Gast
Hello!
I’ve managed to take over an old laboratory. It actually has everything you’d need, at least as a beginner.
Now I’d like to know how I can clean the bowls and jars – which are, of course, already used – without leaving any residue in the containers?
I don’t actually know which bowl was used for fixing, etc.
Unfortunately, I can’t ask the previous owner anymore, as he has passed away.
What else should I bear in mind when setting up? Are there perhaps any classic beginner’s mistakes?
Regards, Phil
CPD
Hi Phil,
You can clean bowls and the like with Granny’s denture cleaner. The question is, though, whether it’s worth the effort and whether you wouldn’t be better off with a few new bowls, which don’t cost the earth.
If you’re working with contrast-reversal paper, you mustn’t use the green lamps. Check the darkroom lighting in general: place a few coins on the photographic paper for a few minutes and then develop. If you can see the coins on the paper, there’s something wrong with the lighting.
Then check that the base plate and enlarger head are parallel. Check whether the spiral inserts for the negative holders are still in good condition. If not, get rid of them! Otherwise, you’ll just end up frustrated. Give everything a good wipe with a damp cloth and you’re good to go.
Regards, CP
cfb_de
Hi Phil,
- *Red* dux lamp. Party bulbs won’t do the job; you need special lamps with filters or special bulbs (ask the host here).
- After cleaning as already described by CP: wash the trays thoroughly with plenty of hot water. Denture cleaner tends to get stuck in the fine scratches, leading to unexpected results.
- Buy *new* photographic paper; nothing from eBay. This minimises a major mistake.
- Buy *new* chemicals; see above for the residue.
- Make sure you have the right lamp in the enlarger. Opal lamps may look like normal white bulbs, but they aren’t (ask host Mirko here).
- Buy an XP2 or other B&W film suitable for a darkroom and use it to make your first negatives. Camera as usual, film development in the darkroom, and if you like, make prints too (you can then use these as a reference for what constitutes average quality. By the fifth one, you’ll already be saying that you’re better off with no experience at all, provided you put in the effort:-)
- Buy a book!!! ‘Merz, Das Praxisbuch black and white laboratory; ISBN 3-9809801-0-3’ for
Gast
Hello!
First of all, thank you very much for all the detailed advice!
I was planning to order some new chemicals and paper from Impex in the next few days. I’ll probably get a new red lamp as well; I’ve actually got two developing units – a ‘Durst’ and a slightly older-looking ‘Leitz’. Unfortunately, I can’t give you the exact models right now, as the equipment is at my parents’ house. As a student, I’ve got limited space...
As mentioned above, there are also various bowls, tins, measuring cups, etc. included. They’re all still in good condition (no cracks or anything like that), but they’d probably need a good wash.
I’ve already got new tongs, and clips for films to be developed later as well.
Two drying presses (for baryta paper?) are also included; they look a bit worn, but I suppose you can buy new cloths from Impex? (I think I saw something like that in the catalogue)
As far as I can remember, there’s no timer or frame included.
Incidentally, there’s also a packet of Ilford ID-11 and various Tetenal chemicals.
But for the life of me, I can’t remember anything else right now.
I’ve undergone exposure on a few ‘standard’ black-and-white films so far and am quite happy with the results, as I had them developed at Impex and scanned them for a rough overview.
I’ve also had some XP2 Super developed locally. So I’ve got plenty of usable film.
@ CP: I’d still like to use the trays and other bits, so with my tight student budget I’d rather buy a decent lamp, etc.
Regards, Phil
Gast
Phil,
Red lights aren't very good; under red light, the contrast is artificially enhanced and you can't really tell if everything looks right, so it's better to use a different colour.
Oleksander
skahde
Phil,
Red lamps aren’t very good; under red light, the contrast is artificially enhanced and you can’t really tell if everything looks right, so it’s better to use a different colour.
Oleksander
Hello,
You can’t judge the contrast of the prints anywhere near properly under Duka lighting, regardless of the colour. It only works reasonably well under bright white light.
If you really want to do a good job, you need lighting that, in terms of intensity and colour, roughly matches the lighting at the exhibition venue. You’ll understand the reason for this effort at the latest when you install a bright spotlight in the darkroom, the images look perfect, and then suddenly all the images appear about 20% too dark at the viewing station.
