Photo Forum / Film Photography / Darkroom / January 2005
Developing paper - always for a fixed time or not?
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Tomas Daniska - 11 Jan 2005 22:22 GMT OK, asked this in some thread but probably was way too off-topic here.
Basically - do you develop your papers always for a fixed time or not?
If fixed - what time do you use? I find Ilford's paper documentation a bit confusing on this - in the same datasheet (for MG IV RC) they once say 60s @20C (in the general process overview) and a few paragraphs later they specify 46s @20C (in the detailed time vs. temperature breakout table).
If development was meant to be processed until the end of the process, this could be OK (maybe they added some safety in the first barebone overview).
But to my understanding, only stop and fix are done this way, development is meant to be performed to some *exact* stage.
Can anyone shine a little light on this for me please? Maybe a sentence or two on whether temperature variations have any impact on development except different timing?
If this may have some impact on the recommendations - I have a tray processor with tempered and temp-stabilized water bath.
Thanks so far
 Signature deejay
Jean-David Beyer - 11 Jan 2005 22:40 GMT > OK, asked this in some thread but probably was way too off-topic here. > > Basically - do you develop your papers always for a fixed time or not? Yes: fixed time -- most of the time.
> If fixed - what time do you use? I find Ilford's paper documentation a bit > confusing on this - in the same datasheet (for MG IV RC) they once say 60s > @20C (in the general process overview) and a few paragraphs later they > specify 46s @20C (in the detailed time vs. temperature breakout table). 2 minutes using D-72 1+2. 3 minutes when using Ansco 113 (Amidol) developer.
> If development was meant to be processed until the end of the process, this > could be OK (maybe they added some safety in the first barebone overview). > > But to my understanding, only stop and fix are done this way, development is > meant to be performed to some *exact* stage. Film is done until you get the desired contrast index. Paper is done "to completion." But that is not quite true: if you leave the paper in the developer for an hour or so (I have not tried this), it will turn black even if the safelights are off; You gotta be reasonable. But once paper is developped "enough" it will only get darker by developping longer. I sometimes do that if I slightly underexposed a sheet, but if I am off by much, that is not good enough, and I just make another.
> Can anyone shine a little light on this for me please? Maybe a sentence or > two on whether temperature variations have any impact on development except > different timing? They probably do, but my temperatures do not vary much because my temperature control valve supplies controlled water to the print washer, and that overflows into my washing sink that, in turn, overflows into my processing sink. If either of those sinks gets too deep, the water overflows down the drain. Normally it is the processing sink that does that.
> If this may have some impact on the recommendations - I have a tray > processor with tempered and temp-stabilized water bath. > > Thanks so far
 Signature .~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642. /V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939. /( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org ^^-^^ 17:35:00 up 11 days, 6:54, 4 users, load average: 4.47, 7.86, 10.10
Gregory Blank - 11 Jan 2005 22:54 GMT > OK, asked this in some thread but probably was way too off-topic here. > Basically - do you develop your papers always for a fixed time or not? [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > processor with tempered and temp-stabilized water bath. > Thanks so far There's a technique called printing for first black. What it amounts to is finding based upon your "standard negative" a printing exposure time and development time that yield the first area along the clear portion of your negative whereby a visible separation is no longer apparent. Typically that might be "for grade 2 about 18 seconds of exposure and about 2 minutes of development in dektol at 68F" The idea being that you will have a full range of tones "5 stops" which the paper will still hold and achieve the 18 second exposure and two minute development.
Each paper you will learn is somewhat different, Resin Coated papers can develop quite fast and have the nick name of "rapid contrast" fast development and fast exposure with more narrow tonal range.
I seem to recall that More info about printing for first black can be found in books like the Darkroom Cookbook/Steve Anchell and various photo darkroom centered books.
Personally I always tailor my development times per the paper and negatives printing , sometimes I extend the development time or shorten it to 1 minute, never less than a minute, seldom more than three... mostly 2 minutes. Most of my negatives print very well at two minutes and I would rather change the exposure slightly and adjust the filters to keep the development time relatively constant.
 Signature LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918
Tom Phillips - 11 Jan 2005 23:58 GMT > OK, asked this in some thread but probably was way too off-topic here. > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > two on whether temperature variations have any impact on development except > different timing? Paper is developed to completion, no more no less. It's important not to use too short a time (46 sec. seems a bit short; I would develop RC paper a minimum 1 minute and probably 90 secs. If you develop longer you will simply increase the apparent contrast but not real contrast (i.e., the paper curve as a whole moves but overall density is not increased.) My times w ould be minimum 90 seconds for RC and 2 minutes for fiber in dektol 1:2; usually I develop 2&1/2 minutes with fiber. This is merely to ensure full development in _fresh_ developer.
Any variations have more to do with (1) developer dilution (since dektol can be diluted up to 1:8 and still produce acceptable results) and developer exhaustion. Greater dilution requires a longer time until completion. But even at a standard dilution the more prints you process the longer you will need to develop in a given tray of print developer (i.e, the developer simply loses strength and activity. The Factor Method as described in Adams' book The Print can help you determine the additional length of development time needed as print developer gets used up in order to develop to completion.
