Support our Sponsors, they keep FADU free: AG Photographic The Imaging Warehouse Process Supplies RH Designs Second-hand Darkroom Supplies |
> Print Dry Down vs "Eye Down" |
*** Click here for the FADU 2015/2014 Yearbooks *** |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Print Dry Down vs "Eye Down"
For lack of a better term, I'll call it "Eye-Down". What I'm describing is that event when we first turn on the 'house' lights after being under safelights through the paper process and the whites of the prints look brilliant in the wet fixer reflected light. Too bright? 'ah, okay I better increase the print exposure'.. don't.. What we call 'Dry Down' is more than just that I think. It's also the fact that our pupils are more wide open under safelights than in 'house' lights. Deciding on how much exposure to give a print while looking at a just printed wet test strip under full 'house' lights is kidding oneself. Taking the test strip into the kitchen to microwave it dry and inspect it under bright kitchen lights is better, but not an accurate reading either I'd say. That is why I have two single 'house' light fixtures in my darkroom, one above the chems holds a bare 25 watt and the other a bare 60 watt by the drying racks. I inspect all fixer wet test strips and prints under the 25 watt light (about 4 feet away) only to decide the exposure, then I turn on the 60 watt also to check the wet print for sharpness, dust or spots I might've missed when inspecting the neg on the light table. Does anyone else here also first inspect wet prints under less than normal lighting? 15 watter, 25 watter, 40 watter? With this process and being aware of "Eye Down", I find print "DryDown" to be less of an issue.
__________________
www.victorkrag.com |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
I have a lamp fitted with a special daylight bulb (blue) in my darkroom which I use to inspect prints / strips etc. I think I bought it from Silverprint or Firstcall many years ago.
Neil.
__________________
"The aim of art is to represent not the outward appearance of things, but their inward significance." Aristotle Neil Souch |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
I have 2 viewing lights in my darkroom, 1 x 20W fluorescent tube and 1 x 20W long life energy saving lamp. These are individually switchable so I can view prints in mixed lighting conditions or singularly.
I tend to initially view the print while wet, like Leon for my eyes to adjust. Then I thoroughly blot dry the print/test strip for a more accurate depth of printing. For most papers, particularly fibre, I have to reduce print exposure by approx. 10%.
__________________
"To the attentive eye, each moment of the year has its own beauty, and in the same field, it beholds, every hour, a picture which was never seen before, and which will never be seen again" Ralph Waldo Emerson. Timespresent Arenaphotographers |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
Like Neil I have a daylight bulb (100W) set up over my fixer tray. I turn my back to the light as I turn it on and then turn back around slowly so that my eyes can adjust to the increased light.
There was a time when I wore sunglasses so as not to shock my eyes when I switched the light on. (The new tablets that I'm on seem's to have cured me of that idea) |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Please don't get me wrong, I witness a physical drydown. I generally find that printing highlights near to the white paper base in expectation of Drydown works pretty well. Re: eye adjusting / iris contraction time, I was surprised when I was checking my darkroom for light leaks after construction, it took a good 6+ minutes before little beams and soft light leaks started to appear in what was complete darkness when I first turned off the lights, indicating how slowly our (my) eyes take to adjust.. Even with acclimated eyes, it seems to me that a 10% reduction, that is changing a 10 sec exposure to 9 secs would be greater than what I find from normal DryDown. ..The 25 watt does make for a more comfortable transition to full brightness, too.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Okay, tested! now 2 hours later, all under full bright lights (60 W & 25 W) I just finished a wet / dry comparison of 8x10 prints and a test strip I made last night on Oriental FB Glossy. The best / selected exposure for the breaking-wave highlights was 21 seconds. I re-fixed and washed today one 21 sec print and also the full page final test strip of 19 secs +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1. First, I checked that the wet 21 sec full image highlights matched the wet 21 sec test bracket -they do. Next, I compared a dry print to the wet test bracketed full sheet and found that the 22 sec exposure of the wet print matched the 21 sec highlight of the over-night dried comparison print laid on top... that's less than a 5 % difference. I'm now very convinced that, for me, determining exposure of wet test prints under the 25watt as suggested to me by an instructor years ago is the way to go to lessen the overall Drydown effect.
__________________
www.victorkrag.com |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
I always view my prints in the same location and try to do so under the same lighting levels.
I have also found there is a reasonable difference in a print between being held in the hand and being laid on a surface - the one laid on the surface being darker as it is not lit from behind. By the time I have rinsed the print under running water for a couple of minutes my eyes are adjusted enough to make a reasonable assessment. I know a guy who was a professional printer for a few years that used to have a set of "standard" prints around the viewing area to help him maintain consistency. He found his mood would affect the way he printed and would sometimes have dark days and others might be light or smooth toned or contrasty - the introduction of a set of normal/standard prints helped him maintain a better consistency from day to day. Although he found printing to be hugely enjoyable, eventually he threw in the as the hours were long and the money too meagre to support a family Martin |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
"he found his mood would affect the way he printed and would sometimes have dark days and others might be light or smooth toned or contrasty - the introduction of a set of normal/standard prints helped him maintain a better consistency from day to day."
I think mood and temperament a huge factor in the way we 'percieve' prints. I look back over some of my prints from the same negs over the years and see a remarkable difference in contrast and tone. I tended to print with much higher contrast when life wasn't going too well. My more recent prints have been much softer and somehow 'smoother'. I also think that when I've been in the darkroom into the wee small hours, my eyes are probably too tired to effectively assess the print. I'm very often disapointed or pleasantly surprised the following morning! Now theres something for the psychologists here to analyse! Rob |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Out of interest, how far away from the 25W bulb do you hold the print for assessing? I use a 60W in the normal ceiling rose which isn't bad for judging highlights. If the light is too dim, I can't judge the contrast very well, so end up with soft prints.
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
The 25 watt is 4 ft above the chemical trays. I decide the multigrade contrast adjustments (LPL dichroic diffusion enlarger to Seagull and Ilford papers) while viewing a wet print under both the 25 watt and also the 60 watt which is another 4 ft away on a perpendicular wall. I set enough contrast so that highlights are just about at the white paper base, if there are blacks, they look black and the overall test prints are about a half a grade from looking too artificial or 'plasticky'. The 5% drydown then softens the entire image but leaves enough 'pop' to for some amount of brilliance and luminescence. This allows me to go a couple different directions in the toning process if I choose. Others have different ways of going about it. I tend to shoot a lot of seascapes here on the coast where the white water can turn a muddy light gray if I'm not careful, also I find that rock material needs a lot of contrast to bring out the detail otherwise I think rocks will look flat too flat. As Ansel Adams emphasizes, luminescence is of the utmost importance. Good luck.
__________________
www.victorkrag.com |
Support our Sponsors, they keep FADU free: AG Photographic The Imaging Warehouse Process Supplies RH Designs Second-hand Darkroom Supplies |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Beard 16"x20" Two-Blade Easel. | Keith Tapscott. | Sale or Wanted | 2 | 20th June 2009 12:35 PM |
How many of us Heat Dry Film? | Martin Aislabie | Monochrome Film | 23 | 30th April 2009 07:26 PM |
Print Dry Down | Bill | Monochrome printing techniques | 35 | 24th April 2009 11:34 PM |
Why 4x5 - Another in my "I'm just curious" series... | Argentum | Cameras - Large Format | 35 | 28th March 2009 05:57 PM |
11x14" or 12x16" | Sandeha Lynch | Monochrome printing techniques | 22 | 29th November 2008 06:21 PM |