What did you compose at Waters Edge?

[Boinzo]

Thanks Brian. I metered at 100 ISO and these were all 15 mins @ 20C ... I might try a bit less development next time although I think the 100 ISO might be leading me to underexposing a bit too.
Enjoy the Otways - would love to get there some time!
Practice will eventually get me there I hope.

[Accordionist]

Bonzo, I think, that major problem is in low detail in shadows. So, you need to do longer exposure, because development affectst only ligts. So, by pushed developement you will get only higher contrast, not the shadows. Zone system is your answer

[briand]

Boinzo..
I forgot to mention my processing is done in a Jobo tank with continuous agitation.
I think you are processing a bit to long. If you have a Grey Card meter from that, use that exposure, take two shots, then process one at 13min, and the second at 11min,
see if the negs are better.
Cheers Brian

[Boinzo]

Thanks Accordianist. I did try to use the zone system but was very concerned about blowing the highlights because there was such a big range of tones. The water was metering at about 12 and the shadows under the rocks down as far as 1. This left me very unsure on how best to proceed....

[Accordionist]

My recipe - with spotmeter measure the darkest area in the scene, where do you still want to have details. Now, move the measured value in Zone 2. (so, if you have measured e.g. 1/30 f22 its 1/4 f22) This is your exposure time. If there is to high contrast, you must short the developement. (do tryouts at home, to determine how much) And/Or you must use compensating developer like Pyro 510.

And it would be best, before all this to determine your own E.I.

[JamesFromSydney]

Boinzo: developing longer will push the highlights up and have little effect on the shadows. The shadows are basically set by the exposure. The bible for understanding this is The Negative by Ansel Adams, if you haven't read it yet.

Nice compositions, btw.

What are your exposure times for these shots?

[Boinzo]

Thanks James. The light bulb has started to light!
I have Ansel's book and have started reading.
Exposure times were around 4secs @ F22. I can clearly see I should have pushed the original exposure and pulled the dev now. I guess I'm still shaking off the digital "don't blow the highlights" thing...

[Brian Ellis]

Now my third outing!

These are from a hike yesterday in Lamington National Park near Brisbane - Queensland, AU.







These are FP4+ in Rodinal 1:50. Wondering if I should have maybe pushed the development longer. I am still trying to get my head around it all. There was a bit of wind which didn't help and I think I got my plane of focus all wrong in the last one.

Any comments or suggestions on how I can do better gratefully appreciated!

I'd suggest a longer exposure to retain some detail in those large black areas in the background and then reduce development time to keep the highlights from blowing out. Of course we're looking on a monitor, maybe those areas actually have detail in the print.

[JamesFromSydney]

Thanks James. The light bulb has started to light!
Exposure times were around 4secs @ F22.

Did you add exposure for reciprocity failure?

[Boinzo]

Did you add exposure for reciprocity failure?

Well that could be part of my issue. I knew I needed to add reciprocity but didn't have a table of values for fp4 with me. In the end I added only an additional half second or so to indicated exposure. I definitely need to put a table in my bag....

Brian - thanks for the input. It's true that in the original scans there is a touch of detail in the shadows but it isn't enough and the images are not how i had visualised them. There is much to learn....

It's fair to say i had it ar#e-about. I think you guys have helped get me back on track! Now I just need to get back into the forest!