> If this may have some impact on the recommendations - I have a tray > processor with tempered and temp-stabilized water bath. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > deejay Sam G - 12 Jan 2005 03:46 GMT Since it is difficult to control all the variables--temp and developer freshness--I'd recommend starting with looking for the first emergence of any image. Then leave in the developer 5-6 times that # of seconds. As an example, when I use MG IV RC for work prints, I usually see the first emergency of an image at 10 sec, so my dev time is 60 sec. As the developer tends to chill a bit or get a bit worked, the emergence time may drift a bit.
When I switch to FB for final prints of the same MG IV, I often find the emergence time is more like 30-40 sec. Consequently, the time in the developer is usually about 3+ minutes.
This method has worked for me, and a couple of test prints will probably help you find what you feel is a "complete" development given the momentary condition of the developer. This 5-6 times the emergence time seems to work well.
I am a hobbyist and don't usually have time to do countless prints at a given session before I dump my chemicals. If you are printing larger numbers of images, I'd watch the emergence time (if it is getting longer and longer) AND the numbers of prints recommended as the max on the label, I'd start from scratch mixing new developer.
Good luck, Sam
> OK, asked this in some thread but probably was way too off-topic here. > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > Thanks so far Gregory Blank - 12 Jan 2005 04:04 GMT > Since it is difficult to control all the variables--temp and developer > freshness--I'd recommend starting with looking for the first emergence of [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > emergence time is more like 30-40 sec. Consequently, the time in the > developer is usually about 3+ minutes. The "drift" your seeing I suspect is the difference between RC and FB papers.
 Signature LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918
uraniumcommittee@yahoo.com - 12 Jan 2005 04:05 GMT Almost always, because paper is developed to finality. Film is not.
Richard Knoppow - 12 Jan 2005 14:58 GMT > OK, asked this in some thread but probably was way too off-topic here. > [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > deejay While it is usually stated that prints are developed to "completion" rather than to a specified contrast in fact to some extent development can be used to compensate for exposure. The contrast is not variable over much of a range if full blacks are to be obtained but some papers allow perhaps a half grade from development time change. Also, some papers, particularly warm tone papers, change image tone a little with variation in development time. Warmer for shorter times, cooler with longer times. At some point extending development will begin to increase fog more rapidly than the image. The time needed to develop full black wtih normal exposure depends somewhat on the emulsion and developer. Warm tone papers generally are developed for longer than neutral or cold toned ones. Active developers, like Dektol, develop more rapidly than less active ones like Selectol Soft. Most modern RC papers contain a layer of developer under the emulsion. This is to permit their use in rapid access "activation" processors but it also affects the development time in standard developers. These papers show an image quickly, perhaps 15 seconds, and develop fully in 60 to 90 seconds. There is little variation possible in development. Papers without incorporated developer show the first image more slowly, typically at around 30 seconds and usually take from 2 to 3 minutes to develop fully. The instructions for the paper will usually give a recommended time. Too short a time will give blotchy blacks or light blacks despite increased exposure, overly long development, more than about 5 minutes, may generate fog or poor blacks despite the long development. My target time for fiber and non-developer-incorporated RC papers is around 2 minutes, for developer incorporated papers around 75 seconds. I've found that judging print appearance during development to be difficult so I generally developed for a fixed time and decide if the print got the right exposure or is the right value of contrast in white light after the print is fixed. Many papers change appearance when dry so that is another complication. "Development to completion" is simply development until the blacks are at or near the maximum density the material is capable of. Film OTOH, is usually developed to a specified value of contrast. The exposure may be adjusted to keep the maximum density at a certain value, but it will most often be well below the maximum value the film is capable of. -- Richard Knoppow Los Angeles, CA, USA dickburk@ix.netcom.com
PGG - 12 Jan 2005 15:20 GMT I typically develop until I see no more change in image and wait another 10 seconds or so. Is this a mistake?
> e needed to develop full black wtih norm Gregory Blank - 12 Jan 2005 20:12 GMT > I typically develop until I see no more change in image and wait another > 10 seconds or so. Is this a mistake? > > > e needed to develop full black wtih norm If your looking at the no change from the stand point of this is what I want, I think it is a mistake. Why you ask? Well,... because of dry down.
 Signature LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918
Tom Phillips - 13 Jan 2005 14:21 GMT > > I typically develop until I see no more change in image and wait another > > 10 seconds or so. Is this a mistake? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > I want, I think it is a mistake. Why you ask? Well,... because of dry > down. In my opinion dry down (as with Richard's comment about using development times to achieve a change in image contrast/paper grade), should really be controlled through exposure, while development time (excluding adjustments for emergence time) to achieve that print contrast should be as consistent as possible. The reason seems obvious: the working strength of developers is not a constant and not predictable.
Most papers, however, do have fairly consistent dry down factors expressed as a percentage of the exposure.
