Collin Brendemuehl wrote: > Nothing below 3? Hmmm. >
Not totally true - if it was a really great neg - 2 1/2 did it for me. But I like contrasty stuff. > I'm finding grade 2 with a saturated neg to have a nice quantity of highlight > detail. Of course having a color head makes things really straight-forward. I don't have a color head.... > But it depends on the film as well as the subject being printed. Sure. I don't like too much contrast on my face... :) > That pic I posted of the young lady a few weeks ago -- that was a normal > exposure on the film side, normal development, but printing just a bit more > than grade 3. > http://members.safe-t.net/dpconsult/ashley.jpg > I did a grade 2 print as well. In that she's less distinct from the > background but has more detail in the skin tones. The '3' print on the web > did require some burning in for the face. > > Sincerely, > > C. Brendemuehl oooh a bit too much white in her eye on my monitor... really can't get into subtle printing discussions without seeing live prints, of course. bEst, ann > > > ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- > >Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 13:30:05 -0500 > >From: Ann Sanfedele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Subject: Re: Hey you b and w darkroom guys - help! > >Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > > >thanks, Colin > >This is kinda what I wanted to know... I never liked D-76 for my own stuff > >and would > >have considered less contrast as the developer aged to be a negative (no > >pun) rather than > >a positive (I printed almost nothing lower than "3" in my dark room days) > > > >I just never used Universal for anything but prints. > >I love Microdol-x 1:3 for Tri-x but the woman I'm teaching got talked out of > >getting it by a storekeep when she told him she thought I had told here to > >get it for prints > >(for one thing) He didn't have any, so he didn't want to sim,ply correct her > >- and she didn't > >think to call me on cell phone while she was in the store.. > >i'm trekking out to Long Island tomorrow to give her private lessons. > > > >Hurray for craigslist! I need the gig! > > > >ann > > > > > > > > > >Collin Brendemuehl wrote: > > > >> B&W has gone through so many stylistic changes in the past > >> few years, it's amazing. Many people I read on NGs shoot an > >> extra 1/3 to 1/2 stop of extra saturation and then develop > >> normally. (Personally, I shoot most b&w by the book but add > >> about 5% extra time to the processing to bring out the > >> highlight detail a bit more.) > >> > >> Isn't Ilford Universal their ID-11, very similar to or the same as D-76? > >> If so, that class of developer has an interesting characteristic that you > >> might make good use of. Let it have a day of a little air exposure and > >> turn a little dark. This will keep contrast under control and give some > >> smoother tones to Tri-X. > >> > >> But apart from that experiment, just develop normally for a good neg. > >> Tri-X is very forgiving of a few seconds either way. > >> > >> Sincerely, > >> > >> C. Brendemuehl > >> > >> ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- > >> >Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 12:03:11 -0500 > >> >From: Ann Sanfedele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> >To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> >Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > >> >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > >> > > >> >I'm about to give a woman lessons in film > >> >developing -- > >> >she acquired Ilford Universal developer - she shot > >> >tri-x > >> >I'm a Microdol 1:3 gal (ot chemicals in stock > >> >chez moi now) > >> > > >> >(nevermind why we aren't using that for the lesson > >> >- long story) > >> > > >> >Anyway, anyone have preferences for developing > >> >times and dilutions for > >> >Tri-X ? Using the Ilford Universal? > >> > > >> >Would prefer personal experience as opposed to a > >> >link on the web. > >> > > >> >Thanks much! > >> >annsan > >> > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________ > Sent via the WebMail system at mail.safe-t.net > > >
