Unmanagable negative contrast

[simon_rodan]

I have just bought an Omega D2V and am trying to make my first prints from 4x5 negs. I have exposed the neg placing the shadows on Zone II and the main element of interest on Zone V. Highlights fell on Zone IX. This would seem to call for normal development. <p>However, when I develop the negs (Ilford Delta 100) in both HC111 (dilution B, 6 minutes) and D76 (stock, 9 minutes) which according to Ilford is the recommended times for normal development at 68F, I get negs that are so contrasty I cannot print them on Ilfospeed grade 2. <p>I don't want to move to grade 1 as I am trying to get the development times sorted for grade 2 paper. With D76 I have tried cutting development time to 3 1/2 minutes which helps but I am worried that in doing so, I am loosing shadow detail.

<p>Any thoughts or suggestions?

[fw1]

Given the subject range you mention, I am not surprised, as I would

go with something like N-2 for this range. With Delta 100 for N-2,

try an EI of 50 - 64, and Rodinal 1:50 for 7 - 9 minutes.

[robert_a._zeichner1]

I would suggest placing the darkest areas of the scene in which you

want to see distinct textural print detail in Zone III. After setting

your lens accordingly, I would then use a second reading of the

lightest area of the scene in which you want to render distinct

textural detail, to determine development. If it falls in Zone VII,

Normal. If it falls in Zone VIII, N-1. In IX, N-2. This will result

in a flatter negative than you currently have and will print easily for

you. I would highly recommend that you consider using Ilford

Multigrade IV paper. You can adjust your contrast with each negative

and "rescue" the occassional goof without investing in boxes of every

grade. Going this route will require some exposure compensation under

the enlarger if using contrast filters. I've been using an Aristo VCL

4500 light source on my enlarger for the last three years and this dual

grid system has eliminated the need for doing this. Good luck.

[john_henderson1]

Typically, the manufacturer recommended times are going to result in

negatives that are too contrasty. Regardless of the manufacturer.

This may be to achieve the contrast that is defined in the ISO

standard at which the film speed is measured. This contrast is

usually too much for most subjects. Cutting down development to

achieve a more useful contrast (Contrast index, gamma, or however you

want to measure it) also tends to lower the speed of the film. This

is why photographers (LF, in particular) rate the film at a lower

speed than the ISO rating.

 

<p>

 

I didn't completely understand the need for down-rating the speed

until reading <em>Beyond the Zone System.</em> It explains

<em>all</em> of this. Get it. Read it. Make a mess of it like I

did.

[scott_walton1]

To give yourself a longer developer time, finer grain use D76 1:1. As

others have stated, manufacturer times are a bit hot. There is a good

web site: www.digitaltruth.com for times of most developers but testing

is always a good thing to take in consideration your water (hard or

soft) and other variables. This is why alot of people use distilled

water...

[john_hicks]

Ilford's development recommendations are obviously too much for your SBR, enlarger and paper.

 

<p>

 

I'd suggest just using D-76 1:1 for the same time or, if that doesn't work, just go to 1:2 or 1:3.

[steve_singleton2]

Is the D2V a condensor enlarger? Apparently Kodak's development

recommendations are based on a diffusion light source which can handle

higher contrast negatives. Why the hell they don't say that in the

fine print is a mystery; maybe to encourage us to experiment with the

materials as much as possible. I too would suggest D-76 1:1 to get

longer, more repeatable times and start by reducing development time

by 20% or so if you print by condensor.

[doug_paramore]

Kodak does state in at least some of their info sheets that the

development times are for diffusion enlargers and times should be

reduced for condenser enlargers. I don't know about every BW film

they make, but the sheets for TXP Professional state this. I agree

with Steve that about a 20% reduction in time is a good starting

place. For condenser enlargers, increase the exposure and decrease

development. Think about getting a cold light head for that great old

Omega and forget about highlights blocking up.

 

<p>

 

Regards,

[triblett_lungre_thurd]

I'd agree... i'd leave the d76 time and temp where it is and cut it

1:1... see where that gets ya... if it is a condensor D2 like mine

know also that in a condensor, Ilfospeed g2 looks like a g3 paper...

or I should say, it does in mine. Same goes for kbrome g2... also, in

mine. Some g2 papers are less contrasty so keep lookin' or cut your

paper dev with some Selectol soft or other low contrast dev if you're

committed to that paper. Tweak it from all directions if you know

how... you'll soon find a combo that works.