# the long awaited moment



## journeyman (Aug 3, 2006)

Well the darkroom is finally complete and I just spent a couple hours mixing all the chemicals and finding containers to put them in. 

I just rolled my beloved first roll on to a spool. (I took it back in June and refused to do anything with it until I could develop it myself. 

The rolling job was atrocious but I'm hoping with every fiber it turns out okay.  Wish me luck just got to wait for the chemicals to cool down.


----------



## journeyman (Aug 3, 2006)

Well the negatives are drying now. I can overall say I'm pretty happy with the results. There were two marks in the film where my fingers touched and I expected that. However, a lot of the images came out over exposed to the point where the image is all black. That is a little disappointing but I'll move on. Over all I have eight working images. Not sure what the quality will be when printed but I expect good things. 

I have no contrast filter in my own darkroom so I'll pretty much work with what I have. I'll post the pictures whenever I get them printed and scanned in.

They will be the first pictures I share on the site.


----------



## Torus34 (Aug 3, 2006)

A hearty welcome to the world of B&W, Mate!


----------



## mysteryscribe (Aug 3, 2006)

Congradulations you have joined a select few who walk in the footsteps of the pioneers of this craft.  The number will shrink even farther in the future, but hopefull at least a handful will keep learning how it is really done.

If you even need any help there are many here more qualified than I.  I am always available to commiserate, since I have made about every mistake imaginable.


----------



## terri (Aug 3, 2006)

More and more people are falling "back" in love with the joys of developing their own film and prints all the time. You're in good company! :thumbup: 

I've spent the happiest and also some of my most annoyed moments in my darkroom. Not one week ago, I came out of there after a particularly successful printing session, complete with "a-HA!" moments, and thought I had the world by the tail. 

Yesterday I rediscovered an old friend: my trash can.  Pathetic! Everything I did was crap. 

But you can't appreciate the former without having suffered through the latter. Be prepared for both!


----------



## Philip Weir (Aug 3, 2006)

mysteryscribe said:
			
		

> Congradulations you have joined a select few who walk in the footsteps of the pioneers of this craft.  The number will shrink even farther in the future, but hopefull at least a handful will keep learning how it is really done.
> 
> CONGRATULATIONS Journeyman, I must join "mysteryscribe" in his comments. I started in about 1958 in the darkroom, and spent many thousands [literally] of hours doing black & white printing and film processing.  probably or without a doubt the best working days of my life.
> A craft almost long gone.  All my work is now digital, but I do miss the old ways. Don't ever forget to contact me for any advice, I will be priviliged to help if I can.  Philip.
> ...


----------



## journeyman (Aug 3, 2006)

Thank you for the reassurance and praise.  All the reasons you all have stated is why I prosue photography in this way.

I printed my first picture today and was disapponited with the outcome.  But at the same time happy to have a benchmark to move on from.

Here is the picture I developed:







Now the issues I want to address and fix are:
                    Poor acutance
                    No pop to the picture (making the blacks blacker and Whites whiter)
                    Bad contrast
                    Why does it look old 

any advice you have on these things would help greatly.


----------



## Philip Weir (Aug 3, 2006)

If I may comment, tongue in cheek. you initially mention you shot the film in June. Was that June 1836 ?? 
Your next post said some exposures were black. Probably a good starting point is getting the negative exposure correct. Are you using an exposure meter ?? If not, let me know, and I can explain how to a pretty good exposure outside without a meter.
Next, what chemistry are you using for both your film and your printing and how do you calculate your time & temperature.
You can buy filters to put in front of your enlarger lens to adjust your contrast, which will help you enormously.
Finally, I think you have discovered a way to make images look ancient.
Congratulations...We learn by our mistakes.  Philip.


----------



## journeyman (Aug 4, 2006)

I took this film back in june and kept it in the refrigerator in an airtight container until a few hours before I developed it. 

I used a light meter and made some adjustments for the difference in asa and because I wanted to adjust for the dark portions of the shot. I then bracketed the shots just in case I made a mistake. (Which is proably the case)  I know the rules for shooting without a light meter as well I've been shooting for years without one.

For film I use acufine (which was recomended ) I then used a kodak stop, fix, and clear.  For the prints I used Dektol with the kodak stop, and fix.  Times and tempetures I used the recomened one on the products.

I said before I don't have contrast filters at the moment so I'm aware of their exsistance and what benifits they provide for printing.

