Condenser enlargers: Kodak

Discussion in 'Kodak' started by Michael Scarpitti, Jul 28, 2003.


    "The development times in the following tables are starting-point
    recommendations. They are intended to produce a contrast index of 0.60
    for T-MAX 400 Film and 0.56 for the other films. These development
    times should produce negatives with a contrast suitable for printing
    with a diffusion enlarger. To adjust contrast for printing with a
    condenser enlarger, reduce the development time by 20 to 30 percent."

    If you're using a condenser enlarger, reduce your times!

    Michael Scarpitti, Jul 28, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  2. Of course, I know this. This is for the benefit of ***others***.
    Michael Scarpitti, Jul 28, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  3. Michael Scarpitti

    Wim Guest

    the contrast index for condenser enlargers for N development should be
    about 0.43.

    Wim, Jul 28, 2003
  4. Why isn't this equivalent to saying, "Do an N-1 development." ?

    -Peter De Smidt
    Peter De Smidt, Jul 28, 2003
  5. Michael Scarpitti

    Nick Zentena Guest

    Isn't that exactly what the zone system claims for 35mm?

    Nick Zentena, Jul 28, 2003
  6. Cannot imagine thats correct for a number of reasons. Typically if you expose a
    grey card and process it N you will get a .75 density (which is also the reflection
    density of the card if you use a densitometer which has a reflection sensor) this is two/three stops below the maximum
    printable density that can be held without dodging on a diffusion light source on a normal grade 2 paper
    or using a grade 2 Kodak filter and obtaining seperation in your shadows and mid tones.
    Kodak use to say a 1.0 density was Normal for grey card exposures and condensor enlargers,
    if the CI is .43 and you have a BF+ at .10 that means from the bottom
    where you get shadow detail to the hightlight density you
    have two stops .15 apart. hardly enough density even for a diffusion enlarger
    to make normal seperation of highlight mid tones & shadows.
    Gregory W. Blank, Jul 28, 2003
  7. Maybe you use grade three paper because your negatives are drastically underexposed?
    Now if you used the Zone system and understood what a contrast filter is for
    you might be able to make prints on Grade 2 or polycontrast paper.....thats
    a lot less stress for for someone like you that has a loose grasp on reality.
    I don't follow people like you, I avoid them on the street when I can.
    Gregory W. Blank, Jul 29, 2003
  8. The problem is you called it CI, CI is not average gradient.
    Gregory W. Blank, Jul 29, 2003
  9. You CANNOT use the Zone Sytem in 35mm work. It's designed for sheet
    I used Varigam and Varilour before you were born!

    You don't know what you're talking about. In 35mm work, grade 3 is
    normal, not grade 2!
    Michael Scarpitti, Jul 29, 2003
  10. You CANNOT use the Zone Sytem in 35mm work. It's designed for sheet
    I used Varigam and Varilour before you were born!

    You don't know what you're talking about. In 35mm work, grade 3 is
    normal, not grade 2!


    Here is a quote:
    "If there is any secret to obtaining high sharpness and fine grain, it
    is to
    ensure that the negative has a low density range. Maximum density
    not exceed 0.9 above base+fog for small negatives, or about 1.2 for
    negatives. This means that 35mm negatives of normal scenic contrast
    ideally be developed to print well on grade 3 paper. Medium and large
    format negatives should be developed to a slightly higher contrast, to
    print on grade 2 paper."
    Michael Scarpitti, Jul 29, 2003
  11. I don't doubt that that 35mm negatives may print better on grade three,
    adjusting contrast in the negative can allow you to print on many grades,
    maybe grade three is normal for 35mm, I am willing to accept that
    for this discussion. I apologize in part as I was baiting you towards defining why you
    hold these convictions, however I can not say I have appreciated your tone of voice
    throughout your posts. I have therefore addressed you in what I have deemed a likewise manner.

    I would say though that using a no filter setting and printing a negative whether
    on condensor or Dichroic will produce an optimal print on the paper grade
    that produces it, which is not to say that it is the manufacture's
    or an otherwise commonly accepted norm. Being that one can adjust the whole roll of film,
    the zone system if one wants to expend the effort to shoot three seperate cameras can be used
    on 35mm photography, thats not to say doing so allows for intuitive shooting when
    action, facial expression and spontienity are primary considerations.

