Annibale G. Posted February 15, 2009 Share #1 Posted February 15, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi, I'd like to make a correct develpment procedure using a correct developing time. Ansel Adams suggest in his book (the negative) a good procedure, unfortunately I can't do it because it is necessary have a densitometer. Could I test my film without that? Any suggestions? other methods? Thanks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 15, 2009 Posted February 15, 2009 Hi Annibale G., Take a look here Film Test Developing Time. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
earleygallery Posted February 15, 2009 Share #2 Posted February 15, 2009 I don't think there is such a thing as 'correct'. Everyone has their own preferences. I just follow the guidelines on the pack of whichever film/developer I'm using and it seems to work fine. I'm not back to the position of having a favourite as yet. If you use the search function you'll find numerous threads and some links to useful development charts etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Annibale G. Posted February 15, 2009 Author Share #3 Posted February 15, 2009 Times indicated from manufactorer as starting point, I'd like to test film for having tha maximun details on highlights and shawdows. That's it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan States Posted February 15, 2009 Share #4 Posted February 15, 2009 To best control highlight and shadow detail you will need to "pull" the film and reduce development. As a starting point you can generally overexpose by one full stop, and then reduce development time by 25%. (This is actually crucial if you plan on scanning instead of wet printing). You choice of developer will generally not matter, but do note that the "suggested" times for Rodinal are all vastly overstated, and will give you terrible grain. You can pull down the times stated for that developer by 30% and have great looking negatives from any film. I'm assuming your using modern coated lenses so the pull times above apply. If you are using uncoated lenses like the Summar you can still overexpose by a stop, but only pull 10-15%. This will give you the dense, flat negatives that produce those "1930's look" prints, sharpness be damned. Lastly, don't forget your yellow or orange filters if you are shooting outdoors. Yellow should be on your lens all the time as a default. It will improve detail in snow and cloud highlights with only a small speed penalty. Best wishes Dan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Annibale G. Posted February 15, 2009 Author Share #5 Posted February 15, 2009 Maybe I didn't explain well what I mean. I'd like to find the best developing time for that film, developer, and iso setting as Ansel Adams suggest in his book, I can't do that because I don't have a densitometer. Do you suggest any other method to test? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
christer Posted February 15, 2009 Share #6 Posted February 15, 2009 Hi, I'd like to make a correct develpment procedure using a correct developing time. Ansel Adams suggest in his book (the negative) a good procedure, unfortunately I can't do it because it is necessary have a densitometer. Could I test my film without that? Any suggestions? other methods? Thanks. Send the film to me and I will measure the densities for you. Send me a PM if you want me to do this and I will give you my postal address. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpattison Posted February 15, 2009 Share #7 Posted February 15, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Check out the late, great, Fred Picker. He created a way of testing your ideal film speed and then ideal print time etc. There are videos available ( see http://foto-tv-eng.hundw.de/tags/the_negative ... you have to subscribe) His book is still available " Zone VI Workshop" where he explains how to find a film's true speed. John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MPerson Posted February 16, 2009 Share #8 Posted February 16, 2009 There is a similar discussion and advice over on APUG at the moment: Exposure Without Densitometer Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hiles Posted February 16, 2009 Share #9 Posted February 16, 2009 Check out the late, great, Fred Picker.He created a way of testing your ideal film speed and then ideal print time etc. There are videos available ( see The Negative | FotoTV ... you have to subscribe) His book is still available " Zone VI Workshop" where he explains how to find a film's true speed. John This is good advice. Fred knew his stuff absolutely. Instead of a densitometer, you can, for very little money (2-3 $), buy a cheap gelatin neutral density filter from a serious photoshop. Get one of 0.01 density. Expose a grey card at various ASAs and record your exposures carefully, leaving a blank frame between each exposure. The frame with a density about equal to the blank frame plus the ND filter over it is the one exposed at the right ASA. Just like what Fred recommended, but you match against the ND filter rather than measure with a densitomiter. Works every time. Once you know your ASA, stick with it through thick and thin. Any other exposre will yield less-than-optimal negatives. Period. Then as you test your development time, your ASA remains constant - different development times (within reason) have very little effect on shadow detail, meaning that your ASA is not a significant variable vs. development time. Fred's (and Ansel's) recommended test for development time assumes printing on real paper. If you are scanning only, test for good scans. But first get your correct ASA - that is key and the way to control your negative quality. Everything else it hit and miss. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don'tknowmuch Posted February 16, 2009 Share #10 Posted February 16, 2009 This site is interesting and well researched. Do look at the in-site link about "About the making of these charts." Jim. Film Development Time Charts Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ndjambrose Posted February 16, 2009 Share #11 Posted February 16, 2009 Hi, I'd like to make a correct develpment procedure using a correct developing time. Ansel Adams suggest in his book (the negative) a good procedure, unfortunately I can't do it because it is necessary have a densitometer. Could I test my film without that? Any suggestions? other methods? Thanks. Times indicated from manufactorer as starting point, I'd like to test film for having tha maximun details on highlights and shawdows. That's it You can rely on the times in the Massive Dev Chart (see www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.html). You may want to test your own film/developer for the fun of it, but it won't be any more accurate. The Dev Chart is the combined research of many expert photographers. In my experience the times there are about as accurate as you can get. Don't forget that when Ansel Adams wrote 'The Negative', there was no consistency in the manufacture of film or chemicals. Many times chemicals were mixed to order by the local drugstore, or shipped in less than ideal conditions where they'd lose their potency. Hence he advocated testing every new batch of chemicals. But today's processes are machine-based, regulated, measured and consistent. Which is why the recommended times in the Dev Chart can be relied upon. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
