Dixactol & Aristo Head?

I used Dixactol with Ilford Pan F film recently for the first time and became frustrated with the extremely long printing times. I use an Omega D5 with the Aristo Variable Contrast head. I used it both in the split contrast mode and selected filtration mode. In neither mode was I able to get properly exposed prints. Times were extended to 3 minutes at f5.6 and still more exposure was needed. The negatives were stained using Dixactol's single bath procedures. The stains were dark but the negatives appear to be properly exposed. Is the problem Pan F? I am really puzzled over this one. I am accustomed to long print times of 1+ minutes in the split contrast mode but nothing this long. I would appreciate your comments.

Robert,

 

<p>

 

Even thought you provide a lot of information, not everything is

here. What size prints are you making? From what size negatives?

Is it possible that your film is over overdeveloped?

 

<p>

 

Remember, any staining developer is going increase your printing

times. I recently started using TriX in PMK with a Zone VI VC head.

My times for an 11x14 went from around 30 seconds to almost 2

minutes. But, the prints are much, much nicer.

Robert:

 

<p>

 

If I were you, I would start by making a proper proof of the negative

on whatever paper you normally use at whatever contrast setting you

consider normal. This will give you a methodical method for passing

judgement with confidence on negative exposure and development.

 

<p>

 

If you are unfamiliar with the term "proper proof", I will give a

brief explanation. Make a contact proof of the negative. Give the

proof the minimum amount of exposure that will still produce maximum

black in the unexposed but fully developed edges of the film. The

density in these areas will be close to the same as the densities of

the shadow areas of the image that were placed or fell in Zone 0.

This exposure can be determined with accuracy by making only 2 or 3

test strips.

 

<p>

 

Once this is done, you can pass judgement on negative exposure by

determining if shadow detail is adequate or not. If exposure was

incorrect, I would recommend first correcting that problem by making

another exposure at whatever film speed is deemed necessary to give

appropriate shadow detail. Then you can determine if the film

exposed at the new speed rating was developed appropriately by

judging if the highlight detail is correct or not. If adjustments in

development are necessary, then make them while exposing and

developing another test negative.

 

<p>

 

Once you have executed these test steps, you will know for a fact

that you have a correctly exposed and developed negative. For me, at

least, it is much easier to forge my way through new and unknown

territory such as this by approaching the situation as methodically

as possible. A proper proof gives quite a bit of sound information

that can be used in passing judgement and making corrections with

confidence.

You will probably have near-normal times if you print on a graded

paper with a nice long scale. Try Bergger Prestige grade 2.