    It can be done.
    Gregory W. Blank, Jul 29, 2003

  12. I understand many people use variable-contrst paper without any
    filter, which in the case of Kodak materials gives about grade 1 1/2.
    This is not a good situation, as it leads to making overly-contrasty
    negatives. I have actually heard students say 'I don't need a filter'
    as if the filter were some kind of crutch. Use the filters! I used
    Ilfobrom paper a lot in the past, and I used more of grade 3 than of
    anything else. I hardly ever use VC papers.
    Michael Scarpitti, Jul 30, 2003
  13. Most manufacturers standardize the Multigraded papers to print
    at grade 2 with "No Filter", but the the test criteria for showing this
    is rather involved, to write out here. Part of the reason Grade three
    works better for you is that you are enlarging the prints. Sensitometrically,
    enlarging works differently than the contact printing procedures common used
    to determine paper HD curve data. There is a difference between a projected
    image and a contacted one, both in appearance and sensitometric readings
    of the printed image.

    In otherwords if I raise the enlarger to where it spills a set amount of light
    (to cover an 8x10 enlargement) if I then contact print the negative or
    step wedge using the same Filter (whatever I decide it to be) there will
    be a decide difference in a print that was project verses the contact.
    All other criteria being the same, development, process time, agitation.
    The only variable is that one print was contacted verses being projected.
    Gregory W. Blank, Jul 30, 2003
  14. I understand many people use variable-contrst paper without any
    Actually the grade can differ depending of the type of enlarger head,
    lamp and lamp age etc. In some situations it might be 1 1/2 and in other
    set-ups it might be 2 1/2. Using a filter will not prevent this
    variation from happening but will minimize it.

    Severi S.
    Severi Salminen, Jul 30, 2003
  15. Its always been my understanding the filter helps stabilize the exposure
    Gregory W. Blank, Jul 30, 2003
  16. I know that in the past Polycontrast was closer to 1 1/2, by Kodak's
    No, grade 3 is recommended for 35mm for other reasons. It's to keep
    the desnity and contrast (and thus graininess) DOWN, allowing for best
    possible definition, in conjunction with condenser enlarging.
    No, it's an optical phenomenon.
    Especially with condenser enlargers.
    I'm glad you know this too.
    Michael Scarpitti, Jul 30, 2003
  17. So are you telling us that using VC paper is a crutch?

    David "reality is a crutch for those who can't handle drugs" Neb

    We are receiving alerts about a worm that is spreading around the Internet
    contained in a .zip archive file. What is surprising to security analysts
    is that this worm is spreading at all since it cannot execute without user
    intervention. Security analysts believe the rapid spread indicates that
    recipients are still opening email attachments even after they have been
    warned many times that it is unsafe to do so.

    - Description of the "Sobig.E" worm, ca. June 2003
    David Nebenzahl, Jul 30, 2003

  18. By the way, graded papers are generally superior to VC papers.
    Mid-tone gradation is superior.
    Michael Scarpitti, Jul 30, 2003
  19. message
    You don't really need to. The negatives will print on
    about one grade softer paper but will be identical in tonal
    rendition. I may be more convenient to adjust the negative
    contrast to the enlarger illumination but since absolutely
    identical results can be had with either diffusion or
    condenser enlargers by adjusting paper grade there is really
    no other reason to do it.
    The effect is due to scattering of light by the silver
    particles in the emulsion. Thick, coarse grain, films have
    more difference than thin emulsion, fine grain films. Color
    films show virtually no change in contrast with different
    amounts of diffusion because the dye particles do not
    scatter light.
    The difference in apparent density with diffuse compared
    to specular light is called the Callier Effect and is
    sometimes called the Callier "Q" factor. It becomes
    important where accurate sensitometric measurements are
    desired but is not a critical parameter in practical
    photography, other than its good to know it exists.
    Richard Knoppow, Jul 30, 2003
  20. Its too bad too because graded papers are on deaths door
    at least in the USA. I started printing using Graded paper
    and really learned to love Forte Bromofort grade 3 in 16x20.
    Gregory W. Blank, Jul 31, 2003
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.