What Can I Do Better?

[Michael Heller]

The goal is decent analog B&W prints from 35mm slides. Prints will go to a Museum collection
I'm copying with a slide copier to PanF processed in D-76 1:1, 7 min @68degrees
Printing on MGFB Ilford. Image is printed #2 contrast, with the highlites burned with a 00. The left side was dodged some...
I know a 4x5 interneg might be better, but I'm not set up for 4x5 film.
I chose this image for a test because of the bright snow and dark reds and blacks in their outfits.
What could I have done differently to make the print better?
Thx!

 

[koraks]

I think you're doing great. The print is punchy, ao is the negative. In case you want to subdue it, you could work on contrast control of the internegative, but of course you could also do the usual burning, dodging and flashing while printing. Not that I feel you must do any of this - I quite like what you got.

Can you tell us a bit more about the museum exhibit? Sounds nice!

 

[Michael Heller]

I think you're doing great. The print is punchy, ao is the negative. In case you want to subdue it, you could work on contrast control of the internegative, but of course you could also do the usual burning, dodging and flashing while printing. Not that I feel you must do any of this - I quite like what you got.

Can you tell us a bit more about the museum exhibit? Sounds nice!

Thanks! I was Photo editor and head photographer at a newspaper in Santa Fe New Mexico in the 70s-90s. Now the Museum of New Mexico wants ALL my work. I've been making B&W prints for them for a couple of years and I'm experimenting with B&W from some of my color slides. I have a You Tube channel that you can look through and see some of the stuff I'm doing as well as a bunch of videos on setting up my darkroom and my 'process'. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvTm7EIbd4gh-hctrz-UBeQ
As far as contrast control I've been experimenting with the 'interneg' development times. I've lived in HP5 so the PanF takes a little experimenting.

 

[koraks]

That's really cool @Michael Heller, and it must be great to receive this recognition of your work! And at the same time also a gargantuan task...makes it worth it to dial in a couple of process variables so you can make good headway.

 

[Michael Heller]

That's really cool @Michael Heller, and it must be great to receive this recognition of your work! And at the same time also a gargantuan task...makes it worth it to dial in a couple of process variables so you can make good headway.

I am just happy that all my slides and negs have a 'home' and will be preserved. I've got a lot of old photog friends who just finally threw their archives away.

 

[koraks]

Absolutely, and I can see why your friends would have done what they did. And if not them, then their children/grandchildren/heirs when the time comes. There should be more institutions who take on the management of such personal archives.

 

[xkaes]

I agree. You're on track. The problem you have is that while PAN F is a great film, it's also relatively high contrast. An easy way to control this is to over expose it -- ISO 12-25 -- and under-develop it -- 25-50%. This will produce a flatter negative. You could try a lower contrast B&W paper or filter, but a flatter negative will capture more in the slide -- because it's over-exposed. How much exactly to over-expose and under-develop? I'm sure you can handle a little trial & error -- just take good notes.

This is actually being discussed right now -- some might say being beaten to death -- in another thread:

Linearity of pulling film and developer temperature

Two questions in one :) Is there a rule of thumb for how much to adjust the time when pulling film? Is the relation between developing time and developer temperature linear? Yesterday I developed a roll of Fomapan 400 in Adox XT-3 (XTOL). The datasheet said 7 minutes at 20 degrees, my...

www.photrio.com

 

[Michael Heller]

I agree. You're on track. The problem you have is that while PAN F is a great film, it's also relatively high contrast. An easy way to control this is to over expose it -- ISO 12-25 -- and under-develop it -- 25-50%. This will produce a flatter negative. You could try a lower contrast B&W paper or filter, but a flatter negative will capture more in the slide -- because it's over-exposed. How much exactly to over-expose and under-develop? I'm sure you can handle a little trial & error -- just take good notes.

This is actually being discussed right now -- some might say being beaten to death -- in another thread:

Linearity of pulling film and developer temperature

Two questions in one :) Is there a rule of thumb for how much to adjust the time when pulling film? Is the relation between developing time and developer temperature linear? Yesterday I developed a roll of Fomapan 400 in Adox XT-3 (XTOL). The datasheet said 7 minutes at 20 degrees, my...

www.photrio.com

Yes, actually that's where I'm going! overexpose underdevelop and 1:1 I've tried lower contrast but this seems to be the best. I'll try and post some test prints of different contrasts. Thx!

