First time printing with a cold light & I'm having trouble

[matt miller cambridge, ia]

I've previously only printed at the community darkroom with an Omega

B something with condenser head and a Saunders with a color head. I

could only make contact prints from the 4x5 negs because they didn't

have a 4x5 enlarger. I am fairly new to B&W. I am using Tri-X &

HC110 dilution B in a Unicolor drum. I recently purchased an Omega

DII, so that I can print at home. It came with the condenser head.

I purchased an Aristo cold light head with the �high intensity�

light.

 

The contact prints I made at the community darkroom turned out

great. Good tonality & contrast. I used the DII with the cold

light for the first time at home tonight. The contact prints I made

are very contrasty with the highlights blocking up nasty. I�m using

the same paper & developer that I used with the other enlargers.

These are different negs, but my exposure habits are consistent and

the negs appear to have the same density as the ones that I printed

at the community darkroom.

 

The print times with the cold light head were very quick too. When

I stopped all the way down to F32, I got times around 10 seconds.

 

Do cold lights need negs with low contrast and high density? What

could be wrong here, I can�t figure it out. I want to make some

bigger prints, but I don�t want to waste the paper until I figure

this out.

[jnanian]

hi matt:

 

others may correct me on this, but usually they say that cold light negatives need to

be over processed by 30-50% ( this used to be stated on the aristo installation

instructions). try to over process your film, and i am sure your prints will look great

...

 

i had the same problems as you have been having for a while, until i changed my

processing, now things are much better. i also got a dimmer from aristo, it makes

printing smaller images a little easier :)

 

good luck!

 

- john

[neil_poulsen1]

I had the same experience. I even went to the extent of adapting a D2V condenser head to my older version of the Zone VI enlarger. But, I did my calibrations assuming a diffusion head versus a condenser head. (Result was increased development times.)

 

Since that time, I've used my diffusion head exclusively.

[donald_miller1]

Hi Matt, I assume that you are printing with variable contrast paper. If so be sure that you have the aristo cold light designed for use with variable contrast papers. (They have two cold lights with differing spectral outputs). In regard to your question on the negatives contrast for use with a cold light, cold light heads need a negative with a greater contrast then those that would be printed on a condensor head. If you have access to a lab that has a densitometer, your maximum density should be around 1.20-1.30 above film base plus fog. (that would be subtracting out the density of processed by unexposed film). Most labs will make measurements for you if you enquire. A negative for printing with a condensor light source would have a peak net density of appr. 1.10- 1.15. Hope this helps you.

[wieslaw1]

Matt, how large are your prints? If small, than of course the light intensity might be too high. To lower it, place a 0.5 - 1 inch spacer between the cold light and the negative holder. The intensity decreases very fast if that distance is increased.

 

It is true that DENSE negatives are easier to print with a cold light than with a condenser light, but I would advise against overprocessing, especially as much as 30 to 50%. You can print any negatives, also thin ones, with the CL. If, on the other hand, you overprocess your negatives, you will have a hard time to print them with a condenser. As you become more experienced, you will decide what is best for you.

 

Do not worry about special CL head with 2 light sources for variable contrast paper. Any CL will work with contrast filters, though your printing time will be a function of a filter.

 

Do not compare different contact prints made in two different locations, because it makes no sense. Something must be common for a meaningful comparison.

[alec1]

Wieslaw, I agree with you about the processing, but not with increasing the distance between the negative and head. For one thing, did you catch the fact he's still just making contacts? I'm thinking its: (a) reaction of VC paper to CL light source, and/or (b) he's using the head the same distance above the contact that he did with the condensor enlarger he used before.

 

Matt, for contacts, [you are putting the negative directly on top of the paper aren't you?] all you need do to reduce the light intensity is raise the head higher - much higher. If that doesn't completely solve your issue [and I bet it won't], you must use the correct (?) VC filter. That's not easy to determine from the info you've given. Keep in mind the quality of CL heads affects VC paper differently. If you have an older CL bulb, then, with VC paper, to get #2 paper to act like #2 paper, w/o VC filters , you need to modify the light by insertion of a CP40Y (yellow) filter placed on top of the difuser just under the bulb. Then your VC paper will print as normal. You can experiment with other VC filters, either 6" filters cut and fitted next to the yellow filter above the negative, or normal VC filters used below the enlarger lens, to change the contrast.

