Analyser Pro Calibration

I have been reading how to calibrate this analyser by Andrew Smallman. Although it is a simpler method than the analyser calibration manual uses I have one question I hope someone can answer. Do I have to take a 'light reading' for each grade of paper. What I mean is. If I want to create a test strip for Grade 1, do I have to take a reading with the analyser set to Grade 1. Then for grade 2, do I have to take a reading with the analyser set to Grade 2. and so on?

It's a brilliant piece of kit - but complex to calibrate.

The specific maker's filters for multigrade/vari-contrast paper are supposed to keep the paper speed fairly constant - usually excluding the hardest grade.

However, you'd be well advised to calibrate each grade for speed, using your own filter set or colour head.

Jeeeeezeus! I just looked at the price of that thing and nearly choked.

I hope it automatically switches your safelight off while measuring.

I bought a little Philips analyser/timer many years ago. Brilliant thing! Even allowing for inflation, it cost me about half the price of that 'Analyser Pro'.

I think the Philips model number was PDT-2030, or something like that. They're probably still knocking around on eBay.

Yep you have to pay for quality I'm afraid. Yes it does switch off the safe light during exposure. I guess it makes sense to do a separate calibration at each grade. It would be nice if you could do a calibration at say Grade 2 and let the analyser sort all the rest out.

I'll have some time to do the sequence during the coming lockdown.

It would be nice if you could do a calibration at say Grade 2 and let the analyser sort all the rest out.

No analyser can guess at how your particular make of paper and filters are going to interact, speedwise. And an analyser can only act as a guide - simply giving a starting point exposure rather than making a test strip or using a greyscale overlay.

Years ago I designed and made a beside-the-lens enlarging exposure meter/timer. It acted like a centre-weighted camera meter, and for proof prints it did an excellent job; saving me hours of time and boxes of paper. However, I didn't rely on it for final 'art' prints, which almost always needed some dodging, burning or special development.

You might now be asking why I bought the Philips meter to replace my home-made one. Because the on-easel Philips meter allowed spot measurement, and I couldn't have built and calibrated one as neatly for less money!

Nowadays, with cheap Arduino boards and interfaces available, such devices can be put together for comparative peanuts.

I'm not sure but I think this Analyzer will show you the

Yep you have to pay for quality I'm afraid. Yes it does switch off the safe light during exposure. I guess it makes sense to do a separate calibration at each grade. It would be nice if you could do a calibration at say Grade 2 and let the analyser sort all the rest out.

 

I'll have some time to do the sequence during the coming lockdown.

I think this analyzer automatically shows you the effect of switching grades of paper, so you don't have to create test strips or calibrate for each grade of paper, but I could be wrong...

Why the VC Analyser Pro is different...

Enlarging exposure meters often suffer from a number of shortcomings. In many cases, a single reading is taken from a mid-tone area of the negative (or from a diffused image) and exposure based on that reading. This can work quite well but it won’t advise you which paper grade to use.

Enlarging exposure meters which indicate a suggested paper grade do so assuming you want your shadows to be at maximum black and your highlights at paper base white. This isn't always the case, particularly in portraiture work. And if it isn’t the case, then you’re on your own - back to the test strip!

The VC Analyser Pro is different because it tells you exactly the shade of grey that you will get on a print for any spot measured area of the negative. You can see the effects of changing the paper grade without making a print - the Analyser's display indicates the changes in print tone for each measured spot as you alter the grade setting. You can manually override the Analyser's suggested exposure time in order to produce a lower or higher key print, and see the expected results before committing a piece of paper. You can even make your own grey scale for use with the Analyser using your favourite materials and processing, so that the Analyser's indications will be as close as possible to the final print.

The VC Analyser Pro is different because it tells you exactly the shade of grey that you will get on a print for any spot measured area of the negative.

Nice theory.

Wonder how that works out in practise? Because most subjects aren't neatly split into discrete bands of flat tone like a greyscale.

If you are doing high volume work on a constant basis these analysers come in handy, but if you are your once-in-a-while printer they are more of a headache than anything. I had a bulky Beseler PM2 color analyzer as well as a JOBO hand held and a Ilford hand held analyzers. The PM2 is gone as well as 10-15 modules I purchased for it. I still have the Jobo and the Ilford, but again I rarely use them. The thing is with these analyzers is that you have to find a perfect negative or print then the machine stores the aperture/time combination so next time you run into a print that is similar, you don't have to plug in those numbers.

A lot of high volume photo labs use to use them, because usually they would get batches of photos where the lighting did not change that much such as a wedding or sports venue. When using the PM2, I had to save a bunch of different lighting scenarios on a "module"(memory bank). Each module could only hold one lighting scenario, so after a while I had to keep buying modules(10-15) and label them so I wouldn't forget. This became too cumbersome after a while, since it was much easier to just eye-ball the negative.

Usually the box of developing paper would give you a starting pack for filters for that batch of paper, so maybe after one or two strips you were on your way. Another thing I found frustrating was the variations in spot meter readings, although the PM2 also let you take a reading of the entire scene then average things out. However you had to be pretty lucky to get a perfect print on the first shot using this method.

A colour analyser doesn't have the same usage parameters as one for B&W Harry. Colour paper generally has a fixed contrast grade, and you're just using the analyser to get a neutral colour balance - or as close to it as lighting, film and paper will allow.

A B&W analyser essentially has to make a 3 point calibration; black point exposure, white point exposure, and key tone exposure. In other words to give a guide as to the grade of paper needed, and to the overall exposure.

This doesn't really need any fancy electronics IME. Just exposure measurements at three areas of the image projected on the enlarger baseboard.

However, the selection of those areas is critical, and down to the desires, judgement and experience of the operator. And I don't think any pre-programmed CPU can make that decision on behalf of the printer.

Look at the similar situation of matrix metering in digital cameras. Pretty good maybe 90% of the time, but in need of human monitoring and adjustment for those remaining 10%.

A colour analyser doesn't have the same usage parameters as one for B&W Harry. Colour paper generally has a fixed contrast grade, and you're just using the analyser to get a neutral colour balance - or as close to it as lighting, film and paper will allow.

 

A B&W analyser essentially has to make a 3 point calibration; black point exposure, white point exposure, and key tone exposure. In other words to give a guide as to the grade of paper needed, and to the overall exposure.

 

This doesn't really need any fancy electronics IME. Just exposure measurements at three areas of the image projected on the enlarger baseboard.

 

However, the selection of those areas is critical, and down to the desires, judgement and experience of the operator. And I don't think any pre-programmed CPU can make that decision on behalf of the printer.

 

Look at the similar situation of matrix metering in digital cameras. Pretty good maybe 90% of the time, but in need of human monitoring and adjustment for those remaining 10%.

The good thing about the Beseler PM2L the one I owned, is that it allowed you to make B&W Grade/Contrast paper decisions by the use of "ratios" if I remember correctly...

The way it worked is that you took a spot reading of the lightest part of the negative then of the darkest part of the negative and the analyzer would give you a "ratio" based on those readings. You would then match that ratio for example 1:4, against a table or chart that came with the analyzer (and that I had posted on the wall in my darkroom) to determine what paper Grade to use.

Unfortunately at the time, I was mostly using Variable Contrast papers so determining the grade was not that important.

**Then again since I was using a diffusion color head, I was able to get the right contrast by varying the Yellow and Cyan filters on the enlarger head. That is when this Analyzer came in handy ! But for colors, I just as well use some Kodak Viewing Filters to try to determine the right colors. Not that it was any faster, it was less complicated and more convenient for me.