The progress of development in the tray is monitored with a clock, not by eye. ‘Full development’ is the magic word. Red light is ideally suited for determining exposure times and similar factors. What is really annoying is how often various authors include such nonsense in their books, whilst the Agfa Laboratory Manual from 1939 already states that paper development should not be controlled by sight.
However, there is a reason why red light should be preferred, particularly in today’s market situation where Eastern European papers play a much greater role: red light is the only lighting with which all current black-and-white paper types can be processed reliably.
If, on the other hand, you use only Ilford and Agfa, you can easily use orange or amber light as well, but you will then have to convert the entire lighting system if you wish to use a different material that requires red light.
Best regards
Stefan
Gast
Stefan,
Yeah, yeah, there are always silly excuses. Agfa said in 1939 not to develop by sight, yet the instruction leaflets from 1960 say exactly the opposite.
That dim red light is absolutely rubbish – you can’t even see your own hand in front of your face – but if you need an excuse not to buy two or three DuKa filters, go on then, by all means.
cfb_de
Dear Anonymous,
I don’t think my red Duka lighting is dim at all: it’s brilliant for reading the paper, and a handheld meter reads ‘2.8/25 sec’ at 100 ASA.
In fact, I’m too lazy to keep changing the filter during a Duka session when using several different papers and having to get used to the different contrast characteristics each time. Once you’ve got used to red light, it’s simpler, more convenient and works better. I don’t need to get all scientific about lighting anymore.
Besides, that’s probably why I’ve never had any issues with fogged paper. With red light, everything works fine apart from colour/pan paper.
Best regards,
Franz
SamuliSchielke
Amaloco makes a laboratory cleaner that supposedly removes all kinds of residue. It’s not expensive. I can’t say how well it works, though, as my bottle of the stuff is still unopened – so far, hot water has always done the job. Incidentally, I can confirm that it’s difficult to judge the contrasts accurately even under green-yellow light. Under red light, everything looks darker than it is, and under green-yellow light, the contrasts appear sharper than they are – at least with my Philips lamps. And developing doesn’t take long with PE anyway.
I’d also advise you to take a small transistor radio into the darkroom; a bit of music makes the work go faster.
Have fun
Samuli
Gast
Hello!
I was actually planning on using a red filter anyway, as, as Franz says, it allows me to process all types of paper without any issues. That way, I won’t be in for any surprises with Adox paper, even if I happen to forget to change the filter.
Best regards and thanks for the advice,
Phil
Gast
But if you need an excuse not to buy two or three Duka filters, go on then.
You really didn’t need to agree with me quite so emphatically. :P
cfb_de
Aren't you just quoting yourself there?
Best regards,
Franz
skahde
But if you need an excuse not to buy two or three Duka filters, go on then.
You really didn’t need to agree with me quite so emphatically. :P
Sorry, I wasn’t logged in.
cfb_de
Ah, right. Still, I’m sticking with my red filter. Orange, yellow-green, dark green and all that stuff just sit there unused. Once you’ve got used to the red Duka lighting, you eventually learn to judge brightness and contrast just as well.
My main problem is that I usually show my photos at work or at home. It’s quite bright in both places. In the evenings at the regulars’ photo meet-up in the pub, they often look quite different and a bit too dark.
I’m off to Duka again at the weekend. By then, the last Efke from my old batch might be finished and I’ll have had a good go at the ‘new’ Cord.
Best regards,
Franz
CPD
Hello,
As far as developing paper is concerned, I consider it to be extremely important.
During my school days, I took a darkroom course where we developed by eye. I was never really satisfied with my results – in fact, none of us were.
My father’s old Windisch book didn’t help me much either (I still have the 1940s edition today). At some point, I came across Beutler’s Darkroom Practice, a book which, although a bit old-fashioned and with example images that weren’t necessarily to my taste, I would recommend (my 1957 edition).
Mr Beutler insisted that the prints be developed face-down according to time. It was like a revelation to me; my prints improved instantly.
However, I wouldn’t have expected that even today, some lab technicians still don’t develop prints face-down. It has nothing but advantages. Compare that to the hassle I had with my black-and-white slides from negatives.
Regards, CP