 

Lots of issues there. Hope that helps.

[alec1]

Matt: let me clarify my previous response.

 

My response about NOT putting a spacer in, is correct - the CL should be as close to the negative as possible.

 

Assuming your problem is with contact printing, raising the whole head way up should mostly solve that and give you longer times. I'm assuming your phrase "exposure habits" refers to setup, as well as times. Unless that "high intensity" bulb is VC corrected [some Aristo bulbs are - some aren't - you can ask Aristo if you don't know - from your descrption, I suspect it isn't] my description about "correcting" the light with the CP40Y filter is right too, for either contacts or enlarging. But, what I meant to say is that filter will just get your VC paper to act as it did at your earlier darkroom without any filter. Your VC filters should then give you approximately the same results you got using them at that darkroom.

 

Once you start making enlargements, your exposure times will naturally be increased because of the raised head. Hope that helps.

[ken_schroeder]

Matt, don't get discouraged. You will be soon printing again. The high intensity cold light is probably, like mine, designed for graded papers. It works very well for them. It can be easily adapted for variable papers. I recommend you buy a copy of Steve Anchell's Variable Contrast Manual. It discusses using cold light with VC paper.

 

The lamp without filtration produces a very high contrast image. I have used a 40cc yellow filter placed above the diffuser glass. That works okay, however, I am in the process of changing to a 30cc green filter instead, which Anchell believes will work better.

 

I have standardized on an enlarger height for all my contact printing. I measured this morning. The negative carrier is 38 inches from the baseboard. I use the 150mm lens and the 40ccy filter in place and VC filters below the lens. I also have a Zone VI stabilizer which allows me to lessen the light intensity. That's nice to have, but not essential. The filters do a fine job of slowing down the light source.

 

Keep working with your enlarger and cold light. You will soon be making good prints with it.

[brian_ellis3]

I don't understand why you're doing what it sounds like you're doing. You say "I used the DII with the cold light for the first time at home tonight. The contact prints I made are very contrasty . . . " You mean you're using your enlarger to make contact prints? Why? There could be lots of reasons why your community dark room contact prints worked fine but your home contact prints are too contrasty and take almost no time to make - the light sources are almost certainly different intensities, you may have the head closer to the paper at home than you did in the darkroom, you may have the Aristo head set up incorrectly (did you remove the condensers from your home enlargers?), the color head you were using had color filters in it and who knows what setting they were on and in any event filters in a color enlarger are differnt from the filters used for black and white printing (though you don't tell us whether you're using filters or not), you presumably are using a different lens which doesn't mean much since the lens performs no function with contact prints except to block light but it is another equipment difference, etc. etc.

 

I wouldn't get too carried away with trying to compare what you did in the community darkroom with what you're doing at home, there probably are a lot of differences involved in the equipment and how you're using it. I've mentioned just a few of the possibilities here. I'd forget about what you did in the community darkroom and start using your enlarger for what it was designed to do, i.e. make enlargements, and see how it performs. How it compares to your community darkroom contact prints really isn't terribly important or relevant to anything.

[matt miller cambridge, ia]

Thanks for the answers�

 

Overprocess the negs? Won�t this give the negs more contrast and make my highlights block up even more?

 

The dimmer sounds like a great idea for smaller prints, I�ll check into that right away.

 

The cold light I have is a brand new Aristo �D2HI High Intensity Cold Light Head with V54 Lamp�. From what I�ve read here, the V54 lamp is supposed to be color corrected for easier printing with VC papers, though it is not the VC lamp (way too expensive). I�ve sent off an email to Aristo to find out for sure though.

 

I�m making contacts with an 8x10 piece of ¼� glass. The enlarger head is just high enough to cover the 8x10 glass with light, like I�ve always done.

 

�You mean you're using your enlarger to make contact prints? Why?� How else should I make contact prints?

 

After I hear back from Aristo, I�ll try the appropriate filter & raise the head to try & lengthen my exposure time.

