paul_hoyt

Are you asking about color compensating filters for color film, or are you using "black and white" contrast filters on color film? The FF on B&W contrast filters are for panchromatic B&W film; and the spectral characteristics of B&W film is different from color . They were not intended to be used on color positive or negative film. That doesn't mean you can't use them for artistic purposes. Checking the exposure with and without the filter on a hand held exposure meter will get you in the ballpark for the amount of light the filter is with holding. But the effect will be an overall hue of color you are shooting through, but I am sure you know that since it appears you have already done this.

You raise an interesting question. I was taught that the "filter factor" is applied to compensate for the loss of exposure due to the amount of light cut by the filter. It has been said that the factor should be increased or decreased depending upon the time of day [the Kelvin of the light] and the type of filter being used. Early morning and late afternoon tend to be less blue than mid day; you can decrease the FF with blue cutting filters.

Rodeo_Joe, Your logic reminds of the old math conundrum from the 1940's. Three men are traveling together and need to find a room in a small town. The only motel in town has 1 room left to rent. The clerk says that the room rents for $30.00 he can add a roll-a-way bed at no charge. Each man pays the clerk with a $10.00 bill. Later the manager comes in a tells the clerk he has overcharged the them for the room, it is only $25.00. He gives the clerk 5 $1.00 bills and tells him to return the cash to the gentlemen. The clerk realizes they cannot evenly divide the 5 dollars between them and pockets 2 dollars. He gives each man a dollar and leaves. Now, each man has paid $9.00 for the room; 3 times $9.00 is $27.00, plus the $2.00 in the clerks pocket equal $29.00. Where is the other dollar? By taking the $2.00 out context it appears a dollar is missing, when in reality all the money is accounted for. When the men paid $30.00, there was $30.00 in the office; 30 = 30. When the men paid $27.00, there was $25.00 in the office and $2.00 with the clerk; 27 = 25 +2. To understand the concept of the Zone system you have to have a few standards. If you take a piece of your photographic paper and expose it to room light for 5 second, develop in Dektol for 3 minutes, you will have a maximum black print. If you develop a piece of photographic paper without being exposed, you will have a maximum white print. There are infinite shades of gray between the two, and the gray of the 18% reflectance gray card by definition is middle gray. Adams defined this gray as Zone V print value. In the passages you quote from Book 2, he is discussing the naturalistic rendering of objects in various zones. The reflectance of average weathered wood may not reflect the same amount of light as the 18% reflectance gray card when measured side by side, but a naturalistic rendering of the wood to appear with the same tonal value of the gray card requires placing it on Zone V. I have never said a scene may contain highlights that exceed 100% reflectance. I have said that depending the quality of the light reflecting from the gray card, other objects in the scene can have reflective densities that fall on zones higher than Zone VII. Keep in mind, everything Adams discusses in Book 2 ultimately relates to print values; shades of gray. I don't think Adams would disagree with you when you pose the issue as measuring the gray card in direct sunlight and basing the exposure on that reflectance. The reflectance of the all the other objects in direct sunlight cannot exceed Zone VII. But if you place the gray card in the same scene in shade and base the exposure on that reflectance, you will exceed Zone VII. And when you drill down on the Zone System, his point is make sure when you expose the negative you have enough exposure in the shadows for the texture or detail you want in the print, and adjust the development of the negative to control where the other values fall.

Of course Zone 8 is 3 stops more than the brightness of an 18% gray card when placed on Zone 5, and Zone 9 is 4 stops, and Zone 10 is 5 stops; based upon the definition of "zones" they must be. Walk into a forest and place the gray card on the trunk of a tree and measure the brightness and place it on Zone 5. Then measure the brightness of the surrounding area "in sun" and calculate the zone difference. If you want the tree bark to have a Zone 5 density in the negative, you will probably need to reduce the development of the negative to control the high densities so they will not be "blocked", since they will exceed your 2 1/2 Zone maximum. I admit I have changed the "quality" of the light in this scenario [shade and full sun], but in many photographic situations by placing what you want to be on Zone 5 will have have other objects exceeding 2 1/2 stops. The tonality of the gray in the 18% reflectance gray card represents "middle gray" between the maximum black & maximum white of photographic paper. And as we all know, the card can have applications in trying to determine the exposure of a scene. Adams never said in his basic photo series what you claim in your post where you say "Ansel's maths must have been a bit rocky if he thought that 18% reflectance was 3 stops less than 100%".

