Film

[madmax12]

I went to the beach today to get some nice cloud shots . As always you bring out the big camera and the crowd gathers. Nice people but they want to talk while you are trying to get the exposure set and focus and look through the usual stuff. I metered then took the shot . as I was cleaning up I noticed that the exposure Iso was set for 50 instead of 125 for the metering . Its has been awhile since I have dealt with this so a little help would be greatly appreciated. I am using HC110 dilution 1/49 . Do I increase the time or decrease the time or just develop it and see took two shots But I would like to get a little review on the process Thanx craig

[Mark Barendt]

I'd develop one normally and print it then if needed adjust development for the second.

[photobymike]

My scanner likes a little over exposure... half a stop or so.... "gives me more dynamic range." Silver printing would be a solid number 2 paper....

[Pawlowski6132]

My scanner likes a little over exposure... half a stop or so.... "gives me more dynamic range." Silver printing would be a solid number 2 paper....

Not sure what this means but , you will clearly need to increase development time.

[photobymike]

Increasing exposure by a half a stop or more helps fill in shadow detail (light or clear part of the negative). The highlight detail or shoulder (dark part of the negative) starts to drop out but my Epson V750 finds them and scans the detail..... On some films just increasing developing time does not help the shadows very much but does make the for a darker shoulder. More detail in the shadows means that there is an increase in dynamic range.... (more steps on the gray scale). Film emulsion has limits to how much density, (shoulder), or how little density, (toe), it can record. I always "shoot for the shadows" Interesting enough that digital cameras do this also because of a limited "dynamic range".... that is why the sky is white usually. Bottom line ...increasing development time helps shadow but (to different degrees with choice of film, developer, and developing technique) really works more to make the highlights (darker on the negative)

I hope this makes sense

[Pawlowski6132]

I understand all that but, the OP didn't increase exposure. He decreased it. So, if he develops N, then he will have an overall thin negative. He's basically pushing the film.

And I'm pretty sure more details in the shadows doesn't equate to an increase in dynamic range.

Increasing exposure by a half a stop or more helps fill in shadow detail (light or clear part of the negative). The highlight detail or shoulder (dark part of the negative) starts to drop out but my Epson V750 finds them and scans the detail..... On some films just increasing developing time does not help the shadows very much but does make the for a darker shoulder. More detail in the shadows means that there is an increase in dynamic range.... (more steps on the gray scale). Film emulsion has limits to how much density, (shoulder), or how little density, (toe), it can record. I always "shoot for the shadows" Interesting enough that digital cameras do this also because of a limited "dynamic range".... that is why the sky is white usually. Bottom line ...increasing development time helps shadow but (to different degrees with choice of film, developer, and developing technique) really works more to make the highlights (darker on the negative)

I hope this makes sense

[madmax12]

So increase develope time by 10% for the being one stop under exposed

[Pawlowski6132]

20%

[Bill L.]

Hmmm. My read of the OP was that he overexposed by a stop. I think the meter was set to ISO 50, and the film was ISO 125. Maybe I misunderstood?

[Pawlowski6132]

Hmmm. My read of the OP was that he overexposed by a stop. I think the meter was set to ISO 50, and the film was ISO 125. Maybe I misunderstood?

Crap. You're right. Sorry photo by mike. That'll be a good lesson to all you kids here. Don't try to read the forum posts and reply from your phone while driving and you're old and you don't have your reading glasses and you don't know what you're talking about.