in the NG. For film as well? I know of your A and B bath print processing; A for agent, B for base. I've just reviewed Howard Bond's two-bath for "Remodeling Paper Curves". His best advice is a chilled inactive A followed by a B water bath; a warm B will speed the process along. He starts with 30 seconds in A then cycles with 20. "Three cycles of loading ... with developer and placing in the water bath ..." He prefers four cycles. Have you ever done any "Remodeling"? Dan No, I haven't read Howard's article. Where is it? Without having read it, I can't really quite understand what he's proposing or what the effects might be. I don't use a water bath; apparently he does. And what's the purpose of cycling in and out of Bath A if there is only agent and no activator in A? Does he use a Bath C for the activator, or is the full developer in Bath A, but chilled so that it acts more slowly? But do send me the reference for Howard's article on Recycling. Remodeling Paper Curves, by Howard Bond; from PHOTO Techniques Vol 1. Chilled or as dilute as is workable; he mentions ice cubes, 55 F, and 1:4. The remodeling is more pronounced if little or no development takes place in the A bath. A thought just now poped into my mind. What if the B bath were a weak version of the B you use? Worth some thought and as I compound all my own chemistry an easy idea to test. Back to H. Bond. He starts with a grade higher paper and exposes for good highlights but shadows will go too dark. So the water B bath. I'm thinking of it as a method to control shadow density. Quote; " The contrast of this higher-than-correct grade of paper is retained in the highlight end of the curve and reduced in the shadow end. " A print from one of his Deardorff taken 11x14 photos certainly underscores the value of his described method of contrast control. Dan Sounds reasonable. I've found a less messy way to do contrast control, I think. Bond is talking about graded papers, which I rarely use any more. Variable is so much easier. But my method of having a soft Bath A plus a hard Bath A, and choosing between them depending on the desired effect, e.g. a harder grade of paper developed in the soft Bath A, gives an intermediate effect that is similar to what you/Bond are describing. But with variable contrast, it's even easier. I have a color head on my Beseler 45, so I begin by doing two exposures under the enlarger, one at full yellow and one at full magenta (doesn't matter in which order), the time for each determined by test strips. For Agfa MCC, it's usually approximately equal, say 10 sec. each at f11 for an 8X10. Then I develop in a homebrew BAth A similar to Ansco 120, followed by the Bath B (carbonate). Contrast control is almost automatic. The full yellow prevents highlights from burning out or the shadows going too dark; the full magenta gives sparkle to the highlights and depth to the shadows and good D-max. Plus, I get that extra zing in local contrast that makes the print values appear to "sing." You can burn and dodge as necessary; if you're trying to increase density but not change contrast, then give equal amounts of time at both full yellow and full magenta. If you want more or less contrast, give additional yellow or magenta as needed. It takes a bit of playing to get your head around a new way of working, but once you do, it becomes automatic. Sure cuts down on the manipulation needed and no need for all the back and forthing between developing baths. Almost too easy. Larry |
#126
|
|||
|
|||
Dan Quinn wrote:
LR Kalajainen wrote Dan Quinn wrote: LR Kalajainen wrote Glad to see I'm not the only divided-developer nut in the NG. For film as well? I know of your A and B bath print processing; A for agent, B for base. I've just reviewed Howard Bond's two-bath for "Remodeling Paper Curves". His best advice is a chilled inactive A followed by a B water bath; a warm B will speed the process along. He starts with 30 seconds in A then cycles with 20. "Three cycles of loading ... with developer and placing in the water bath ..." He prefers four cycles. Have you ever done any "Remodeling"? Dan No, I haven't read Howard's article. Where is it? Without having read it, I can't really quite understand what he's proposing or what the effects might be. I don't use a water bath; apparently he does. And what's the purpose of cycling in and out of Bath A if there is only agent and no activator in A? Does he use a Bath C for the activator, or is the full developer in Bath A, but chilled so that it acts more slowly? But do send me the reference for Howard's article on Recycling. Remodeling Paper Curves, by Howard Bond; from PHOTO Techniques Vol 1. Chilled or as dilute as is workable; he mentions ice cubes, 55 F, and 1:4. The remodeling is more pronounced if little or no development takes place in the A bath. A thought just now poped into my mind. What if the B bath were a weak version of the B you use? Worth some thought and as I compound all my own chemistry an easy idea to test. Back to H. Bond. He starts with a grade higher paper and exposes for good highlights but shadows will go too dark. So the water B bath. I'm thinking of it as a method to control shadow density. Quote; " The contrast of this higher-than-correct grade of paper is retained in the highlight end of the curve and reduced in the shadow end. " A print from one of his Deardorff taken 11x14 photos certainly underscores the value of his described method of contrast control. Dan Sounds reasonable. I've found a less messy way to do contrast control, I think. Bond is talking about graded papers, which I rarely use any more. Variable is so much easier. But my method of having a soft Bath A plus a hard Bath A, and choosing between them depending on the desired effect, e.g. a harder grade of paper developed in the soft Bath A, gives an intermediate effect that is similar to what you/Bond are describing. But with variable contrast, it's even easier. I have a color head on my Beseler 45, so I begin by doing two exposures under the enlarger, one at full yellow and one at full magenta (doesn't matter in which order), the time for each determined by test strips. For Agfa MCC, it's usually approximately equal, say 10 sec. each at f11 for an 8X10. Then I develop in a homebrew BAth A similar to Ansco 120, followed by the Bath B (carbonate). Contrast control is almost automatic. The full yellow prevents highlights from burning out or the shadows going too dark; the full magenta gives sparkle to the highlights and depth to the shadows and good D-max. Plus, I get that extra zing in local contrast that makes the print values appear to "sing." You can burn and dodge as necessary; if you're trying to increase density but not change contrast, then give equal amounts of time at both full yellow and full magenta. If you want more or less contrast, give additional yellow or magenta as needed. It takes a bit of playing to get your head around a new way of working, but once you do, it becomes automatic. Sure cuts down on the manipulation needed and no need for all the back and forthing between developing baths. Almost too easy. Larry |
#127
|
|||
|
|||
By now you've scared the original poster away.
One dose of this ng, and he prolly took up knitting... Excelsior, you fatheads! -Chris- |
#128
|
|||
|
|||
By now you've scared the original poster away.
One dose of this ng, and he prolly took up knitting... Excelsior, you fatheads! -Chris- |
#129
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Toe speed of TMAX 400 (was fridge and heat problems) | Richard Knoppow | In The Darkroom | 192 | September 14th 04 01:59 AM |
darkroom wannabe | EC | In The Darkroom | 59 | September 4th 04 01:45 AM |
Is it Copal or copal? Then what is it? | Nick Zentena | Large Format Photography Equipment | 14 | July 27th 04 03:31 AM |
Insane new TSA rule for film inspection | [email protected] | 35mm Photo Equipment | 94 | June 23rd 04 05:17 AM |
The first film of the Digital Revolution is here.... | Todd Bailey | Film & Labs | 0 | May 27th 04 08:12 AM |