Focusing

[rbconbautista]

Is it normal that smaller prints lets say 2.5x3.5 wallet size prints are harder to focus than larger prints? Having trouble focusing negative even tho negative is perfectly in focus.

 

[Derrel]

Well oh, you are looking at a very small image as compared with a 5 x 7 in enlargement or bigger. I really believe you should use a grain focuser with a dummy sheet of the same enlarging paper as you are using inserted into the easel for focusing. I feel that a good grain focuser is worth its weight in gold.

 

[rbconbautista]

Well oh, you are looking at a very small image as compared with a 5 x 7 in enlargement or bigger. I really believe you should use a grain focuser with a dummy sheet of the same enlarging paper as you are using inserted into the easel for focusing. I feel that a good grain focuser is worth its weight in gold.

Will that make focusing easier? Cuz what I noticed is that the grain is also less noticeable on smaller prints and vice versa.

 

[Designer]

Is it normal that smaller prints lets say 2.5x3.5 wallet size prints are harder to focus than larger prints? Having trouble focusing negative even tho negative is perfectly in focus.

It is the same phenomenon as DOF when taking a photo. The enlarger head is so close to the print easel that it is affecting the DOF. You might not have enough room to get your head in there to see the focusing loupe. Get a longer lens for your enlarger.

 

[vintagesnaps]

When you enlarge the image it will likely enlarge the grain too and make it more noticeable. This might be another reason to make sure you're metering and getting proper exposures so you get good quality negatives as much as possible. Shooting in nice light could be a help reduce grain too.

I haven't done smaller than 5x7 prints. I'd suggest using the grain scope to get focused. I found it took me a bit to figure out what the grain should look like thru the scope once it's in focus.

I've used a shared darkroom at a university that made it available to people in the community; I joined the art center and then could go in and use the studios. You might think about a way to use your time in there as efficiently as possible. I used to look at my negatives at home so I knew what I was going to print. (I have a small light box but a lamp shade will do.)

Maybe have a couple or three negatives from the same strip that you want to print ready to go. When a grain scope is available, maybe you can focus one image at say, 8x10 (or 5x7). After you expose the paper, put it in one of the black plastic light safe envelopes that the Ilford paper came in and close it (assuming you have one empty.) Expose your next one, put it in the black plastic envelope. Do maybe a third or stop at two depending on how many you can do before you need to pass along the grain scope. Then one at a time slide an exposed paper into the developer, stop bath, fixer... then while it's in the fixer put the next one in the developer, etc. til you get all three in the rinse.

At least that's what I'd try and see how that works, maybe a different process would work for you. Then if you wanted to do a 5x7 of them, reset the enlarger and go thru the process again with that strip of negs. I think it might work better to stay with doing some at the same size so you don't have to keep stopping and resetting the enlarger so much.

 

[rbconbautista]

When you enlarge the image it will likely enlarge the grain too and make it more noticeable. This might be another reason to make sure you're metering and getting proper exposures so you get good quality negatives as much as possible. Shooting in nice light could be a help reduce grain too.

I haven't done smaller than 5x7 prints. I'd suggest using the grain scope to get focused. I found it took me a bit to figure out what the grain should look like thru the scope once it's in focus.

I've used a shared darkroom at a university that made it available to people in the community; I joined the art center and then could go in and use the studios. You might think about a way to use your time in there as efficiently as possible. I used to look at my negatives at home so I knew what I was going to print. (I have a small light box but a lamp shade will do.)

Maybe have a couple or three negatives from the same strip that you want to print ready to go. When a grain scope is available, maybe you can focus one image at say, 8x10 (or 5x7). After you expose the paper, put it in one of the black plastic light safe envelopes that the Ilford paper came in and close it (assuming you have one empty.) Expose your next one, put it in the black plastic envelope. Do maybe a third or stop at two depending on how many you can do before you need to pass along the grain scope. Then one at a time slide an exposed paper into the developer, stop bath, fixer... then while it's in the fixer put the next one in the developer, etc. til you get all three in the rinse.

At least that's what I'd try and see how that works, maybe a different process would work for you. Then if you wanted to do a 5x7 of them, reset the enlarger and go thru the process again with that strip of negs. I think it might work better to stay with doing some at the same size so you don't have to keep stopping and resetting the enlarger so much.

Don't you gotta test strip each negative. Each negative is different from one another. Then for each negative chances are you have to re-focus maybe not by much though.

 

[rbconbautista]

I average about 2 5x7 prints per hour (not including squeegee and dry which takes about 5 minutes in the print dryer). Once I test strip and develop I process my final print. While that print is in the fix I start on the second print and so on. Then when I'm done printing I get the prints that have been in the fix long enough I then put it in the final rinse then I squeegee then dry. Basically while I'm waiting for it to stop, fix, and rinse, I'm either cleaning up the dry station, enlarging, and or matting.

 

[vintagesnaps]

That all sounds familiar...

Depends. I've found if I shot a roll at the same time in the same light, once I've gotten the exposure time determined I can crank prints out pretty efficiently. I doubt I did that at first though. Sometimes I might do a quick 1/2 test strip (cut the strip in half or cut smaller strips, whatever) of 2 or 3 exposure times.

When I start a new roll, then I have to redetermine exposure; if I shot the roll at different times then I probably would have to do a test strip. I don't know if it would help but I always kept notes on the back of proof sheets/contact sheets suppose I could scan a couple if you want to see notes.

If you're doing 5x7s and don't have to adjust the enlarger that probably keeps the process moving along.

 

[rbconbautista]

That all sounds familiar...

Depends. I've found if I shot a roll at the same time in the same light, once I've gotten the exposure time determined I can crank prints out pretty efficiently. I doubt I did that at first though. Sometimes I might do a quick 1/2 test strip (cut the strip in half or cut smaller strips, whatever) of 2 or 3 exposure times.

When I start a new roll, then I have to redetermine exposure; if I shot the roll at different times then I probably would have to do a test strip. I don't know if it would help but I always kept notes on the back of proof sheets/contact sheets suppose I could scan a couple if you want to see notes.

If you're doing 5x7s and don't have to adjust the enlarger that probably keeps the process moving along.

Well I haven't shot a roll where the lighting has not changed.

 

[vintagesnaps]

Guess it depends on what I'm doing, if I was taking a series of pictures in about the same place not facing different directions, etc. I've been a photographer forever and have done sports/events so am used to shooting fairly quickly. If I was moving around enough I'd probably need to do test strips to determine exposure for each photo or so.