Effect of printing without a multi contrast filter in the enlarger?

[RichyX]

I recently made my first attempt at B+W printing in a darkroom.

It's possible that I neglected to put a multi contrast filter in the enlarger.
The highlights look blown out on the contact sheet I produced.

Obviously there are many other factors that could have caused the blown highlights, but could not using a multi contrast filter have contributed?

[Nesster]

AFAIR, multi contrast paper without a filter defaults to a '2' grade.
Try a shorter exposure time for the contact sheet.
Inserting the filter would have a similar effect - i.e. one would cut the light and therefore the exposure.

[Wheatfield]

If your enlarger uses a tungsten filament bulb, printing without a multicontrast filter in place will give you ~ a grade 2 contrast.
Blown highlights are either over exposure or over development, presuming you are exposing the paper for long enough.

[Wheatfield]

Originally Posted by Nesster

AFAIR, multi contrast paper without a filter defaults to a '2' grade.
Try a shorter exposure time for the contact sheet.
Inserting the filter would have a similar effect - i.e. one would cut the light and therefore the exposure.

A shorter exposure time under the enlarger is going to blow the highlights even more. He needs more exposure not less, presuming his negatives aren't the problem.

Richy, do this:
Set your enlarger height so that the projected light covers an 8x10 sheet.
Take an unexposed but normally developed negative (a piece of the leader is good) and put a scratch onto the emulsion.
Put that into your enlarger and focus on the scratch.
You may need to readjust the enlarger height and refocus.
Once you've done this, mark the height of the enlarger head, as that has just become your standard height for making contact sheets.
Use a grade 2 1/2 filter.
Under safelight, put a sheet of paper into your contact frame and make a test print. Stop the lens down several stops and then adjust the time, covering an additional inch of the paper with each additional exposure.
Develop, fix and wash the paper normally.
If you've done it right, you'll get a piece of paper with exposures starting from grey to black.
Repeat this process until you have determined what time it takes to make the first real black (no density increase with longer time).
You now have the correct time for that paper and film.
Now, do a contact sheet from that film and inspect it.
Do you have good shadow detail? If so, then your exposures are good. If you don't, then you are underexposing. Adjust the ISO for that film downwards a stop for a subsequent test.
If you have no deep shadows at all, then you are over exposing the film. Increase the ISO by one stop for a subsequent test.

Or better still, do an exposure bracket to get your results faster.

Are the highlights good, with ample detail and not blown out?
If so, then your film developemnt is good.
If the highlights are blown, then you are over developing, cut your development time by 20% for a subsequent test.
Are the highlights muddy? If so, then increase your development time by 20% for a subsequent test.

Continue doing this until you are getting a good contact sheet

Once you've done this, you will find that your printing has become much easier, and you have wiggle room with the VC filters to make contrast adjustments based on individual scenes.

[Nesster]

Ah yes, thank you for the correction. My memory's rusty after 30 years of not using an enlarger...

[graphicgr8s]

Originally Posted by Wheatfield

A shorter exposure time under the enlarger is going to blow the highlights even more. He needs more exposure not less, presuming his negatives aren't the problem.

Richy, do this:
Set your enlarger height so that the projected light covers an 8x10 sheet.
Take an unexposed but normally developed negative (a piece of the leader is good) and put a scratch onto the emulsion.
Put that into your enlarger and focus on the scratch.
You may need to readjust the enlarger height and refocus.
Once you've done this, mark the height of the enlarger head, as that has just become your standard height for making contact sheets.
Use a grade 2 1/2 filter.
Under safelight, put a sheet of paper into your contact frame and make a test print. Stop the lens down several stops and then adjust the time, covering an additional inch of the paper with each additional exposure.
Develop, fix and wash the paper normally.
If you've done it right, you'll get a piece of paper with exposures starting from grey to black.
Repeat this process until you have determined what time it takes to make the first real black (no density increase with longer time).
You now have the correct time for that paper and film.
Now, do a contact sheet from that film and inspect it.
Do you have good shadow detail? If so, then your exposures are good. If you don't, then you are underexposing. Adjust the ISO for that film downwards a stop for a subsequent test.
If you have no deep shadows at all, then you are over exposing the film. Increase the ISO by one stop for a subsequent test.

Or better still, do an exposure bracket to get your results faster.

Are the highlights good, with ample detail and not blown out?
If so, then your film developemnt is good.
If the highlights are blown, then you are over developing, cut your development time by 20% for a subsequent test.
Are the highlights muddy? If so, then increase your development time by 20% for a subsequent test.

Continue doing this until you are getting a good contact sheet

Once you've done this, you will find that your printing has become much easier, and you have wiggle room with the VC filters to make contrast adjustments based on individual scenes.

Or he could just use a grayscale test strip.

[Wheatfield]

Originally Posted by graphicgr8s

Or he could just use a grayscale test strip.

If he has one. If he doesn't, then it's either something to buy, or something to learn how to make, and then learn how to use.
One of the things I found when I was teaching myself the Zone System was that all the grayscales in the world didn't really mean squat once I was out in the field.
Dialing in with a grayscale got me close, but i was always doing final tweaks on a new emulsion by going out and shooting representative exposures to see how things worked in the field.

[RichyX]

Thanks for all the advice, there's a lot to go through!

I suspect I made a mistake when developing the film. Not being used to using center weighted metering for gigs I thought I may have overexposed the roll a stop. My lecturer thought otherwise. Took his word for it considering his decades of experience and developed the film normally. Looks like I may be right.

I made a test strip before the contact sheet. My choice of exposure time could have been a little off, so I'll try it all again on Monday.

[HGMonaro]

Originally Posted by Wheatfield

If you have no deep shadows at all, then you are over exposing the film. Increase the ISO by one stop for a subsequent test.

this point needs clarifying as I think you mean you have shadow detail equivalent to the rest of the scene. Can't say I've ever seen that but I guess it's possible. This is a somewhat unlikely scenario as most films need more exposure than their box speed suggests but you could always have a slow shutter in your camera which would give a similar end result.

Once you've done this, you will find that your printing has become much easier, and you have wiggle room with the VC filters to make contrast adjustments based on individual scenes.

yep. Also, every now and then you'll get a scene with high (or low) contrast that really needs individual exposure and development treatment (what the Zone System is all about) but using roll film (as opposed to sheet film) you can't really do that, so you still need to learn the various tricks (exposure, contrast adjustmments, burning & dodging, split grade printing, paper flashing, etc) of getting a neg onto paper. If you get your camera exposure and film development accurate, your printing process will be more enjoyable and you'll only have to use the 'tricks' in mild doses intead of every print!

When printing, I advise to get you highlights right with exposure first, then alter contrast to suit your intended print representation. If using fiber paper (not generally recommended for starters) remember to allow for dry-down, which has an effect on both the highlights and the overall print.

Lots of concepts to read up about

[HGMonaro]

Originally Posted by RichyX

Not being used to using center weighted metering for gigs...

'gigs' just re-read this....

is that the scene (as in musicians playing in a spotlighted venue?)

[RichyX]

Originally Posted by HGMonaro

'gigs' just re-read this....

is that the scene (as in musicians playing in a spotlighted venue?)

Exactly.

Shooting with my K20D I always use spot metering to get the performer properly exposed.
My superA only has center weighted, so unfortunately it's taking the dark background into account when metering.

[HGMonaro]

in that situation you are probably best to print (contact sheet or actual print) for the highlights and left the shadows do whatever they do, you might not be able to keep detail in dark areas without it looking wishy-washy (technical term!). You've picked a hard task!