ADOX Variocontrast filter

Beef · 2009-01-16T22:29:23+00:00

Hallo Ich hab mir jetzt mal gedacht, dass ich von Festgradationspapieren auf Multigradepapieren umsteige. Gekauft hab ich mir für den Anfang: Fomaspeed Mu...

Beef

Hello I’ve been thinking about switching from fixed-grade paper to multigrade paper. To start with, I’ve bought: Fomaspeed Multigrade ADOX Easy Print Multigrade ADOX Multikontrast filter set 9x9 (item code: ADLIFI) So, in my first test, I hardly noticed any difference between the gradients. The only difference is the exposure times. But in terms of contrast, for example, gradient 2 is almost exactly the same as gradient 5... there’s practically just a slight difference in brightness. And from one grade to the next, there’s practically no difference visible to the naked eye. According to the description, the contrast filter set is Ilford-compatible, which is compatible with the papers I’m using. What on earth could I be doing wrong? Underneath my lens, there’s a swivelling holder with a red filter in it... I’ve put the films in there (with the red filter removed, of course). Could someone perhaps upload some scans of multigrade paper with different gradation levels so I can see the intended difference?! E.g. G 1-3-5? I’d be very grateful for any information. Regards Andi

GeorgK

Hello. What are you using to develop? A proper developer, or that Knoff-Hoff-Showm-style coffee toy from the old thread? Best regards, Georg.

Andreas_23

Hi Andi, The difference between, say, grade 2 and 4 should actually be quite significant. Take a look here (I couldn’t find anything better at short notice): Example The image on the left has been enlarged using a gradient of 2 (or perhaps it was 1½) and the one on the right using a gradient of 4. You can see that the image on the left has very little contrast and the one on the right has almost no grey tones at all. Incidentally, the effect of the gradation slides is also clearly visible with the coffee developer, but I think I’d better leave that topic alone. Best regards, Andreas

Beef

Hi you two,

What are you using for development? A proper developer or that Knoff-Hoff-Showm-style coffee toy from the old thread?

I develop with Eukobrom 1+9...that should do the trick :) The coffee stuff was just a bit of fun when I’d run out of developer :) Phew, well that example is pretty extreme...that’s exactly how I’d imagined it. I’ll do another test today and upload it so you can judge whether it’s more or less okay :) One more question... it says that the exposure times for gradient (4-5) (or maybe it was 3-5) are longer than for 0-3. Is it actually the case for you that, for example, 0-3 are EXACTLY the same and 4-5 are longer (but also both EXACTLY the same)??? It just seemed to me that Gradient 0 takes a considerably long time to perform another exposure. Or do you have a different exposure time for each gradient? Regards Andi

GeorgK

Hello. Another silly question: what film? Classic black-and-white film or (masked) C41 black-and-white? Otherwise, the only other thing I can think of as a possible cause of the problem is a completely unsuitable enlarger lamp. Best regards, Georg

Beef

Hi Georg, It’s a classic black-and-white film. In this case, it was an Ilford HP5+ that I developed in Rodinal 1+50. Well, I don’t know much about enlargers. I’ve got a Liesegang ‘Rax’. Above the lens system there’s a chamber with a 75W incandescent bulb hanging in it...but it’s not the usual grey or transparent sort, it’s white. And underneath there’s a large lens that catches the light. What do you actually call this type? Diffuser, condenser,...??? But it produces excellent images with fixed gradations :) Regards Andi

MirkoBoeddecker

Hi Andi, What colour is your Duka light? Best regards, Mirko

Andreas_23

Hi Andi, As far as your equipment is concerned, I can’t spot anything wrong. The Rax is an old gem, but that doesn’t matter. The white bulb is an opal bulb. The white coating, together with the condenser (the large lens), ensures that the photo is lit as evenly as possible. It’s fine to place the films in the holder for the red filter. It can’t be down to the ADOX films either; they work fine. I wouldn’t have thought of the colour of the Duka light that Mirko mentioned. That could, of course, be a cause, as the films are coloured. However, I have no experience with different light colours. I use a very simple red lamp, like the one Mirko has listed under item number APRLL (current catalogue, p. 66). I’ve never had any problems with it (with B&W). In my experience, the exposure times for gradation levels 1–3 and 4–5 are not exactly the same. I rather have the impression that the films become increasingly dense as the number increases, meaning they require ever longer exposure times. From 2 to 3, I roughly estimate an increase of 10%. From 3 to 4, however, the step is significantly larger. I don’t measure the exposure, though; I judge it by eye, so it may well be that the brightness at 1, 2 and 3 is physically the same. The different contrast does, of course, result in a different visual effect. Good luck with troubleshooting, and best regards, Andreas