I'm a big believer in we learn from our mistakes that's why I posted the picture to get feedback on what I did wrong.  Hopefully I can figure out what to do for next time.


----------



## mysteryscribe (Aug 4, 2006)

phillip is infinitely more qualified than me but I would like to see the negative.  Is there any way you can scan the negative for us.  If you put it on the scanner glass and scan it with the lid open we might be able to see some of it.  

What format was the negative, and what camera did you use for it.

Is your darkroom really completely dark.

If you lay the negative on a newspaper can you read the print through a large portion of it.  

Okay amature sloothing done for this post.


----------



## JamesD (Aug 4, 2006)

Try lightening your print exposure by a stop, maybe 1.5 or 2.  Also, try a longer wash time, as there appears to be a bit of staining.  As for the scratches and dust, you'll have to bear with them, unless you want to try your hand at quite a bit of retouching.  You can try to remove some dust with an air compressor, or canned air, and a very soft brush... I think camel-hair are the ones usually recommended.  I've also rinsed negatives before to remove large amounts of dust, especially when it was stuck to the emulsion.  If you aren't already, try hanging your negatives to dry in a tiled bathroom, with the door closed, and the exhaust fan (if there is one) on.  Leave any windows closed.  I generally dry mine in the shower, with the curtain closed.  When they're dry, cut them in the same room, and immediately transfer them to negative sleeves.

Good luck!


----------



## journeyman (Aug 4, 2006)

okay scanned the negative doesn't really show much as far as problem solving.  The picture was taken on a 35mm slr.  It's a Oylmpus OM-1n from the 70's.  

Darkroom is completly dark I'm gonna try cleaning up the negative a lot and then printing it again we'll see what happens.


----------



## journeyman (Aug 4, 2006)

http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n199/journeyman88/Untitled-2copy.jpg


----------



## mysteryscribe (Aug 4, 2006)

The negative tells somethings even in the state of the scan.  I has black and white and appears to be reasonably contrasty.  I would guess that it isnt in the negative or exposure of it, but rather in the print exposure.

Try this.. 

lay a bit of black paper over your print easle.  Start an exposure you think is about one or two stops over exposed.l then pull the black cover back a little at a time.  You will get stripes at differnt exposures.  keep a mental clock of the interval between movements.  When you get finished find the best one when viewed in regular room light  Then go back and shoot a full pic of it.  If it still looks right in daylight.  Hang it in your dark room as a guide.  Prints always look darker in the darkroom.  So you i need a go by...


----------



## journeyman (Aug 4, 2006)

I think your talking about test strips.  I do one everytime before I develop a picture. 

I printed it again after cleaning up the negative. WHich helped a lot.  I also went with a much shorter exposure time. At a lower appeture.  The results were better but it still has a very old look to it.


----------



## journeyman (Aug 4, 2006)

So I had some time before work so I decided to test something.  I took an old negative of mine (from around april may proably) and printed it.

It came out very nicely so now I have narrowed down what could be wrong to this list:

1.Negatives (something wrong with the roll)

2.Film developer (the old negative was developed in D-76)

3.Paper (I have a fiber based 8x10 that the old picture was printed on this one was printed on 5x7 resin coated paper)

Now with some more expiermenting maybe i can figure out the problem.
(I will post that other picture in a little while)


----------



## mysteryscribe (Aug 4, 2006)

sounds like you have it pretty well in hand.  I think you have a grasp of what you are doing much more than I did the first time I printed a picture.  Let me know what you figure out Im curious.


----------



## journeyman (Aug 5, 2006)

Thanks for the vote of confidence mysteryscribe and show that i acutally can make a decent picture in the dark room here the other one.

http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n199/journeyman88/hillwithclouds.jpg

Also can anyone tell me the difference between resin coated and fiber based paper as for a working with them.  All I know is the rc has a resin coat on each side (hence name) and it take less time to develop rc and wash it as well.


----------



## mysteryscribe (Aug 5, 2006)

I took a look at both your images in my editor.   The first thing that struck me was that they weren't scanned in black and white.  Once I converted them they both got much better.  Then as you said adding come contrast did wonders for them.

I  think you have a good handle on it.  Some of what I see I'm sure is because it is a scan not the real print.  I would guess that they are much much better as prints.  But you were right the second one is much better.

You do lose a lot of detail when you scan anything.   Keep on keepin on you are doing just fine.


----------

