Nice. Except (although maybe the video didn't show the tones correctly) it looked to me as though the difference between the 9 and 12 second strips was very very slight. Maybe you could have tried just 10 or 11 seconds and still gotten a full black. And maybe an 11 second print would have had equally good blacks with more detail in the jeans and the guys face.?
They were very very slight Scott. Maybe you're right I could have got away with 9 or 10. Even though 9 or 10 was not DMAX. Interesting. Thanks "edited part" - Pinned as good point here.
I’ve been neglecting my darkroom partly because of health and partly because of other things going on around me. This is just the motivation I need to get back into it. A very informative video, thanks for posting it.
Simply explained, and a good starting point for those starting out. DMax times are good to know, but are only the starting point. When printing, you might expose to have a grade one as your base line time, and have you grade 5 to kick the blacks to the right level. It is a balancing act.
Hey Roger, absolutely love your videos! You make, hands-down, the best darkroom videos on youtube. You are direct inspiration for me starting to print as of a few weeks ago, and I wouldn’t be able to do it without the knowledge I gained from you. I love your experimentation, and your attitude when it comes to photography in general. I notice that you almost never use a color filter on any of your lenses for contrast or anything for that matter, and wondered if you didn’t have a specific reason for that, if you’d do a video on color filters on your lens. I don’t think aybody would do it quite like you could. Either way, great work, and keep it up!
WONDERFUL!! I didnt know i needed to know this. I think the conversation you, me and a user by the name of Mamiya were talking about the negatives and at one point he mentioned he would love to see a video about DMAX. Well i for one admit i dont think we (meaning me) was in the same topic at the same time. I just found out something i didnt know what i needed to know about the print side of this. In our conversation, and in my print making i never really considered this issue, but knew it was an issue when i do scans. Now because of this video i can see... there is a very simple and easy way to figure this out... something that i didnt know was a thing!
Yes, this is the exact problem that I had 30 or so years ago when I developed my own paper. I overexposed it and underdeveloped it. This is why I could not get any white areas, all was grey.
I've got a Stouffer scale for this kind of approach. I use this for testing exposure and development of my negatives. Virtually a perfect negative should be ok with the D-Max paper exposure time.
Great video Roger! I learned a new technique! My problem with this would be that my negs are never consistent shot to shot. I always wind up wasting paper having to do new test strips for each image. I think I need to work on my development consistency for one and my go-to cameras are over 35 years old which probably don't help. Thanks for taking the time to produce these as I almost always learn something but always get entertained. Cheers!
Wondering if the paper manufacturer doesn't state its D-Max time, performance curve...? Another teaching moment for us all. Thanks for investing your time in us.
well done, roger!!! your next step (just suggestion for your next video) could be finding a real film speed of your favorite film (and stick with this speed)...as you probably know, box speed of film is not exactly the real speed of the film (regarding you camera shutter speed)...as you know that 12 sec is D-max, I would shoot one roll of film with different speeds, all the shots should be exposed with the same light ideally on 18% gray Kodak board. Doing that (e.g. shooting ISO 400 as ISO 200, 320, 400, 640, 800 on 18% gray cardboard) three times on one roll of your favorite film and knowing D-max (12 sec.), you can cut the film on three parts and develop it with 3 different times (30 sec. up and 30 sec. down with your basic developing time you usually use)...exposing those 3 strips with 12 sec. (D-max), finding which shot is really gray (closest to 18% gray), you will find your real film speed and you will get better idea of the developing time of your favorite film...it is kind of alchemy, but your shots will look way better on paper..have fun:)
Won't the DMAX time change based on aperture and enlarger height? Would need to make a new test every time you want to crop or print a different size. Unless there is a method to convert a time from one enlarger height to another?
Yes. That 12 seconds would only apply to everything staying the same as the same as the final test strip. Move that head up, change the aperture, a day or two old developer, different filter would change times.
DMAX must have been hiding under a stone in my photography world seen it used by you on your negs but never thought of using as a exposure method for full size prints, great video Roger very interesting perhaps giving one of the Buddhas head print the same DMAX treatment would have been interesting.....
Very useful. So are we saying that by and large its better to compute the timings based on DMAX values, or test strip values? Your tests seems to show that by using the DMAX values you get a fairly accurate looking print without the need to do test strip computations. But I'm guessing it depends on what artisitc look you're after?
Well that test will only show you a true print according to your negative. If you think you have a perfectly exposed and perfectly developed negative that DMAX test will soon let you know when you make a print. Normally i'd probably have used contrast filters and a bit of dodging and burning to get more tones in that print and make it pop more. I reckon my neg needed another stop or two of exposure.
This is great! Just a quick question, in the video you said that Dmax is the minimum time to get maximum black, but does the Dmax change with different colours i.e. is the Dmax different using different contrast filters or would it just make a steeper S curve? Cheers!!!