> -- > LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable > to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918 Gregory Blank - 13 Jan 2005 14:58 GMT > > > I typically develop until I see no more change in image and wait another > > > 10 seconds or so. Is this a mistake? [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > Most papers, however, do have fairly consistent dry down > factors expressed as a percentage of the exposure. I agree, I was trying to make the point that the time to remove is the time to remove. :-)
 Signature LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918
Tom Phillips - 13 Jan 2005 15:25 GMT > > > > I typically develop until I see no more change in image and wait another > > > > 10 seconds or so. Is this a mistake? [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > I agree, I was trying to make the point that the time to remove is the > time to remove. :-) Well I'd agree he should just pick a time w/adjusted exposure and then use a factor method. OTOH 10 seconds post completion won't matter much, especially as you develop longer to comensate for emergence time. The weaker or more dilute the print developer, the slower working it is.
Gregory Blank - 13 Jan 2005 16:32 GMT > Well I'd agree he should just pick a time w/adjusted > exposure and then use a factor method. OTOH 10 seconds > post completion won't matter much, especially as you > develop longer to comensate for emergence time. The > weaker or more dilute the print developer, the slower > working it is. I always anticipate the last 10 seconds as my timer counts down audibly at 10. So I begin "attempting" :-) to pull the paper out during the last ten. Sometimes I have been known to pull part of the sheet out and massage the stubborn parts of the image for up to a minute to get perfect contrast in a portion of the image,...takes a lot of care and I prefer "good exposures" to that technique by far.
Hey maybe "I" should claim to be the world's greatest printer, LOL.
 Signature LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918
Tom Phillips - 14 Jan 2005 06:33 GMT > > Well I'd agree he should just pick a time w/adjusted > > exposure and then use a factor method. OTOH 10 seconds [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > perfect contrast in a portion of the image,...takes a lot of care > and I prefer "good exposures" to that technique by far. Hot souping might work better; I also prefer buring/dodging or other subtle contrast controls. Sometimes I divide the development using selectol but most of my prints are developed straight to completion.
> Hey maybe "I" should claim to be the world's greatest printer, LOL. And A.A. would be #2? ;)
> -- > LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable > to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918 Gregory Blank - 14 Jan 2005 12:08 GMT > And A.A. would be #2? ;) Well I would mention names but it might start trouble :-)
 Signature LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918
Tom Phillips - 14 Jan 2005 13:55 GMT > > And A.A. would be #2? ;) > > Well I would mention names but it might start trouble :-) Uelsmann, Bond, Weston?
Nothing like a good disagreement :)
Tomas Daniska - 12 Jan 2005 17:34 GMT first of all, thanks to *everyone* who replied - all the comments compiled together are starting to make a little peace in my mind :)
> At some point extending development will begin to increase fog > more rapidly than the image. > The time needed to develop full black wtih normal exposure depends > somewhat on the emulsion and developer. Warm tone papers generally are by the way - how do you use to calibrate to the "full black"? just expose the paper for extended time and develop to find out what black the paper can give and use that as reference?
> developed for longer than neutral or cold toned ones. Active > developers, like Dektol, develop more rapidly than less active ones > like Selectol Soft. > Most modern RC papers contain a layer of developer under the > emulsion. This is to permit their use in rapid access "activation" > processors but it also affects the development time in standard maybe that's the reason for relatively short recommended times when using Ilford Multigrade developer... i'll go finding out as soon as i get to the datasheets again
> developers. These papers show an image quickly, perhaps 15 seconds, and > develop fully in 60 to 90 seconds. There is little variation possible [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > non-developer-incorporated RC papers is around 2 minutes, for developer > incorporated papers around 75 seconds. i suppose you're talking developers of "standard" room temperature (e.g., around 20C), are you?
> I've found that judging print appearance during development to be > difficult so I generally developed for a fixed time and decide if the especially if you use dip-processors or develop in drums :) that's why i'm asking here first - experimenting on the topic with such equipment would probably yield loads of ballast until some conclusion can be derived...
> print got the right exposure or is the right value of contrast in white > light after the print is fixed. Many papers change appearance when dry [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > value, but it will most often be well below the maximum value the film > is capable of. again, thanks for all the comments
 Signature deejay
dan.c.quinn@att.net - 14 Jan 2005 22:24 GMT > by the way - how do you use to calibrate to the "full black"? > just expose the paper for extended time and develop to find out > what black the paper can give and use that as reference? With 120 roll film I expose the area twixt two negatives with three or four varying exposure times. As the density in the paper reaches maximum black with the longer exposure the less exposed areas will draw near. It is a ballpark exposure time. I use 5x7 for the tests and at the same time have a first look at the two adjoining frames. The Max. Black time holds for that roll of film all other factors held constant.
> > Most modern RC papers contain a layer of developer > > under the emulsion. I do not think that is true. I've not been able to locate any source for developer incorporated emulsions. Freestyle has informed me that NONE of their GRADED papers, FB or RC, have DI emulsions. I doubt that any one can point to any one paper and know for certain that it has a developer incorporated emulsion. All of today's papers, RC or FB are FREE of developer; that I believe much much closer to the truth. Dan
|
|
|