VictoriaC Posted June 2, 2014 Share #1 Posted June 2, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hello All, I've been on this forum now for about a month since I bought my Leica equipment and dived deep into film photography again (more so than just the cross processing and multi exposures I was doing last year with Lomo cameras). One thing I have not seen here and found very little info on elsewhere in the net is using different ISOs on one roll of film. I found a blog yesterday which was very informative about Ilford XP2 Super 400, stating that the ISO can be moved 100 to 800 (1600 if you dare) and process as if rated 400. What about films like TriX or TMax or Ilford Delta 3200 ?? And colour films? Has anyone tried with CineStill and changed the ISO mid-roll and just processed at 800? Apparently Portra 400 can move from ISO 50-1600 without modifying development. I guess if it's brighter light then I can just use a ND filter but I'm really more concerned about day turning to night and wishing to increase the ISO so I can continue to shoot without changing film or using a flash / tripod. Thank you. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 2, 2014 Posted June 2, 2014 Hi VictoriaC, Take a look here Multi ISOs on one film roll?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
swamiji Posted June 2, 2014 Share #2 Posted June 2, 2014 (edited) There are/were a few specialty films that allowed this, mostly with special processing. But, no, generally you can not adjust ISO on a single roll of film on a frame by frame basis. You adjust the time of developing based on the ISO shot for the entire roll. Edited June 2, 2014 by swamiji clarity Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gsgary Posted June 2, 2014 Share #3 Posted June 2, 2014 Ive done it with XP2 that i got free from Ilford and developed it in Rodinal instead of C41 ISO400 ISO800 ISO1600 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipus Posted June 2, 2014 Share #4 Posted June 2, 2014 I've done this occasionally with Portra 400. I've shot it at approx EI 100-EI1600 and had it developed at 400. The results are not bad at all. It's like having a digital camera in a film M. Not all shots are great but most can be used with some work in Photoshop. I am travelling now so don't have access to my image library but I can post examples in a few days. Cheers Philip 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
StS Posted June 2, 2014 Share #5 Posted June 2, 2014 The only films I'm aware of, which can handle several stops of different ISO rating on one roll are XP2 and BW400. Classic black and white films have some leeway, Kodak say in the data sheet of the Tri-X that it can handle exposure @ 800 ISO without any correction in development time. Tmax or Delta films need more care in exposure and processing, though. Kodak Portra (as most C41 negative films) can handle slight shifts in exposure. Some people use this to create a special look. However, if natural colours are expected, the exposure should be correct. Having said that, 400 ISO can take one a long way, in my experience. Stefan 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
StS Posted June 2, 2014 Share #6 Posted June 2, 2014 I've done this occasionally with Portra 400. I've shot it at approx EI 100-EI1600 and had it developed at 400. (...) I am travelling now so don't have access to my image library but I can post examples in a few days. Cheers Philip Sorry, Philip, crossed posts - I would be interested as well to see some examples, playing around with Portra, I stayed on the lower side of one stop variation so far. Once, I exposed a roll of Portra 160 @ 400 by mistake and found the results unusable. Stefan 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted June 2, 2014 Share #7 Posted June 2, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) There a couple 35mm cameras that allow you to change to different ISO films mid-roll, for example a Contax and Exacta but no Leicas. There is one 70mm rangefinder that allowed it as well, but that's not what you asked about. Every other 'solution' is a kludge. You have already read them above. . Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erl Posted June 3, 2014 Share #8 Posted June 3, 2014 Compromised input equal compromised output, whatever way you look at it. Learn to live with one ISO on each roll. It need not be the speed on the box. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted June 3, 2014 Share #9 Posted June 3, 2014 (edited) I found a blog yesterday which was very informative about Ilford XP2 Super 400, stating that the ISO can be moved 100 to 800 (1600 if you dare) and process as if rated 400. What about films like TriX or TMax or Ilford Delta 3200 ?? . XP2 is a very wide latitude film, so rating it at alternative ISO on the same roll is simply taking advantage of that characteristic. All it means is you can under or over expose it and you'll still get a reasonable negative. But you don't actively need to change the ISO, you just under or over expose a bit. There are some developers for B&W negative film called 'compensating developers' which basically work by working until the developer is exhausted. As the highlights develop most quickly the developer exhausts itself in those areas while continuing to develop the shadows. This means that over or under exposure on the same roll (multi ISO) is almost literally 'compensated' for. But the best way to use these developers is still to use one ISO and use the characteristic's they give of a wide latitude for achieving the perfect negative, not just a usable negative. Diafine is one common compensating developer, DiXactol another, and the