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss Unfortunately not. Literally each combo is different. To make things worse: even multigrade shifts, as the MG filters have different colors and density (rule of thumb: the more reddish the MG filter, the longer your exposure). If I remember it right, with my former go-to paper developer I had 0.8 up to 3.5 seconds difference between softest and hardest filter, depending on temperature and dilution. Once you have figured out the core principles, MG becomes obsolete whatsoever, because you then are able to work with the zone system. As a result of all the extensive testing, you can just throw any perfectly exposed negative at your enlarger / fixed-gradation paper / paper developer combo and set a standard f11 @ 12.5 seconds. Each print will just look fine. That's where this system really shines. (btw: I just have found your channel. Finally someone who really cares about lab work 🤩 +1 subscriber)
I'm glad to see you getting into some real photographic techniques, it's unfortunate that most of the guys that could teach this stuff well have disappeared during the slump in film sales, their all dead or retired. Also, I'm proud of you for changing your slogan to "shooting and learning", the more you learn about photography the more you realize you don't know shit, quickly followed by the realization that 99% the people on RUclips know even less than shit about photography and are just repeating what the heard some other twat repeating what they heard second hand from some other twat... Keep up the good work!!
Ha ha. That slogan been on there for about a year. We all in the same boat here. The guy who introduced me to film photography many years ago died before he saw my first print. He is the inspiration behind the word "boss" in my channel name.
Always worth a watch, accurate development time seems crucial, I develop for a full 2 minutes with a timer, consistency is key, as always, very educational,
Correct. If you "pull" the paper too early, or developer temperature is too low it skews the results. If you find a film and developer you like, and expose consistently, prints have little variation within a given size.
Nice. Except (although maybe the video didn't show the tones correctly) it looked to me as though the difference between the 9 and 12 second strips was very very slight. Maybe you could have tried just 10 or 11 seconds and still gotten a full black. And maybe an 11 second print would have had equally good blacks with more detail in the jeans and the guys face.?
They were very very slight Scott. Maybe you're right I could have got away with 9 or 10. Even though 9 or 10 was not DMAX. Interesting. Thanks "edited part" - Pinned as good point here.
One of the best channels for analog work. Always nice then a new video is up!!!
Cheers johan
I’ve been neglecting my darkroom partly because of health and partly because of other things going on around me. This is just the motivation I need to get back into it. A very informative video, thanks for posting it.
Cheers Mark. Good to hear from you. Stay positive.
Simply explained, and a good starting point for those starting out. DMax times are good to know, but are only the starting point. When printing, you might expose to have a grade one as your base line time, and have you grade 5 to kick the blacks to the right level. It is a balancing act.
Once you got dmax defined, you can work out preflashing for your paper and combine both. It should reduce dodging/burning efforts significantly.
Hey Roger, absolutely love your videos! You make, hands-down, the best darkroom videos on youtube. You are direct inspiration for me starting to print as of a few weeks ago, and I wouldn’t be able to do it without the knowledge I gained from you. I love your experimentation, and your attitude when it comes to photography in general. I notice that you almost never use a color filter on any of your lenses for contrast or anything for that matter, and wondered if you didn’t have a specific reason for that, if you’d do a video on color filters on your lens. I don’t think aybody would do it quite like you could. Either way, great work, and keep it up!
Thanks John. I'm not a big user of filters. I did do a video a few weeks back. Have a look through my vids.
WONDERFUL!! I didnt know i needed to know this. I think the conversation you, me and a user by the name of Mamiya were talking about the negatives and at one point he mentioned he would love to see a video about DMAX. Well i for one admit i dont think we (meaning me) was in the same topic at the same time. I just found out something i didnt know what i needed to know about the print side of this. In our conversation, and in my print making i never really considered this issue, but knew it was an issue when i do scans. Now because of this video i can see... there is a very simple and easy way to figure this out... something that i didnt know was a thing!
love these videos, thanks so much for your efforts
Yes, this is the exact problem that I had 30 or so years ago when I developed my own paper. I overexposed it and underdeveloped it. This is why I could not get any white areas, all was grey.
Thx for sharing your learnings!
I've got a Stouffer scale for this kind of approach. I use this for testing exposure and development of my negatives. Virtually a perfect negative should be ok with the D-Max paper exposure time.
Great information. Getting the last of my needed equipment, will finally be able to put your suggestions into practice this weekend.
Nice print on Instagram from that colour neg!
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss Thank you.
Great video Roger! I learned a new technique! My problem with this would be that my negs are never consistent shot to shot. I always wind up wasting paper having to do new test strips for each image. I think I need to work on my development consistency for one and my go-to cameras are over 35 years old which probably don't help. Thanks for taking the time to produce these as I almost always learn something but always get entertained. Cheers!
Same as me Jason. I'd have to test again for other negs on that roll.
Wondering if the paper manufacturer doesn't state its D-Max time, performance curve...? Another teaching moment for us all. Thanks for investing your time in us.