Beef

Hi Andi, As far as your equipment is concerned, I can’t spot anything wrong. The Rax is an old gem, but that doesn’t matter. The white bulb is an opal bulb. The white coating, together with the condenser (the large lens), ensures that the photo is lit as evenly as possible. It’s fine to place the films in the holder for the red filter. It can’t be down to the ADOX films either; they work fine. I wouldn’t have thought of the colour of the Duka light that Mirko mentioned. That could of course be a cause, because the films are coloured. But I have no experience with different light colours. I use a very simple red lamp, like the one available from Mirko under the item number APRLL (current catalogue, p. 66). I’ve never had any problems with it (with B&W). In my experience, the exposure times for gradation levels 1–3 and 4+5 are not exactly the same. I rather have the impression that the films become more dense as the number increases, meaning they require increasingly longer exposure times. From 2 to 3, I roughly estimate an increase of 10%. From 3 to 4, however, the step is significantly larger. I don’t measure the exposure, though; I judge it by eye, so it may well be that the brightness at 1, 2 and 3 is physically the same. The different contrast does, of course, result in a different visual effect. Good luck with troubleshooting, and best regards, Andreas

Hi, Thanks again for your replies. So, my Duka light is red. But that has nothing to do with it... whether it’s brighter or darker or even switched off completely... it doesn’t affect the image. I’m currently shooting a test series... then I’ll print a few gradients and upload them here. Somehow I also remember that, for example, there was hardly any difference between gradient 5 and gradient 3. But there was a significant difference between G1 and G2?! :) Regards, Andi

Beef

Hi everyone, Right, so I’ve just taken a few test prints. I thought I’d photograph a subject that included everything from white to black. But I reckon that was the wrong choice :) The film is Fomapan 400, with an exposure of 400 ASA. Developed in HC-110 (dilution ‘B’) for 6.5 minutes at 20°C. To measure the exposure, I moved a bit closer, aimed the centre-weighted spot meter at the top-left corner of the amplifier and saved the reading. Then I stepped back a metre and took the shot at f/5.6 and 1/15s. As you can see, the exposure measurement was anything but successful :lol: Before saving the reading, I held a grey card up in that corner... but it gave the same reading. However, the white wall has severe overexposure. Here are the prints: [ATTACHMENT NOT FOUND][ATTACHMENT NOT FOUND][ATTACHMENT NOT FOUND] In order: G0 at 8s; G2 at 4s; G5 at 13s On ADOX Easy Print 311 V with Tetenal Eukobrom (1 min) My scanner is pretty rubbish... in reality, there are actually a bit more details in the shadows. But as you can see, these contrast sheets do work after all :) But it almost feels to me as though the gradient 2 is already too harsh... a mid-point between 0 and 2 (i.e. 1) would be more appropriate here... so basically shortening the film’s development time a little... do you agree with me?! And what do you think of the enlargement times?! G0=8s and G2=4s... a bit extreme, really, when both times should actually be pretty much the same. How do I find the best time?! I’ve just been trying out different times to see when the dark black is actually black and the brightest white is really bright (or rather, when the details in the shadows match reality) :lol: With G0 and 4s, I’d end up with a really light grey intensifier :) And could anyone perhaps give me a tip on a better subject/test setup where I can see the full range of grey tones from the deepest black to the brightest white, and test my film development time more accurately for a print with a gradient of 2?! (I don’t have a densitometer and won’t be getting one in the future either) Many thanks in advance for your replies :) Regards Andi

AndreasAchermann

Hi Andi, This isn’t exactly the answer you were looking for regarding a test setup, but your question and your desire to achieve detail in both the highlights and the shadows, as well as your experiments with filter foils, remind me of my own experiences. I haven’t checked your other posts, so apologies if I’m stating the obvious here... > Split-grade Expose in two stages using the ‘corner filters’ 0 & 5: Have a read of this post: http://www.achtung-analog.de/lab_split.html or search the forum. Of course, the optimally exposed negative remains the basis... the split-grade technique allows you to influence the highlights and shadows independently of one another during printing.

philippleser

Hello,

Of course, the optimally exposed negative remains the basis... the split-grade technique allows you to adjust the highlights and shadows independently of one another during printing.

I would recommend first understanding the tonal range for each gradient before attempting ‘more difficult’ techniques such as split printing. This works quite well with a transparency grey scale. You expose this onto a test strip at different gradients (and the same exposure time) and can then see exactly what the tonal range is. Best regards, Philipp

AndreasAchermann

You’re right, of course, Philipp. This article should be a good source of information: http://www.schwarzweiss-magazin.de/swmag_sensito_5.pdf . Of course, the linked Splitgrade guide is more of a recipe than a method backed by measurement technology and scientifically documented; I’m still keen to hear Beef’s thoughts once he’s had a go at it. Cheers :-) Achi