newer Obsidian Aqua is a DIY formula that works extremely well. I have been using Obsidian Aqua and developed at box speed FP4, HP5, and a roll of Neopan 1600 rated at 800, all in the same tank for the same development time. The negatives come out perfect. So the same would be true of more exaggerated ISO changes (under and over exposure) on the same roll. I would recommend Diafine as a good start. Steve Edited June 3, 2014 by 250swb 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrism Posted June 3, 2014 Share #10 Posted June 3, 2014 As well as a two part compensating developer like Diafine, you can pull the same trick with stand development (which is probably what the other users of XP2 in Rodinal are doing). I'm not likely to vary the ISO at which a film is exposed, but it is nice to have films of different speeds developed in the same tank. Chris 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
spydrxx Posted June 3, 2014 Share #11 Posted June 3, 2014 I too have seen some interesting results of others who shot films like Tri-X at 200-1600 ISO on the same roll, stand develped in Rodinal. Most of the comments suggested that the negative images weren't optimal for traditional printing, but generally scanned well, and results were consistent across ISOs. FWIW, the article most intriguing on this methodology indicated that time of development, beyond about 19 minutes, or the exact temperature weren't significant factors if the concentration was such that 3.5mm Rodinal/roll of film was used at approx. 1:100 dilution. I've got a roll in my camera at this time I'm using to try this out. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gsgary Posted June 3, 2014 Share #12 Posted June 3, 2014 As well as a two part compensating developer like Diafine, you can pull the same trick with stand development (which is probably what the other users of XP2 in Rodinal are doing). I'm not likely to vary the ISO at which a film is exposed, but it is nice to have films of different speeds developed in the same tank. Chris The ones above I sure I used rodinal 1+25 for 18 mins agitating ever minute, I have used stand but im sure the ones above were not stand, I use stand development a lot and add 12 grams of Sodium sulphite Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
VictoriaC Posted June 3, 2014 Author Share #13 Posted June 3, 2014 Really interesting posts, thank you for sharing so much knowledge. I'm looking forward to seeing what else may crop up in this thread. I've started a new roll of Tri-X in my M6 and the half dozen photos I've already taken today are split between 400 and 800 ISO. Considering I'm gambling with techniques I hope I don't mess up my images as the photographs I'm taking are important to me Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gsgary Posted June 3, 2014 Share #14 Posted June 3, 2014 here's a shot from a roll where i was playing with my new Voigtlander 50mmF1.5 ASPH M mount, HP5 stand developed in the fridge 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted June 3, 2014 Share #15 Posted June 3, 2014 (edited) I've started a new roll of Tri-X in my M6 and the half dozen photos I've already taken today are split between 400 and 800 ISO That is only one stop. It is likely that even an expert will err to the same degree. Don't fret. And stop thinking digital where what you lay upon the film is malleable. Edited June 3, 2014 by pico Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted June 23, 2014 Share #16 Posted June 23, 2014 For optimum results , expose are correct speed. Under or over will be thin or dense and may be printable, but not optimal. I tried with XP2 decades ago. It is not more or less tolerant than other films. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted June 23, 2014 Share #17 Posted June 23, 2014 I don't think XP2 is the same as other films. For instance if it is over exposed the grain gets smaller, so that can be expolited if you aren't otherwise likely to blow highlights. Steve Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted June 23, 2014 Share #18 Posted June 23, 2014 I don't think XP2 is the same as other films. For instance if it is over exposed the grain gets smaller, so that can be expolited if you aren't otherwise likely to blow highlights. Steve Grain? Interesting, but I cannot visualize how that can be. Does greater exposure cause the slower layer to develop? TIA for any insight. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted June 24, 2014 Share #19 Posted June 24, 2014 (edited) Grain? Interesting, but I cannot visualize how that can be. Does greater exposure cause the slower layer to develop? TIA for any insight. Insight care of Mike Johnston..... The Online Photographer: How To Shoot Ilford XP2 Super The caveat is still 'if you aren't going to blow the highlights', but it exploits the fact that there is less 'grain' in the most exposed areas of chromogenic film, and more in the shadows. Of course chromogenic film doesn't have 'grain' as such but it helps things along if the black and white bits have some common reference between traditional B&W and C41 process . Steve Edited June 24, 2014 by 250swb 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrism Posted June 24, 2014 Share #20 Posted June 24, 2014 Chromogenic films have remarkable latitude for exposure. I developed a roll of Ektar 100 two days ago and had bracketed shots on it - could barely tell which was which when it came out of the tank. I think I'm right in assuming XP2 shares this tolerance, though I confess that while I routinely develop it in Rodinal, I have never bothered to do it in C-41. Chris 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.