 

[cliveh]

What I don't understand is

The goal is decent analog B&W prints from 35mm slides. Prints will go to a Museum collection
I'm copying with a slide copier to PanF processed in D-76 1:1, 7 min @68degrees
Printing on MGFB Ilford. Image is printed #2 contrast, with the highlites burned with a 00. The left side was dodged some...
I know a 4x5 interneg might be better, but I'm not set up for 4x5 film.
I chose this image for a test because of the bright snow and dark reds and blacks in their outfits.
What could I have done differently to make the print better?
Thx!

What I don't understand is how you are getting negs like that with only 7 minutes development. Are you sure dilution/time/temp are correct?

 

[Don_ih]

I think I'd use Tmax 100 instead of PanF. Tmax is excellent for copying. You can also experiment using filters on your lens to adjust how the colours come through in terms of contrast. Filters should work the same as they would in the actual world. Not sure what kind of slide copier you're using, so I don't know how filters would fit. If you have a lot of slides to copy, you may want to get an Illumitrans.

 

[bernard_L]

I would be cautious with overexposing Pan F. The shoulder sets in early; that would compress the highlights of the slide, while they already (on the slide) have a lower contrast than the dark tones.

 

[xkaes]

I would be cautious with overexposing Pan F. The shoulder sets in early; that would compress the highlights of the slide, while they already (on the slide) have a lower contrast than the dark tones.

That's why you under-develop to avoid blowing out the highlights -- flatten out the curve.

 

[koraks]

flatten out the curve.

Which will leave the highlights muddy and flat.
Keep in mind that reducing development does not flatten the curve per se.

 

[miha]

Thanks! I was Photo editor and head photographer at a newspaper in Santa Fe New Mexico in the 70s-90s. Now the Museum of New Mexico wants ALL my work. I've been making B&W prints for them for a couple of years and I'm experimenting with B&W from some of my color slides. I have a You Tube channel that you can look through and see some of the stuff I'm doing as well as a bunch of videos on setting up my darkroom and my 'process'. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvTm7EIbd4gh-hctrz-UBeQ
As far as contrast control I've been experimenting with the 'interneg' development times. I've lived in HP5 so the PanF takes a little experimenting.

Wow, thank you for sharing this YouTube channel! You've totally made my Sunday morning, I've been enjoying your videos so much!

 

[xkaes]

Which will leave the highlights muddy and flat.
Keep in mind that reducing development does not flatten the curve per se.

It works for me and my gear, and it might work in this case as well. Those highlights could use a little "mud".

 

[Michael Heller]

Wow, thank you for sharing this YouTube channel! You've totally made my Sunday morning, I've been enjoying your videos so much!

Thanks for the Kudos! I'm just trying to share what I know has worked for me! I'm hoping to get started printing some of my 6x7 B&W aerials and doing some more videos soon. I've been busy putting in the plumbing for bathroom in the basement!

 

[Michael Heller]

It works for me and my gear, and it might work in this case as well. Those highlights could use a little "mud".

The snow at the bottom right cant take any more but the woman's arm in the left middle needs more, for sure. thx!

 

[Michael Heller]

I think I'd use Tmax 100 instead of PanF. Tmax is excellent for copying. You can also experiment using filters on your lens to adjust how the colours come through in terms of contrast. Filters should work the same as they would in the actual world. Not sure what kind of slide copier you're using, so I don't know how filters would fit. If you have a lot of slides to copy, you may want to get an Illumitrans.

I lived in Tri-X and HP-5... back when, and since my return I have still yet to try/use T-Max. Maybe now's the time. I do think the internegative gets the tweaking first. I've got a fixed barrel copier that has a lens built into it. It adapts to my Nikon like a normal bayonet lens. I'd have to cut some gells or something so that's not and option. Thx!

 

[miha]

@Michael Heller Tri-X was huge for U.S. journalists in the '70s. Why do you prefer HP5 over Tri-X?

