I have found I like trying lith printing for foggy scenes. The contrast is enhanced and it makes for some very moody tones. I have come back to lith printing this past year and unlocked some techniques that make it more predictable and rewarding. I learned last March to more carefully control the exposure and refresh the developer constantly. With the right exposure; made evenly across the print the infectious development can be more effectively harnessed. Refreshing the developer keeps the development times in the range of 20 minutes.
So I set about the Foggy Oak image that I printed conventionally here... I got a nice mood from that print. Off to try a lith version.
From my prior experience and notes I know the range of exposure for the paper I will be using. For Oriental Seagull #2 I know I need Ev (ISO 100) of about 2.9 in the fog and that should be good for an exposure of 32-45 seconds. Because I am printing this on the second (third for USA) floor with 'The Beast' my 4x5 enlarger and my wet-side on the ground floor. I decided to make 4 exposures to save trips up and down the stairs. It helps to have duplicates because of the unpredictability of lith developer and to have prints to test different toning strategies on before committing to the good prints. I made 4 exposures
 |
| 32 seconds straight |
This shows the hazard of not having an even exposure. The infectious development starts in the high density areas and proceeds but the lighter areas won't catch up before the highlights closest to the infectious areas begin to catch and block up.
 |
| 32 seconds with 32 seconds burn of upper left corner as with the conventional print |
This is what I am looking for. By burning the upper left corner the exposure is better balanced and the infectious development could proceed more evenly.
 |
| 64 seconds with 64 seconds burn of upper left corner as with the conventional print |
The 64 second exposure despite the same level of burning as the previous image shows it was too much exposure. The infectious development started in the darkest area but the overexposed highlights caught too soon and just ended with a black mess. Given that result; with the other exposure I decided to stop development before infectious development set in. I wanted to see what that would look like. It illustrates the difference infectious development makes. Still the image has that nice taupe color and a good look.
 |
| 64 seconds straight (snatched early) |
Armed with one or two good prints I went for another round. This time focusing on the 32 second exposure and I take a look at 22 seconds to see where that goes. I modified the exposure by running it for 64 seconds and dodging the area that turned up very dark in the first image to better balance the exposure for 32 seconds.
 |
| 64 seconds with 32 second dodge |
This one is the best of the lot. It seems that the following prints begin to suffer and I suspect the developer was too old. I had been replenishing every print or every other print but it may be the too much bromide had built up. In any case the development became more erratic and in some cases did not seem to go infectious.
 |
44 seconds with 22 second dodge
|
The above print shows how it didn't appear to be getting infectious development. The dark area just kept building density in the highlights and shadows.
 |
| 44 seconds with 22 second dodge |
In any case this second example with identical exposure shows the uneven development that this level of exposure seems to create. It isn't terrible but lacks the tonal balance I am seeking.
 |
| 64 seconds with 32 second dodge |
This last one of the batch also did not seem to have had infectious development either. It is a good print however.
This was a successful session which makes me think I should try the Fotospeed paper I have. It has a wonderful peach/salmon tone. I have only 6 8x10 sheets left!
I would also like to try some toning of these prints. This is a good use of the crappy prints; to test the right amount of toner. Some things from tomorrow.
Comments