Alpha1983
Hello,
I’m new here, so I’m not sure if this topic has been discussed before.
I have the following problem:
Despite the negative being developed perfectly, most of my pictures lack contrast; they’re grey on grey, with no whites or proper blacks.
At first, I suspected the green DUKA light, but I do occasionally get some excellent pictures.
Pictures with extreme contrasts – portraits against a white background – turn out very well with gradient 1.
Landscape shots or architecture have hardly any contrast.
I use the following materials:
Film: Agfa APX 100 KB film
Paper: Work by Tetenal Gradient 1–5 (I’ve already tried them all)
Developer: Tetenal Eukobrom – the developer is quite old, but has nevertheless produced some very good results as described above – so I have ruled out the quality as a factor.
Fixer: Tetenal Superfix
Next, I wanted to try Ilford Multigrade, but with filters etc., it is a costly purchase and I cannot say for certain that it will deliver the desired results.
Unfortunately, the attached image is just a photograph, so the quality isn’t the best. I hope you can still see what I mean.
I hope you can help me.
hubspe
Hi,
?
I never use green Duke light; I’ve always been advised against it. Even orange isn’t good with some papers because of the fogging effect, e.g. Foma 131 mg classic.
In my humble opinion, you’re on the safe side with red.
?
It would be good if you knew someone with a densitometer; then you could measure the negatives and see if they’re really okay. ;)
HenningH
Work paper should normally cope with green... Perhaps you could still try making a print in the dark, then we can rule that factor out.
?
How old is the paper? The papers (especially those with hard gradients) soften over time. So it may be that the No. 1 paper is still suitable, but the higher gradients are too soft.
?
If the developer has already partially oxidised, it will still start the development process due to its alkalinity, but it won’t be able to finish developing the image. Then we’d have the same effect again: very soft works, but anything harder isn’t possible. You should try some fresh developer here.
?
What kind of enlarger do you use?
Alpha1983
Thank you very much for your replies.
€
I’ll test the Duka lighting again just to be absolutely sure.
€
The point about the age of the paper could well be the key. The paper is now quite a few years old. When I didn’t get a good result with Gradient 3, I tried up to 5 and had the impression that the result was getting worse rather than better. Only Gradient 1 produced reasonably decent results – which would fit with your description.
€
I’ve now ordered some new developer to rule that factor out as well.
€
I’ll let you know my results by the middle of the week. ;)
€
Could you give me a recommendation in the meantime? I’m currently trying to decide between multigrade and fixed gradation. I just want to assess which is better value in terms of quality.
:spudnikwhat:
piu58
Firstly, the image lacks true black. Either you didn’t use enough light, or you developed it for too short a time, or both. To start with, I would determine the so-called standard exposure time for the paper: this is the time at which the blank film just about produces true black. To do this, make a test strip using blank film, with exposures in half-stop or, better still, third-stop increments. You must not go below this time, otherwise you won’t get any black at all. Use this time as a starting point. If the image then turns out far too dark overall, you’ll need to increase the contrast. With decent negatives, fresh developer and fresh paper (and, of course, suitable darkroom lighting), it should look significantly better than in your example, though.
I’ll be holding my workshop ‘The Path to a Fine Image’ again at the Fine Art Forum in Paderborn, where I’ll demonstrate and explain all of this.
hubspe
Quote from Alpha1983
: Could you give me a recommendation in the meantime? I’m currently trying to decide between multigrade and fixed-grade paper. I just want to gauge which is better value for money in terms of quality.
:spudnikwhat:
€
Fixed-grade paper would be far too expensive for me, as I’d need to keep several packs of the same size but with different hardnesses in stock.
With multigrade, you can get much more out of a print, e.g. by using split exposure (exposing 80–90% with a softer gradient and 10–20% with a hard gradient (5.5)).
You can get even more out of it with a two-bath development process (first bath: hardener and slow development – second bath: soft and fast development).
The final touch is the right toning, which also adds a bit more.
TR
Hello, a two-bath process is actually unnecessary when using multi-contrast paper, though it would still be a good tip for a beginner. The key here is to use fresh chemicals to minimise the risk of errors. A green light is certainly unsuitable for multi-contrast paper in this context. Have a go at Googling ‘haze test’ or something similar.
hubspe
Hello, two-bath development is actually unnecessary with multi-contrast paper, and I wouldn’t recommend it for a beginner.
?
Well, unfortunately that’s not true at all. I’ve always used multicontrast paper, and with split exposure followed by two-bath development, there’s always been a slight improvement in the print quality. Give it a go. ;)
?
It may well be that it’s not for beginners. It was just meant to give a rough idea of the next steps. ;)
KlausWehner
To pinpoint the cause of the problem, I would take a systematic approach:
?
1. Take a small piece of your photographic paper, develop and fix it without exposing it – following your usual procedure (don’t forget the darkroom light).
2. Take a small piece of your photographic paper, expose it to the maximum (simply hold it up to daylight) and process it in the same way as the other piece of paper.
?
The first piece of paper should be pure white, the second deep black.
Depending on the outcome of this test, the fault can be narrowed down further.
?
One possible cause of the fault has not yet been mentioned: incorrect exposure of the negative.
It is also conceivable that several faults are combined.
?
Generally speaking, if you’re unsure, I’d recommend using fresh materials and a red darkroom lamp.
?
Without actually having seen the negative and the print, it’s difficult to comment on the problem.
If you’re able to visit the fineartforum, the problem could probably be resolved quickly.
I would also highly recommend Uwe’s workshop!
?
The test mentioned above will get you a step further for now.
?
Warm regards from Paderborn
Klaus
Alpha1983
Hi everyone,
?
Well, first of all, many thanks for all the ideas and suggestions. I’ve managed to get a bit of clarity on things now.
To clear up the question about the Duka lighting: Green Light and Tetenal Work don’t interfere with each other in the slightest. ;)?
?
The developer wasn’t the newest, but it wasn’t too old either. The culprit really was the paper. With new paper, I get the black I want and there’s plenty of contrast in the print!
?
Many thanks!!
?
Best regards from Limburg