[scott_walton2]

Brian pretty much beat me to the punch line. There are alot of variables and

even more with a community darkroom!!!!! Printing with a cold light is going to

be different. I to have the same setup as you except for the high output head. I

have been toying with the idea of getting it because I used to use one at a job

I had and loved the extra speed! Get a set of Ilford contrast filters and slip in

the 1, 0 or the 00 (one at a time) and give it another try. This will effectively

lower your speed by about a good stop, whether you do it by f stops or speed

is your decision. I started using the 40ccY but quickly got rid of it because of

the light loss. I tailor my negatives to the system and a good part of the time

print without filters because the head usually prints at a 2.5 - 3 effective

contrast.

By the way, what developer are you using? This could be part of the contrast

also. I love LPD and have used it for years after doing alot of tests over the

years. 10 seconds is a good amount of time to print/dodge/burn an 8x10.

Actually, that amount of time gives me enough time to sip my coffee, rub my

belly and generally scatch my head for lack of other things to do while I'm

waiting :)

 

My general times are around 3-5 seconds and by having all my tools ay hand,

you can do what you need very quickly.

 

A slightly higher density neg is good for printing but by using the 00 filter, your

printing times will be slower. All you need is a well exposed negative with

shadow detail and fine tuned highlights to make some absolutely stunning

prints! They will have a glow (luminosity) that printing with condensors or

even color heads won't match. You will quickly get better at printing and your

starting 10 seconds will feel like a day! Don't worry about making larger

prints. When you raise your enlarge up to an 11x14, your time sort of doubles,

open up one stop and your pretty much still at 10 seconds. A 16x20 is the

same thing +- a second or two. Try the Ilford filters and as you go, you will start

developing for "your" system now that you have illeviated alot of the problems

you had having to deal with other peoples mistakes as far as developers/

contaminations and all the other headaches that go along with community

darkrooms! Turn up the music and have fun!

[matt miller cambridge, ia]

By the way, I'm currently using Ilford multigrade RC paper (pearl) & Dektol. If the Dektol temp was too high, could that be part of the excessive contrast problem?

[scott_walton2]

Yes Matt, as far as temp is concerned and a few more things, Dektol can be a

bit contrasty but with the contrast filters (Ilford) you should be fine. For me

Dektol doesn't last and that is why I use LPD. I do use the 6" Ilford filters right

on the negative carrier but I think you have the option of under lens filters too.

[matt miller cambridge, ia]

I heard back from Aristo. I asked them "I recently purchased a "D2HI High Intensity Cold Light Head with V54 Lamp" for my Omega DII enlarger. Is this light designed to be used with VC papers? Or do I need to filter the light?"

 

Rick Mehta responded "You do not need any filters. I hope you are making negatives suitable for Cold light."

[richard_ritter]

Matt

First run a Zone I test to make sure you are using the proper ASA for your film. Them run a development time test for the paper and your enlarge you are using. These tests can be found in the �Zone VI Workshop Book�. These two tests will get you into the ballpark for you enlarge. Cold lights can handle denser negatives and give better tonal separation in the high values. If you are using VC paper the best thing to do is get a color correction kit and take the yellow filter out and use then to change the contrast. IE a 40cc yellow will yield about a grade 2 ½ and 80cc will get you down to grade 1. No filter grade 4.

 

Negatives that print on grade 2 paper with a condenser head will print on a grade 3 � 4 with a cold head.

[cruiserparts]

>cold light negatives need to be over processed by 30-50%

 

I second, or third, the advice about not doing this. You'll be fighting every negative you

try to print. I have processed tmx,y, and z, and hp5+ according to the book (with minor

changes after I had tested my neg, dev, paper combo) and been able to print them just fine

on my cold light enlarger. Granted, it's 20 years old, but I don't think overprocessing by

2 or three stops is the way to go. I'd bet your problem is elsewhere.

[steve_singleton3]

If Matt's prints are too contrasty now, why in the world would he want to increase contrast by extending development? Most standard development times, as given by manufacturers, are standardized for diffusion enlargers. Using condensers, you'd need to cut back 15-20% to get in the vicinity of #2 contrast. If you didn't make that adjustment for the condensers before, you shouldn't have to do so now. To get the new setup dialed in, why not use the previously successful contact prints as a reference and the same negs until the results are in the ballpark. That way you've eliminated negative development as a variable. To see if filtration is an issue with the VC paper (my guess), you could always buy a small package of #2 graded--but you're going to need filters anyway. Once you're producing OK contact sheets, then you can start refining film speeds and development times to fine tune.

