data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b6a7a/b6a7aebd15d563c51c12b94087b8a0fe6666a4f0" alt="" data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/05d81/05d81c51909faee3345e8e7954c2c9d760d7424f" alt="" data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/edec3/edec3d7cebccb8060b5c5273f5f316427fb2e4f5" alt="" |
My best guess would be that you used different filters for exposing the paper. If I understand correctly you made a paper test, you plugged the numbers in the plotter and the plotter gave you an exposure scale (ES) of 1.32. You then did your film test, plugged the numbers and told the plotter you wanted development times for a DR of 1.32 to match the paper.
To answer your question first, yes, the film density range (DR) should match the paper ES. So obviously there is something wrong if the negative with a DR of 1.0 is the one printing well on the paper you tested and gave you an ES of 1.32.
The only thing I can think of is the paper and the response to the enlarger light. Did you use a filter or did you expose the paper without filtration? Did you make sure your densitometer was zeroed out and calibrated?
As the name suggests, VC paper varies in contrast and what might be small changes in color light can make a big difference in the paper response.
If your purpose is to calibrate your set up, I think it is best if you start with graded paper. This way you know the paper response will be the same, you can then make better judgements on the quality of your negatives and your test results.
Good luck, let us know what you find out. |
|
|
|
|
|