Not sure. I'm not great with science and reading tech charts. I have to play and fail a lot!
well done, roger!!! your next step (just suggestion for your next video) could be finding a real film speed of your favorite film (and stick with this speed)...as you probably know, box speed of film is not exactly the real speed of the film (regarding you camera shutter speed)...as you know that 12 sec is D-max, I would shoot one roll of film with different speeds, all the shots should be exposed with the same light ideally on 18% gray Kodak board. Doing that (e.g. shooting ISO 400 as ISO 200, 320, 400, 640, 800 on 18% gray cardboard) three times on one roll of your favorite film and knowing D-max (12 sec.), you can cut the film on three parts and develop it with 3 different times (30 sec. up and 30 sec. down with your basic developing time you usually use)...exposing those 3 strips with 12 sec. (D-max), finding which shot is really gray (closest to 18% gray), you will find your real film speed and you will get better idea of the developing time of your favorite film...it is kind of alchemy, but your shots will look way better on paper..have fun:)
Thanks Lucas. I did this ages ago with Lomo Film. Have a look. Let me know what you think.
Won't the DMAX time change based on aperture and enlarger height? Would need to make a new test every time you want to crop or print a different size. Unless there is a method to convert a time from one enlarger height to another?
Yes. That 12 seconds would only apply to everything staying the same as the same as the final test strip. Move that head up, change the aperture, a day or two old developer, different filter would change times.
lolololol you the sign in the background is crooked now @1:28
DMAX must have been hiding under a stone in my photography world seen it used by you on your negs but never thought of using as a exposure method for full size prints, great video Roger very interesting perhaps giving one of the Buddhas head print the same DMAX treatment would have been interesting.....
Cheers Harry.
Very useful. So are we saying that by and large its better to compute the timings based on DMAX values, or test strip values? Your tests seems to show that by using the DMAX values you get a fairly accurate looking print without the need to do test strip computations. But I'm guessing it depends on what artisitc look you're after?
Well that test will only show you a true print according to your negative. If you think you have a perfectly exposed and perfectly developed negative that DMAX test will soon let you know when you make a print. Normally i'd probably have used contrast filters and a bit of dodging and burning to get more tones in that print and make it pop more. I reckon my neg needed another stop or two of exposure.
Shoot Film Like a Boss ok thanks for the clarity sir. I understand. Nice job again.
This is great! Just a quick question, in the video you said that Dmax is the minimum time to get maximum black, but does the Dmax change with different colours i.e. is the Dmax different using different contrast filters or would it just make a steeper S curve? Cheers!!!
Yes the results would change if I used a different filter, changed the enlarger height, aperture, paper, developer
D-max also depends on the developer. Back in the ol-days you must have D-max for paper/developer combination ( a lot of work :/ )
Wow so some developers didn't work as well with certain papers? Is that before multigrade?
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss Unfortunately not. Literally each combo is different. To make things worse: even multigrade shifts, as the MG filters have different colors and density (rule of thumb: the more reddish the MG filter, the longer your exposure). If I remember it right, with my former go-to paper developer I had 0.8 up to 3.5 seconds difference between softest and hardest filter, depending on temperature and dilution.
Once you have figured out the core principles, MG becomes obsolete whatsoever, because you then are able to work with the zone system. As a result of all the extensive testing, you can just throw any perfectly exposed negative at your enlarger / fixed-gradation paper / paper developer combo and set a standard f11 @ 12.5 seconds. Each print will just look fine. That's where this system really shines.
(btw: I just have found your channel. Finally someone who really cares about lab work 🤩 +1 subscriber)
You say you "can see a slight difference between 9 seconds and the rest of it" at 5:20. Easy when we're sitting at home!
He is right Roger my thoughts exactly when watching.....Now what activity allegedly effects eye sight..mmmmmmm
the time in developing should be the same also, isn't it?
if you leave longer or shorter in the dev the final density would change, right?
Same time in developing as test strip. It shouldn't get any darker over time.
I'm glad to see you getting into some real photographic techniques, it's unfortunate that most of the guys that could teach this stuff well have disappeared during the slump in film sales, their all dead or retired.
Also, I'm proud of you for changing your slogan to "shooting and learning", the more you learn about photography the more you realize you don't know shit, quickly followed by the realization that 99% the people on RUclips know even less than shit about photography and are just repeating what the heard some other twat repeating what they heard second hand from some other twat...
Keep up the good work!!
Ha ha. That slogan been on there for about a year. We all in the same boat here. The guy who introduced me to film photography many years ago died before he saw my first print. He is the inspiration behind the word "boss" in my channel name.
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss I remember when you changed it, I waited to see if you would keep it..
Always worth a watch, accurate development time seems crucial, I develop for a full 2 minutes with a timer, consistency is key, as always, very educational,
Correct. If you "pull" the paper too early, or developer temperature is too low it skews the results. If you find a film and developer you like, and expose consistently, prints have little variation within a given size.
Check out Dmax for film exposure