A bit of back to basics

[Grandpa Ron]

I restored my late uncle's 4x5 view camera and have take dozens of photos. I scan them into post processing and adjust the contrast and I have had several really nice prints.

Phase two was to restore his 1940 vintage enlarger, it is the only way I have of printing 5x7 photos. So far the project has gone well, but if find the photos lack contrast with grade 2 paper. Grade 3 is an improvement but still lacks the tonal range of some of my uncles old black and white prints.

While I am still at the foot of this rather steep learning curve, I also noticed that the old lab processed negatives I shot in high school have seem to also have more contrast.

So my questions are.

• Is my 10 minute development time with Rodinol 50:1 developer and Arista EDU 100 film long enough.
• I am using grade 2 and grade 3 Arista paper as my enlarger has no color filters for RC papers. would another brand of paper make much difference.

This has been a fun project resurrecting this old photo gear, now the challenge is to see so how good a print I can get.

 

[Ysarex]

Low contrast negatives result from underdevelopment and/or to a somewhat lesser degree underexposure and of course both.

Joe

 

[webestang64]

Is my 10 minute development time with Rodinol 50:1 developer and Arista EDU 100 film long enough.

The starting point according to the massive dev site says 7 minutes.
Link.....
https://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.php?Film=%Arista+EDU%&Developer=&mdc=Search&TempUnits=F&TimeUnits=D

 

[Derrel]

Your darkroom safelights and your print development times are something to consider as well.

 

[Derrel]

Do some online research about ways to test your safe lights. In my own personal experience, the dark rooms that many people have access to have low-grade light pollution which causes a lowering of contrast in enlargements.

In community dark rooms oftentimes the culprit is other workers allowing white light to be broadcast into the room, while at other times it is a safelight which is not completely safe and which causes almost imperceptible fogging of photographic paper.

 

[Derrel]

I used to find that a development time of 90 seconds and even up to 120 seconds made a difference in my fiber-based prints. With Kodak resin-coated paper, I used to prefer 90 seconds, and not the recommended 60 Seconds.

I think that developing enlargements face-down in the developing tray leads to better enlargements. Always resist the temptation to yank a print when it appears to be developing too much or too rapidly. Develop for the full-time and you will often see an increase in your maximum D-Max in the blacks.

Also make sure that your print developer is at full strength and is at the correct temperature and it's not too cold, or weak.

 

[dxqcanada]

You can see visually if the negative is "thin" ... if it is, I suspect underexposure, unless your water is really really cold.

 

[compur]

You might want to try a different brand of paper.

 

[Derrel]

I used to print on grade 4 Kodak fiber based paper. The exact type of enlarger that you use plays a big part for example an old Durst diffusion enlarger gives you a lot lower contrast print then say a Leitz Focomat IIc condensed enlarger.

 

[Derrel]

You need to make sure _every_ part of your system is in order....film, metering, ISO rating you assign to the film, filmdeveloping time/temperature/dilution/agitation, your enlarging paper, developing time, safelight, etc.

It would be a trivial matter to rig up a below lens holder for a set of polycontrast filters from either Kodak or Ilford. You might wish to change your rated film ISO and also your film developer or agitation method. You can also change your paper grade either by using a different polycontrast type filter or buying some grade 4 paper. Perhaps your darkroom Safelight and its proximity to your developing tray is causing a very slight degree of fogging. My first instinct would be to test your Safelight with a couple of coins placed on a fresh sheet of paper for two minutes. Then develop the paper and stop it and fix it. If you have white outlines where the coins were, then you will know within 5 minutes if your safelight has been fogging your prints.

 

[Grandpa Ron]

I never though about the safe light, I is the classic 5 inch Kodak with 15 watt bulb and OA yellowish filter. I hangs above the work station. I can put a dimmer on it if needed.

I also suspect the negatives are a bit thin. My paper exposure time is 2 1/2 to to 4 seconds, the development time is 90 sec. at 68 F.

Since I just received some new 4x5 film holders from E bay to check out for light leaks, I will be recheck my meter/shutter speed. I will also tray develop the negatives so I can control the development time of each sheet on film.

This may take a while. thanks for the info.

 

[dxqcanada]

Have you checked the lens shutter to make sure it is still accurate? It might be running too fast or the aperture may have a problem ? ... or maybe your light meter is off ?

 

[Derrel]

Paper exposure times are very short...2.5 to 4 seconds....ohhhh, that would be VERY hard to work with...no time for dodging, very brief burning times...very little room for error in determining the "right" exposure. It does make me think that perhaps your negatives are way too thin.

 

[dxqcanada]

Eh, I just thought of something ... how much exposure do you lose if the sheet film is loaded backwards in the holder?

 

[Derrel]

I would like to see a sample negative...your typical enlaregement time is troubling...2.5 to 4 seconds seems way too brief...10-15 seconds is about where I think you should be at.

I think that perhaps you are indeed underexposing my suggestion would be to immediately cut in half the iso level that you are giving to your standard film.