35 mm negative printing seems to requirer more time and a max. enlarger lens opening.Does this sound normal? glight than 645 negs.greenspun.com : LUSENET : B&W Photo: URL Review : One Thread
I just traded my 645 camera for a 35 mm Leica R5 and attempted to print 8X10-B&W using the same enlarger ( 70 mm lens ) as I used for the 645 negs. I set the head at the 35mm position with no filter.I realize for a 8X10 from 35mm the projection distance is greater than 645 but I rapidly found that I was exposing for 60 sec. with the lens full open and still getting a light print on Kodak Polymax RC multigrade paper. The film was Kodak TN 400 ( C-41 processing ) B&W. Does this sound as if I am not doing something correctly? Thanks KM
-- karen morningstar (email@example.com), October 04, 2003
That is right, 33mm negs require 10 to 50% more exposure at F8 or F11. The reason is the emultion base of the film is thicker than 120 negs. Also, 645 camera like my Bronica will create a normally exposed neg at 1/2 of the negitive density of a 35mm camera. In addition, the increase focal length of the enlarge will double your exposure and f setting.
Noramal for my 35mm negs for a full frame 8x10, F11, with a new bulb is 25 seconds where a 645 neg will be under 8 seconds.
There is more control and better gray scale with the larger exposure, more dodge and burn capability.
Best thins to do is performa gray scale test with you enlager. Photograph a gray card, develop the negitives and then perform a time test to reach the gray on that card, exposing at 2 second intervals every two inches on the paper. This will give you your base time for the that film, be sure your F stop is at F8.
If this does not work, problems acheiving the gray, replace the bulb.
I do not foresee a problem and wish you luck, any more problems, let me know...
Michael Troop www.troopm.com firstname.lastname@example.org
-- Michael Troop (email@example.com), December 09, 2004.