christer Posted February 16, 2009 Share #12 Posted February 16, 2009 I LOVE THIS! Here we have one gentleman saying:"site xxx is well researched". And then we have another gentleman saying:"these times (on site zzz) are as accurate as you can get". Check the times these charts give for, say, HP5 at box speed in Xtol 1+1 68°F/20°F. One says 9 minutes and the other 12 minutes. If one of them has the right time for you, then you are lucky! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hiles Posted February 16, 2009 Share #13 Posted February 16, 2009 Any of these charts may be a good place to start, and may turn out to be right on for you. But NOTHING replaces testing in an organized scientific manner. Fred Picker used to say, "Different is not the same". He was right. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don'tknowmuch Posted February 16, 2009 Share #14 Posted February 16, 2009 Mmm... I realise that Annibale was asking a slightly different question and wanted to know if there was a way to conduct tests without a densitometer, but I still maintain that the site I suggested was worth a look is well-researched. I don't deny that the Massive Dev Chart is also well-researched. It just so happens that the researchers seem to have reached different conclusions! Gentleman Jim. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenneth Posted February 16, 2009 Share #15 Posted February 16, 2009 I LOVE THIS! Here we have one gentleman saying:"site xxx is well researched". And then we have another gentleman saying:"these times (on site zzz) are as accurate as you can get". Check the times these charts give for, say, HP5 at box speed in Xtol 1+1 68°F/20°F. One says 9 minutes and the other 12 minutes. If one of them has the right time for you, then you are lucky! Maybe that is because everyone has an opinion of which they are entitled. In the final analysis, surely what is right for you is right for you even though it may seem wrong to another Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_d Posted February 17, 2009 Share #16 Posted February 17, 2009 Annibale, I found Ansel Adams method of zone system very accurate when using sheet film and a spot meter but not as effective with roll film and variable lighting conditions. A densitometer is more accurate than you need when shooting roll film because of light contrast usually changes between each frame and you can't develop each frame seperatly. You are going for the best all around average. I found the best way to test roll film for film speed is by shooting, developing, and printing your film and see where your values tend to fall and then make adjustments from that point. Remember to expose for the shadow density and your developement will control the highlights or contrast. Changes in developement time will change the d-min of the film very little if any but will have great effects of the highlights or dense fiilm areas. When printing, expose for the highlights and adjust your contrast filter to get the shadows where it it needs to be. If the shadows don't have the details you like then on the next roll of film increase your exposure 1/3rd stop and try again. If you you find you are consistantly printing with a grade 5 filter, increase your developement 10% on the next roll. If you are consistantly printing with a grade 1 filter, decrease your developent on the next roll about 10% and try again. You don't want to over expose and under develop, you want correct exposure and correct developement for your shooting and developement techniques. Like I said with roll film you are going for a best average. When frame one is a high contrast scene and requires n-2 developement and frame 2 is a low contrast scene and it requires n+2 developement, your best average is to develope for n and control contrast in printing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Annibale G. Posted February 17, 2009 Author Share #17 Posted February 17, 2009 thanks guy for all the advice. In my opinion what is incorrect in the massive develop.... is that for some film and developer they put same time if you push the film for one stop. Thanks awfully Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbelyaev Posted February 17, 2009 Share #18 Posted February 17, 2009 It is very simple. Look at the develped film. If you feel that you need more shadow details add some exposure time. Once you know the correct exposure put the film on a printed text. If you can the text through the highlights (the darkest areas of the negatives) you will be able to print the film. If you can not read, decrease develpoment time by 10-15%. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tgray Posted February 17, 2009 Share #19 Posted February 17, 2009 I've thinking about this for the past couple weeks too, then I came to the realization that I'm happy with the scans I'm getting and the prints I'm making. I printed a P3200TMZ neg the other day using the split grade method and came up with grade 2.3. So, I'm pretty much on in terms of having negs that print between grades 2 and 3. So why worry? I guess the point is that I agree with some of the above comments. Shoot at box speed, use the manufacturers times, and after 10,20,100 rolls, you'll get to know what your negs are lacking. More shadows, pull the film. Not enough contrast in the negs, extend development time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
j. white Posted February 17, 2009 Share #20 Posted February 17, 2009 I highly recommend that you get a copy of "The Practical Zone system" by Chris Johnson. He outlines a method by which to test effective film speed, exposure and development times based the materials that you use. As sagely mentioned above, the best results are abtained using sheet film, however Johnson outlines principles along with his method that apply to all formats. I found the book immensly helpful in guforming my own understanding of and methods for expressive shooting. -J. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.