Getting back into B&W, looking for comments

I've been away from B&W for a while, shooting digital, but I'm looking to get back in to the darkroom next month. I've kept my hand in with a changing bag and film scanner, but I'm looking to touch up before I go in to class. I think this is technically pretty sound, but I'd like comments, and especially anything I should change for printing vs. scanning.

 

Canon AE1 w/50 1.4, Tri-X, developed in HC-110 'H' for 12 min@20C. Scanned at 2700 DPI and minimally processed in Lightroom:

 

Looks fine, but post some more images. Difficult to comment based on one photo. As for scanning vs. printing I go with what's needed. To post online a good scan (I use 2400 dpi) works great. Often you won't need to make any adjustments and if so minimal if negative is not to dense or thin, You may find that some films are easier to scan than others, but that depends on equipment and technique. Printing in a darkroom is something I do when I want prints. I could take my scans and have machine prints made, but I prefer a traditional darkroom. Now if someone brought me a roll or black & white and wanted me to develop and print it without charging too much, I'd process, scan, and have 25 cent prints made at a one hour lab to keep their cost down.

Looks fine, but post some more images. Difficult to comment based on one photo. As for scanning vs. printing I go with what's needed. To post online a good scan (I use 2400 dpi) works great. Often you won't need to make any adjustments and if so minimal if negative is not to dense or thin, You may find that some films are easier to scan than others, but that depends on equipment and technique. Printing in a darkroom is something I do when I want prints. I could take my scans and have machine prints made, but I prefer a traditional darkroom. Now if someone brought me a roll or black & white and wanted me to develop and print it without charging too much, I'd process, scan, and have 25 cent prints made at a one hour lab to keep their cost down.

 

Mike,

 

Thanks. Here are two more, shot two days ago a few seconds and one stop apart. Same development routine as the grafitti, scanned at 2700dpi, minimal processing in Lightroom: set point curve to 'strong contrast', sharpen a touch. No noise removal, no cropping, no local adjustments.

 

What I'm trying to ask is, if these negs work in my current workflow, where it's easy to scan a somewhat 'flat' negative and adjust contrast/curves in post, should I plan on being able to do the same thing in the darkroom with different grades of paper, or do my negs need to have more/less density and contrast from the get-go? I haven't printed in a darkroom in 20+ years, and I just don't remember. Sure, that's why I'm taking the class, but I can't help wanting to get a head start!

 

 

 

As used to be, proper negative development should match a paper with a contrast grade #3 (smaller formats).

But notice that a roll film could contain images taken at very different conditions, so each image could need a different EI and development time.

Also, it`s matter of taste, some will prefer a contrastier or a flatter picture of a given image... so I don`t know how are your images taken for scanning, I think you should start with recommended times (manufacturer`s) and check if it suits your taste.

In the same way you adjust contrast/curves, you need to use different traditional techniques to get similar results... paper grades are just the first step. Digital processing is great just because complex wet darkroom procedures are made so easy, that is, dodging/burning, split contrast control, masking, etc. can be easily performed to get similar results.

I stopped using hybrid processing time ago, but my feeling was that my V750 asked for *softer* negatives than my enlargers. But again, I don`t know how are you developing your films. The images look fine.

Edited August 29, 2017 by jose_angel

As used to be, proper negative development should match a paper with a contrast grade #3 (smaller formats).

But notice that a roll film could contain images taken at very different conditions, so each image could need a different EI and development time.

Also, it`s matter of taste, some will prefer a contrastier or a flatter picture of a given image... so I don`t know how are your images taken for scanning, I think you should start with recommended times (manufacturer`s) and check if it suits your taste.

In the same way you adjust contrast/curves, you need to use different traditional techniques to get similar results... paper grades are just the first step. Digital processing is great just because complex wet darkroom procedures are made so easy, that is, dodging/burning, split contrast control, masking, etc. can be easily performed to get similar results.

I stopped using hybrid processing time ago, but my feeling was that my V750 asked for *softer* negatives than my enlargers. But again, I don`t know how are you developing your films. The images look fine.

 

Thanks for the comments; my negs are consistently developed as described in the original post - 12 min in HC110 dilution H@20C, agitation 5 seconds per minute, fix for twice the leader clearing time. I'd typically describe them as a bit flat, needing contrast increased in post. That's not manufacturer or massive dev chart spec, but I suppose the thing to do is to keep that constant, and see how they print.

Something seems a bit off. Can't tell without seeing the negatives, but they might be underexposed. Look at the shadow areas and see how much detail/density is there. Naturally it's all opinion and the look you want, but for me there's something flat about the images that changing the overall lightness or contrast doesn't fix. OTOH, it could also be the original lighting and some fill flash would fix it.

Looking again at the image in an editor, there seems to be good shadow detail, so not underexposed. What you want is luminous skin tones, and these are (IMO) too flat. Agitating 5 seconds per minute isn't much- I'd be doing 5 seconds every 30 seconds. That will help the highlights. Cut the time slightly if the contrast is too much, though I doubt it will be.