I don't know what kind of film that Bjorn uses, but for the film I use: TMAX 100 and 400 and Tri-X, Kodak publishes normal development times specific for sheet film (tray and rotary processing) that are not based on some kind of averaging 35mm film exposure.
I've never heard anyone suggest underexposing negative film on purpose, and I don't think that's the best way to go for someone who is starting out in the darkroom.
John Clark
www.johndclark.com
Well, it was more of an example of the first steps to vary development according to subject contrast/desired contrast back when I started to get beyond the D76/20deg/8min standard formula. My previous post was not intended to include a lot of data, rather just simple hints and tips which can pay off very quickly as the OP isn't that well versed into darkroom work.
So, the original question was about overexposure/underdevelopment, which I pointed out to be the first variation recommended. I then added the opposite as a sidenote.
Somewhere down the line (soon though), I'd recommend to get a bit more formal and make some tests to see how much to reduce/extend developing times and adjust the film speed, but I'd rather start by giving the newbee student something simple yet effective to start with as few numbers as possible.
Btw, the ever so popular "push processing" is all about underexposing and then resqueing whatever you can save by overdeveloping. Just about every newbee I've met have asked me about "how much ...". Say John, have you never heard of push processing?(Just to be clear, my opinion is that the subject of push processing doesn't work. You simply sacrifice everything in the shadows and get lots of grain and contrast. But as this is the large format photography forum, I recon noone does it here.)
//Björn
Realizing that I'm swimming against the current of convention, I always thought that a more useful train of thought would be "expose for density, develop for contrast".Originally Posted by Bruce Watson
With that must go the understanding that, as increased development also increases density, one figures that in when determining the exposure. Hence, the "Sloppy Zone System":
"My spot meter shows only three stops difference between the lights and darks. I'll increase the contrast with more development, but keep the negative from getting too dense by decreasing exposure a bit."
or,
"My spot meter says ten stops difference, whoa, that's a lot... I'll decrease the contrast with decreased development, but since that will also decrease density, I'll give it more exposure..."
Mind you, there are a lot of other variables... If I use HP5+, an uncoated lens, and stand development in abc pyro, my negatives will be completely different than yours if you use Tri-X, a multicoated lens, and drum development in Rodinal, even if we had identical exposure/development times.
"I love my Verito lens, but I always have to sharpen everything in Photoshop..."
That could be represented on the zone scale by a shadow value placed on Zone I and a highlight value that falls on Zone XI, a luminance ratio of 1024:1.
This certainly is a scenario that calls for decreased development or development modification with a compensating effect----to hold the density range of the negative to within the expsoure scale of the paper----but it's beyond me why you would make it more difficult by pushing the highlight densities even further up the scale? I don't see that there is anything to gain by doing that.
Went out shooting this past weekend to try to put some of this into practice. Here are some of the resulting shots. Not the greatest scans (or developing). All Kodak TMAX 100 developed in HC110.
1
2
3
4
Nice shots Sean. You dont say what or how you did it, but by the way your shots look you seem to have gotten the hang of it.
(I was once given access to a big workshop site where a major fire just had taken place. Most people just saw the devastation, while I saw lots of nice new shapes like twisted corrugated burnt sheet metal. Areas of unexpected grays, blacks and whites. While your site wasn't burnt down, I can really see why you made those shots.)
//Björn
Thanks, Bjorn.
I had with me very simple instructions from another posting on here (that I can't find at the moment) in a note on my iphone that explained metered reading in the shadow - 2 stops = zone 3. Then I just tried to keep track of which scenes had high contrast and which ones had low contrast (I did so by facing the shot film holders in different directions in my camera bag). Then, when developing I just guessed +/- 30 seconds or so of developing time (5 min was "normal").
Found it... it was Gem Singer's wonderfully concise description from this thread: http://www.largeformatphotography.in...ad.php?t=56334
Aim the one degree spot at the darkest area in the scene where you still want to see some detail. Close down two stops.
You have just placed the shadow area in Zone III.
That's usually the proper exposure for the scene.
Now, aim the spot at the brightest area in the scene.
If it's a five stop range between the darkest and brightest reading, use normal development.
Less than five, increase development.
More than five, decrease development.
No need to take a whole series of meter readings and average them. That's defeating the purpose.
Just make certain that you have given enough exposure to get some detail in the shadows. Then, develop for the highlights.
That's the Zone System in a nut shell.
While it isn't necessarily a real common situatation, it's also not unheard of to deliberately "underexpose." It's done in a situation where you want the darkest important shadow areas in the scene to appear black - no texture or detail - in the print.
One situation where I remember doing that was in photographing sand dunes in early morning light using b&w film. For some photographs I wanted the shadows in the dunes to be black - no texture or detail - and I wanted the areas where sunlight was striking the dunes to appear bright but still retain some texture. IIRC I placed the shadows on Zone II which caused the brighter areas to fall on Zones V and VI so I developed for my +1 time to move them to Zones VI - VII.
Brian Ellis
Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you do criticize them you'll be
a mile away and you'll have their shoes.
All good advice. In the zone system you expose for the shadows and then vary highlights by varying development time. Normally on a sunny day your are 2-3 stops over exposed. To fix this you meter for shadows, stop down two stops, and cut development time. The problem you run into with shorter development times is you run the risk of not having enough development time to let shadow and highlights developed properly. If you use a un diluted developer and have a normal development time of 7 minutes and you need to cut development times normal time - 3 time periods (based on some calibrations you have done) you run the risk of both shadows and highlights not having enough development time. Your might have to only develop 5 minutes and 38 seconds for example. This can be to short to get proper development for both shadows and highlights.
Jerry Orabona has a explanation for several methods of doing the test for the zone system. Look for film speed tests at this
URL:http://www.jerryo.com/teaching.htm
Wally Brooks
Everything is Analog!
Any Fool Can Shoot Digital!
Any Coward can shoot a zoom! Use primes and get closer.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks