Aperture and Exposure time

[Aryel]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello,

I was printing a fairly dense negative yesterday and after being very happy with my base print exposure, I realised that I could not dodge because it was not possible for me to see during exposure. 

i was exposing at f11 for 162 seconds (grade 4). Is there a way to compute the time when changing exposure. (F8, 81 seconds, f5.6 40.5)?

Thanks a lot!

Aryel

[Pyrogallol]

It should be the same as any other aperture and time relationship, double or half. Except that there may be some reciprocity factor in the paper for a very long exposure. Sometimes if I want to burn in a dense sky I might open up the aperture a couple of stops for the burn to reduce the time, but be careful not to move the lens when opening it up and not to over burn.

As far as seeing is concerned you need to let your eyes get used to the light, or lack of it. I find if I have been out of the darkroom and then gone back in it is easy to overexpose a print as my eyes have to get used to the darkroom light again and I can get the exposure wrong. A “normal” negative usually needs three stops down on the enlarger lens and one push of the timer button, which is permanently left on about eight seconds. A denser negative might need two pushes of the button and a thinner one an extra stop down. Durst 670 enlarger.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[M.Hilo]

Besides opening the lens one or even two stops, I would always make new tests and turn off any darkroom lights during the exposure. And I may use a stronger bulb, which in my case is a 250w opal lamp instead of my usual 150w bulb. (Condenser enlarger, Leitz Valoy II or one of the Focomats).

Dense negatives often need a different set up.

Finally, much depends on the size you print.

 

[Aryel]

Thanks a lot for the information @Pyrogallol, @M.Hilo. I won’t hesitate to try next time. 

This is the print in question : I was planning to try to dodge all the reflections in the water. Looking at it today, I quite like it as it is now. Feel more subtle than what I had in mind originally. 
 

I was unsure yesterday so decided to experiment and left it overnight in a selenium bath, really like the purple tint.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Pyrogallol]

Looks as if you like printing the whole negative right up to the edges, as I do.

The negative seems to be a bit uneven in density, at the top left, though looking at the bottom it seems even from side to side, so maybe hold back the top left and burn in the top right a bit more. Some dense negatives can show up unevenness especially if you have pushed the contrast up in the printing. It might be a bit difficult to bring out the reflections in the water, several test strips and wasted prints !

 

what camera, lens, film, developer?

Good luck.

Edited August 29, 2021 by Pyrogallol

[Aryel]

2 hours ago, Pyrogallol said:

what camera, lens, film, developer

It was an M3, 50 elmar (red scale), fp4+ developed in dd-x for 10 minutes. 

thanks a lot for the advice, next session I will open up the lens so that I can see the image while exposing and see what it looks like with when dodging. Brightening the left corner makes lot of sense too. 
 

Many thanks 😊  

[Aryel]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Big thank you for the suggestions. I am learning quite a few bits from this one. 

I ended up waiting 5-10 minutes in the dark and printing at f4 (nothing is sharp on the photo anyway). Dodged the main reflection and the top left corner then burned the top right part to bring it closer to the main tone (accidentally burned the bottom right a bit too 🤭).

quite happy with the new one, planning to try a tiny bit brighter and without burning the bottom right. 

Many thanks 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited August 30, 2021 by Aryel

[Pyrogallol]

Glad you like this print better. The reflections are easier to see now and there is a little more of the right hand edge of the negative showing. I like the way the negative “bleeds” off at the edges

[M.Hilo]

Without disagreeing with Pyrogallol's suggestions, I prefer the first print. To even out this image makes it less of the dream it is. I would simply print the first a bit darker and not mind losing some detail in the top left.

I also like better the black frame from the first print, the child coming from the 'open' . . .

[Aryel]

6 hours ago, M.Hilo said:

also like better the black frame from the first print, the child coming from the 'open'

This I fully agree, I love the way the racket is partly out of the photo even more with the border on the other side. Planning to reprint this way. 

i like the reflections better on the new one, maybe I will try a third version dodging the water but without evening it out and put the three side by side to decide. I am curious to see it now. 

the prints are actually fairly dark already, the scanner kind of brightens things up a bit. 

i am really thankful for the comments.