 

[Michael Heller]

What I don't understand is

What I don't understand is how you are getting negs like that with only 7 minutes development. Are you sure dilution/time/temp are correct?

Yes sir. Did it myself! ;-) Actually I ran a strip before in straight D-76 and 6;30 time ( I think- Id have to look) and they were too dense so I went 1:1 and pulled 30 sec. Agitation was the same 2 slow inversions every 20 secs. A little less might 'help' but not enough, so that's what I know. I'd not tat well versed in Pan F. I'm more of an HP-5/Tri X kind of guy. I just wanted to try it for the tiny grain. I think trying some other films might be good. I just want to get a 'baseline' so I can adjust from there as necessary. Thx!

 

[Don_ih]

I lived in Tri-X and HP-5... back when, and since my return I have still yet to try/use T-Max. Maybe now's the time. I do think the internegative gets the tweaking first. I've got a fixed barrel copier that has a lens built into it. It adapts to my Nikon like a normal bayonet lens. I'd have to cut some gells or something so that's not and option. Thx!

Tmax is about as good as you can get for a copying film.
The device I mentioned, a Bowens Illumitran, can probably be found pretty cheaply if you keep on the lookout. It has a macro-bellows built into it, you use a 60mm enlarging lens, it has a built-in flash (you can vary the intensity). Because of the separate lens, you can use filters. Something to keep in mind if you want to copy a lot of slides.

 

[Michael Heller]

Tri-X was huge for U.S. journalists in the '70s. Why do you prefer HP5 over Tri-X?

I was one of them and I ordered thousands of rolls of whatever I wanted and my staff of 3 and I all preferred HP-5 because in Acufine it pushed better and gave us negatives with less blocked up highlites. (For 3200ASA I think it was 9 min @85 degrees (yes 85!) - invert the tank ONCE, set it down and walk away. Do not touch the tank until it goes into a 80 degree wash and Fix.{preheat tanks and reels too!) At 400 they were about the same but we processed everything for shadow detail and we shot 2 or three subjects on a roll so our negs were always a little on the 'thick' side and we liked HP-5 better. Highlites were only going to be as white as the parer stock the newspaper was printed on anyway! Thx!

 

[miha]

I was one of them and I ordered thousands of rolls of whatever I wanted and my staff of 3 and I all preferred HP-5 because in Acufine it pushed better and gave us negatives with less blocked up highlites. (For 3200ASA I think it was 9 min @85 degrees (yes 85!) - invert the tank ONCE, set it down and walk away. Do not touch the tank until it goes into a 80 degree wash and Fix.{preheat tanks and reels too!) At 400 they were about the same but we processed everything for shadow detail and we shot 2 or three subjects on a roll so our negs were always a little on the 'thick' side and we liked HP-5 better. Highlites were only going to be as white as the parer stock the newspaper was printed on anyway! Thx!

Thanks!

 

[Michael Heller]

I just want to elaborate on my response to mica; Our goal was to make pictures look great in print. That took coordination between the pressroom, the 'back shop' and the composing room that put it all together. We had to produce prints with an appropriate tonal range for the printing equipment they were using and the paper they printed on. We couldn't expect the 'back shop' to adjust they process to accommodate our prints. And prints were what we gave them They would then make a half tone (an image with a dot screen in it) of our prints and reduce or enlarge them and and paste it onto an actual page of type. That would then be photographed with a 'giant camera' and a negative of the entire newspaper page was then produced and that was contact printed on a large photo-sensitive metal plate that was the thing that took the ink and transferred it to the newsprint paper. So if our B&W prints didn't adapt to their whole production process, the image in the paper would look like shit. But we always looked great.. and our negs were usually a little thick!

 

[MattKing]

So if our B&W prints didn't adapt to their whole production process, the image in the paper would look like shit. But we always looked great.. and our negs were usually a little thick!

This really resonates with me.
When I was photographing for an offset-press printed Tab newspaper, my prints changed.
Looking back, there was no science or even careful methodology involved - I just adapted.
I'd do some prints on Wednesday afternoon/evening and then see how they looked in Thursday's paper.
Then on Thursday I would take some more photos, print them, and see how they looked in Friday's paper.
And the results improved over time.
By the way: I was a teenager at the time .