A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

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.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » General Photography » In The Darkroom
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Cool tone print developers vs other processes



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 23rd 11, 07:18 AM posted to rec.photo.darkroom
Richard Knoppow
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 751
Default Cool tone print developers vs other processes


"Lew" wrote in message
...
Just getting back from Stieglitz, Steichen, Strand at the
Met. I'm
completely blown away by the difference between the
wonderful deep
tones of the gum over platinum prints vs the gs prints,
including the
ones made by Steiglitz himself. There's such a visible
difference
between the washed out greys of the gs and the velvety
blacks of the
other processes!

Are any of the commercial 'neutral tone' developers such
as Platinum
II, Clayton P20, or Formulary TD 31 going to help? If yes,
are there
any diy formulas published? I mix pretty much everything
myself.

I've also seen old gelatin-silver prints that were
disappointing. I think some of this may be the nature of the
paper but some is just bad processing. For instance, many of
the Edward Weston prints at the Huntington are quite dark,
they look over exposed and I suspect may have been rejects.
Other prints look great even though from the same period.
Prints made much later by Cole Weston mostly blow the
originals away. It may be that the paper was better but I am
not at all sure.
In general, the range of gelatin-silver paper is greater
than platinum or paladium. Overcoating platimum with gum
will increase the densities plus a great deal of
manipulation is possible. Carbon prints also pretty much
match GS and may have been better nearly a century ago.
If you are having trouble with good blacks on modern
paper its more likely the negatives or technique than the
developer. Actually, provided the developer is reasonably
active, it will have little effect on the maximum density or
on the paper curve. It can on the image color to some degree
but that is mostly determined by the nature of the emulsion.
While there are those who swear by somewhat obscure
developer such as Amidol, they really are little different
although Amidol will insure neutral tones and certainly
makes good prints.
Dektol is noted for producing a slightly olive color on
some paper. Adding some benzotriazole to it will stop that.
Also developers using Phenidone, such as Ilford Bromophen,
will produce somewhat more neutral colors on many papers
than Dektol.
Using Dektol at a stronger dilution than the standard
1:2 may also provide more satisfactory results. It will
develop slightly faster and have longer life at 1:1, the
blacks are still limited mostly by the paper but you will
get whatever they can do a bit easier.
In general paper should be exposed so that it develops
at a pretty much standard time. That will be around 2
minutes for papers without incorporated developer in the
emulsion and closer to a minute or 90 seconds for those that
have. Unlike film paper is developed to "completion" that is
to the maximum contrast of which its capable. Because of
this variation of developing time has very little effect on
contrast although it may compensate a little if the exposure
is not correct. Too short a time will result in muddy
blacks, too long a time will generally bring up fog in the
highlights and may also result in poor blacks due to lack of
exposure.
Getting negatives right is very important, they should
be exposed and processed to print at close to "normal" grade
paper. Modern variable contrast papers can compensate over a
wide range but generally if a negative will not print within
one grade of "normal" the quality of the print will not be
the best.
There is a great deal in the literature, including all
the Zone System material, about how to get good negatives.
There are other things that can contribute to bad
prints, something as simple as flare in the enlarging lens
from dirt will ruin a print. Also, fog from stray light or
defective safelights. Both Kodak and Ilford have published
methods for testing safelights, while not quite the same
they accomplish the same purpose. Safelights can be tricky
because they can look fine to the eye and still produce fog.
Especially old filters should be tested occasionally because
they do fade.
I hope this helps a bit. If you have specific problems
post them, the above is very general advice and may not
apply to your problem.


--
--
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA



  #2  
Old February 25th 11, 08:37 PM
Keith Tapscott. Keith Tapscott. is offline
Senior Member
 
First recorded activity by PhotoBanter: Feb 2005
Posts: 112
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Knoppow View Post
Getting negatives right is very important, they should
be exposed and processed to print at close to "normal" grade
paper.

Modern variable contrast papers can compensate over a
wide range but generally if a negative will not print within
one grade of "normal" the quality of the print will not be
the best.





--
--
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Very true. :-)
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Cool tone print developers vs other processes Thor Lancelot Simon In The Darkroom 0 February 22nd 11 10:13 PM
Cold Tone B&W Paper Developers. Keith Tapscott. In The Darkroom 0 August 16th 08 11:42 PM
Warm tone papers and developers Lew In The Darkroom 16 March 30th 06 11:52 PM
New Ilford Print Developers. Keith Tapscott In The Darkroom 13 January 26th 06 10:22 PM
FA: This Minox B spy camera not only LOOKS cool, carrying it makes you FEEL cool! Hugh Lyon-Sach 35mm Equipment for Sale 1 August 12th 05 05:38 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:14 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.