I believe Adams said the amount of gray in an 18% reflectance gray card approximates the Zone V print value. If I place an 18% gray card on a white wall in direct sun and there is a 3 to 4 f/stop difference in meter readings between the gray card and the white wall, nobody is going to believe the wall is reflecting 144 to 288% of the light falling on it. And the Zone system is about how much light is striking the negative and controlling the negative densities to keep that texture in the low and high values. We are measuring the brightness of the light reflecting off objects, and "zones" don't double in % reflectance, but in brightness.

Well, I guess Adams was photographer, not a mathematician, and I am not sure how that has any bearing on the original question.

I have never cared for resin coated paper. I ended up using the only box I bought for negative proofs. I suggest you try a box of Ilford multigrade Classic FB. You have the color head that will provide the "variable color" for variable contrast paper. If you selenium tone your prints, this particular Ilford paper tones well at 1:10 dilution. Paul

David, Are you are referring to Erwin Schrodinger, or Ruben Bolling's Schrodinger's cat? Link: Tom the Dancing Bug on Twitter Nerds want to know!

Presently there are two on eBay for about than 1/2 that amount.

In one of Ansel Adams Basic Photo series he has a discussion on the Sinar Six Meter. It was in Book One of the one - five series of books before he published the Revised series that only consisted of Book 1, 2, 3. He had a fairly complete discussion and a few photographs of the meter placed behind the ground glass. Here is a link to the book on eBay, unfortunately it is signed and not priced for just reading. But this is the book with the Sinar discussion. SIGNED Ansel Adams Camera and Lens Basic Photo One Revised Fourth Print HC DJ | eBay

I believe De Vere makes an enlarger that projects a digital file for "silver" printing.

Grolsch beer bottles have a unique cap assembly that some photographers have found to be a good storage bottle.

One of Amsel's assistants, Alan Ross or John Sexton, said it was very liberating to go through the boxes of prints and see run-of-the-mill photographs. I think in the Eloquent Light Adams stated, 12 good negatives [or prints?] a year, is a good crop. Paul

I tone for permanence and a slight hint of purple. The dilutions are to control the immersion time to make sure the toning does not go "too fast", Oriental Seagull responds very quickly at 1+9; 2 minutes and is hard to control the desired effect. And I found Iflord MGIV toned too slowly at 1+9; 12 to 15 minutes. I use a two bath fix; "first" fix is after the "stop" bath and store the prints in a tray of water. At the end of the printing session, I rinse the print and do a "second" fix with the print going into a second holding tray of water. I rinse the prints individually with running water to remove most of the chemicals on the surface of the print and then they go into the selenium toner. From the toner they go into a washing aid, then running water rinse. The final wash is in a archival washer. I hope this helps.

To me contemplative equates to serene and Leslie's image "fills the bill", as do most of the images . Fred G's image wakes me up, I like it, but it is far from serene, it is powerful.

I found the Selenium Toner had a shorter "shelf life" when mixed with washing aids like Perma Wash. Selenium Toner would last diluted much longer when it was just diluted with water. I would store and reuse my diluted toner until it failed to tone my prints. Different papers respond very differently to Selenium toner. Ilford MGIV required a 1+4 dilution, Ilford Classic toned at 1+9, Oriental Seagull required a 1+19 dilution; all fiber based paper. I decided on the various dilutions to keep my toning times to more than 5 minutes but less than 10 minutes.

The Ferrante system required the condensers. When using the Zone VI or Aristo cold light, the housing is as close to the negative as possible; the lamp housing bellows is collapsed completely. The Aristo or Zone VI lamp that fits the Beseler or Omega 4X5 enlarger is the same unit; the Beseler needs a special collar. The condensers are replaced by the Beseler collar and the lamp housing sits into the collar. And notice the seller does not indicate which lamp this is; Hi Intensity, balanced for variable contrast, graded papers. The Zone VI Stabilizer requires the "photo cell" in the lamp housing to read the intensity of the lamp. The photo cell plugs into the stabilizer; the stabilizer sits between the enlarger and your timer. From the picture on ebay, it appears the cold light is in the Omega housing. It should lift out; ask the seller if it separates or is a permanently sealed unit. You are aware it is too big for the Beseler 23C? Paul

Hi Vincent, A "cold light head" uses a cathode ray tube, or tubes in a variable contrast housings; cathode ray tube, think neon lights, fluorescent lights. I don't believe the Beseler color head uses cathode ray tubes. The color heads have protocols for mixing the intensity of the blue and green filters for B&W variable contrast papers. Graded papers respond to the blue spectrum only. I am not sure what light you would get with both green and blue set to zero. Either the lamp housing is a "cold light source" or it is not, regardless of filter settings. Don't confuse "diffusion" printing with "cold light" printing. An incandescent bulb can be the illumination source of a diffusion printing system.

I have had both the Beseler MX series enlarger and the Zone VI Series II enlarger w/variable contrast head. Originally the Beseler had the Aristo cold light retro fitted with the photo cell and the Zone VI stabilizer, and the Series II enlarger had the compensating timer. I often wondered how the compensating timer could compensate for the fluctuations of the 2 grid system. The light output might vary, but the timer would not know which tube (color) was fluctuating. I will admit the Zone VI enlarger was easy to work with, but the light was not as bright as I would have liked. I did speak with a photographer that had acquired one of the few LED Zone VI heads that Calumet sold for the Series II Enlarger. He said the light output was very low and exposures were long for 16X20 prints from his 4X5 negatives. I found using the Beseler setup with variable contrast filters and the stabilizer gave me the printing speed and control over the light output that satisfied me. Then one day I saw an ad in my Craigslist for a Ferrante Variable Contrast Lamp for a Beseler MX series enlarger. I bought it and I found that even though it is a cold cathode ray two grid system [actually 3 grids, but that is another story], the light output is very stable. I printed for years with that system and made some of my best prints. It is a diffusion head that uses the Beseler condensers; I suppose that would be the best of both worlds for Alan. I have never used a color head for variable contrast printing. I do know they have a mixing chamber and the light exits through a diffusion disk. I believe the lamps are "hot", and the fans are necessary to cool the housing. I would assume there might be an issue with negative buckling, but I am sure there is somebody here who can definitively answer that question. Paul

Your best bet for Cold Light Heads are Aristo and Zone VI. Both are no longer in production, but are usually available on Craigslist or Ebay. If you happen to see the Zone VI head, the last version had a sensor in the head that attached to the Zone VI stabilizer. The unit works without the stabilizer, but if you find one with the stabilizer, BUY IT. Not only does it stabilize the lamp output, but has a "dry down" rheostat when making the final print. You do have to buy the head specifically for your enlarger. There are posts in PN about replacement lamps from the company that bought Aristo; Voltarc (LCD Lighting); Louise Kessler is/was the contact. The Zone VI and Aristo lamps are so similar the lamps are interchangeable. Also, most of the time there is no mention of the type of lamp in the housing on the auction sites. V54 lamps were made with spectral output for variable contrast papers. Years ago when I was buying up cold light lamps and stabilizers when they were "dirt cheap", I ended up with three different lamps; High intensity for graded papers, normal for graded paper, and V54 for variable contrast paper. None of the sellers discussed the which "lamp" they were selling.

Sort of an answer, if you Google Rotating Optical Illusions, you will se objects that appear to rotate, but they are not. It is the close juxtaposition of the light and dark ripples, very similar to the rotating gears, that trick the eye.

Your enlarging time for a Beseler 23C is far too short; something is not right. I assume you have the head at the proper setting for your negative size? One way to get the enlarger farther away from the paper is to use a longer than "normal" enlarging lens. 6X6 negatives should use an 80mm lens, a 105mm enlarging lens will move the head farther away from the paper and slow down the exposure. But when I used to enlarge 6X6 negatives on a 23C [80mm lens] my times were 20 to 40 seconds at f/11 to f/16.

I made my own using 3/4" no voids plywood 18X22; I never printed larger than 16X20. I glued a thin piece of metal over the top of plywood, and attached two aluminum L brackets to two edges of the plywood making a 90 degree right angle. The L brackets [top and one side] over hung the top of the easel about 3/8" and were raised just above the metal top. My paper could slide under the L Brackets [not too much play] and Al-Ni-Co magnets held the other two sides. This would work for any size print up to 16X20. When making test strips, a series of magnets could be placed on the edges of the paper to indicate each increasing exposure strip. I painted the metal top "middle gray" to keep any reflections at a minimum.

I suggest you start by placing a small sauce pan lid on a piece of your 8X10 enlarging paper, turn on the white lights, wait a few seconds, turn off the white lights, develop the enlarging paper for your normal developing time. You should have a circle of unexposed paper [pure white] and the rest is completely exposed and completely developed to maximum black. This will show you the maximum range of your paper and chemistry. If your black seems weak, do it again but increase your developing time by 30 seconds. I find that 3 minutes for fiber based paper in a developer like Dektol [Diluted 1+3] will have completely developed all the exposed silver. If your blacks are still weak, it might be your paper or developer combination.