[wieslaw1]

Alec - �did I catch the fact he's still just making contacts?� - if so then the question is trivial. I might as well post a threat to the effect of �how to turn a light in a room�.

[alec1]

Geeze, Wieslaw, ease up. I didn't think it was disrespectful, especially since you obviously didn't read his posting correctly [otherwise, why ask how big his (contact) prints are?]. It wasn't a personal attack.

[george_nedleman]

Why don't we all back up a minute.

1)An Aristo light with a v-54 bulb needs filters.

2) If in your opinion and others who may see your negs, do they look "Normal" -good shadow detail and non-overblown highlights-

3) Buy a density step wedge And expose it under all the filters so you have at least 2 blank white steps. Then count the number of steps (@.1 intervals)to total black. I can't think of the numbers but there is an accepted density range for numbered papers. Match what density range you get for each filter and compare it to the accepted values ie for my V-54 Arista a #2filter is the equivalent to about #3 graded paper.

[jnanian]

matt:

 

when rick from aristo said " you do not need filters" he meant that you do not need a

40cc filter to allow you to use multi contrast filters/vc papers. the older ariso w45

phosphor and the olde omegalite did not emit a light that worked as well as the v54

phosphor. the omegalite needed a yellow filter to work "better" ... and every once in a

while i see someone on ebay selling a bluish/greenish/yellowish filter that

supposedly makes the w45 cold light heads more like a v54 ...

 

sorry i mispoke before. the installation instructions for the cold light heads aristo

sells suggest that negatives will be better suited for a cold light head if

development times (as compared with condenser) are increased by 20-30%, NOT 30-

50% ..

i have printed with a condenser for 20 years with no problems - thin negatives or

dense negatives alike. when i tried to print thinner negatives with the cold light head,

it didn't like it too much.

 

good luck with your printing!

 

- john

[wieslaw1]

It is all right Alec.

 

I just reflected - I learned contact printing when I was 6 or 8 years old under bathroom lighting. The process is a trivial one. This discussion shows that in the 3-rd Millennium one needs a professional adviser on how to turn the light on, in addition to a psychologist, a lawyer, a financial adviser, a beautician, dietitian, etc. It is ridiculous!

[neil_poulsen1]

There's something curious about your post. Consider the following three statements:

 

1] The contact prints I made at the community darkroom turned out great. Good tonality & contrast. I used the DII with the cold light for the first time at home tonight.

 

2] The contact prints I made are very contrasty with the highlights blocking up nasty.

 

3] These are different negs.

 

What's curious is that, for the same negatives, the diffusion head will print at LESS contrast than the condenser head. This is at odds with the first two statements. But, the third statement clears this up. It appears that the negatives you printed at the community darkroom are not comparable with those printed with your new diffusion head. The negatives printed at the community darkroom were probably taken in a less contrasty scene than those printed on your new diffusion head.

 

The reason some people recommend that you increase your development time is because of what was stated above, that for the same negatives, diffusion heads will print at less contrast.

 

To get excellent results with black and white, you need to vary the negative development time for different types of scenes that you are photographing. Ansel Adam's (also Fred Archer's) zone system is the most exacting way of doing this. If you decide to do this, in your testing, you will typically find that your tested ASA will be about half the recommended ASA. At what ASA are you photographing for the TriX film that you are using, and what is the recommended ASA?

 

You are serious about your black and white photography; otherwise, you wouldn't go to the trouble of setting up a home darkroom. Consider learning about and using the Zone system, and your problems will begin to fade. Once mastered, you will be very pleased with the results that you obtain.

[wieslaw1]

More crap about the zone system! C'mmon, Neil, do not complicate simple things!

[jorge_gasteazoro4]

<i>More crap about the zone system! C'mmon, Neil, do not complicate simple things!</i><p>

Actually if you want to learn testing and developing correctly you should try the BTZS (Beyond the zone system). After using the zone system for 28 years I gave the BTZS a serious try since Dick Arentz recommended it for pt/ pd printing. The concept is very simple, you test your paper range to see what it can accommodate and then you tailor your negatives for that paper. So far out of 15 exposures I have done, 14 have been perfect, and the other one was my fault (new at the system!).

I wish I had not been pig headed and had given the BTZS a serious chance before. It would have saved me countless negatives and many hours of testing the in the "traditional" way.