PDA

View Full Version : help developing problems 8x10 - WITH PICTURES.



Clieben
19-Feb-2019, 21:15
Having developed first batch of 8x10s, shot on ILFORD 100, I have found some issues. Low contrast prints and thin negatives.

These were shot with a shattered lens, and of course that will affect the contrast as well as other properties, however I am convinced the issue lies in the development process, or perhaps using the 100 speed film in low light (reciprocity failure?).

Also of note the purple in the negative which is from too little fix?

I understand this can be fixed with multigrade paper and filters, FOR THIS ROUND, but I would like to not have this happen again.
The future photos will not have been used on the broken lens but still that is not the reason for this overall 'gray low-con tone.'

Here are some pics of photos, neg, and developer + notes.

Any ideas / solutions? Thank you.



https://ibb.co/pK7hm0k

https://ibb.co/M7qSNfK

https://ibb.co/r2SQ8Wc
https://ibb.co/TPS43pB
https://ibb.co/Wkx6jf2

Clieben
19-Feb-2019, 21:28
Note: these were 10 second exposures.

koraks
19-Feb-2019, 23:58
It doesn't say how long you developed in your notes. Likely the development time was too short. Also your measurement system for the developer (15ml to "3 cups") doesn't sound like something that is optimally consistent.

Clieben
20-Feb-2019, 03:01
It doesn't say how long you developed in your notes. Likely the development time was too short. Also your measurement system for the developer (15ml to "3 cups") doesn't sound like something that is optimally consistent.
Thank you-

Now that I think about it, even a day time test was a very thin negative. The measurements are because I use the small measuring glass and larger water measuring glass, bought from a local store... (I agree with you). Development IIRC was 30-50 seconds with light agitation from all four sides.

Huub
20-Feb-2019, 03:08
They look underdeveloped indeed. This could also be caused by not using enough developer or the developer being too cold. When using Rodinal you should at least use 8 ml of concentrate per sheet of 8x10. Also make sure the temperature is above 18 C and compensate the time from any deviation from 20 C.

HoodedOne
20-Feb-2019, 04:30
Development IIRC was 30-50 seconds with light agitation from all four sides.

Is this development for paper or for a negative. Because for a negative it seems very short.
When I develop 4x5 or 8x10 negatives, the development times are 6+ minutes. (rodinal/r09 1+50)

Also I do not totally agree with the remark Huub made. I use a Patterson Orbital for developing my 8x10 film. in the Orbital I use 120ml with constant agitation for 6 minutes, and only use 2.5 - 3 ml of r09. And thatís most of the time for dubble sided x-ray film. I do this at room temperature (approx. 19C), but I never check the temp. when developing.
So the amount of developer needed, is depending on how you develop. With constant agitation you can use less.

pepeguitarra
20-Feb-2019, 06:10
I haven't developed a print in the dark room yet, but the fixer seems to be for paper, not film. Does anyone know if it will have the same effect? Maybe the instructions he has is for developing prints, not negative.

alexmuir
20-Feb-2019, 06:21
The fixer will do both film and prints. You should use different batches of working solution for each, however, and avoid using the film batch for the prints, and vice versa.
Alex


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Fred L
20-Feb-2019, 06:31
30-50 seconds development time ? that's your problem there. I don't shoot Ilford, but would imagine Rodinal at 1:50, dev time shld be somewhere around 10 minutes or so (probably more ?).

HoodedOne
20-Feb-2019, 06:36
30-50 seconds development time ? that's your problem there. I don't shoot Ilford, but would imagine Rodinal at 1:50, dev time shld be somewhere around 10 minutes or so (probably more ?).

The Massive Dev app says 14 min.

Pere Casals
20-Feb-2019, 07:15
Now that I think about it, even a day time test was a very thin negative.

For LF, specially for 8x10, it's interesting controlling well your process.

I'd suggest you next books: Darkroom Cookbook , Beyond the Zone System, very cheap used.

I'd also suggest you practice with roll film, you will learn easier (and cheaper) to meter from bracketings. All this would help you to progress faster both in analog process and in LF.


IMHO mastering all that it's about learning some theory and practicing. The theory vs practice balance is a personal choice, but sure that learning well the basic theory helps the practical learning.

Doremus Scudder
20-Feb-2019, 12:56
There's a lot going on here. I'll try to take it in order.

Exposure: your negatives look underexposed. If you made a 10 second exposure and didn't adjust for reciprocity failure, you'd have underexposed your negatives. Ilford has charts in their tech sheets with all the info you need. Do your homework. Also check your metering, film speed setting, etc.

Negative development: Use a standard developer with the manufacturer's recommended time for the film you are using for a starting point. Be careful and precise mixing chemicals. If you are not 100% familiar with the whole process from beginning to end and the specifics of the chemistry you are using, read up. Do make sure you fix properly.

Print development: 30-50 seconds is on the short side even for RC paper. Again read up... Your prints look underexposed and underdeveloped.

Here's a good and low-tech process check. Print a negative (make a test strip) so that the clear area on the negative is just barely distinguishable from maximum paper black (paper exposed to room light and developed for the proper time in properly-mixed fresh chemistry will give you a base line). Then, make a whole print of a negative at the exposure that gives you the black you want. This is a "proper proof." Evaluating it will tell you what's wrong with your process. No shadow detail in the print = underexposed negative. Not enough contrast in the print = underdeveloped negative. And vice-versa for both the above.

Bottom line: it seems you need to learn a bit more and become more familiar with the process in general and what you are trying to do in particular. It's not rocket science, but you do have to embrace the learning curve and pay your dues (and read the instructions...).

Best,

Doremus

Clieben
20-Feb-2019, 13:47
These responses are incredible. I meant 30-50 seconds for developing the negative and I agree the water could've and should've been warmer. Will purchase the used books mentioned and run some specific tests before developing the next round of film. ... I think having accidentally burned the first two actual pieces of film black by thinking I could work in safelight (having been many years since in darkrooms), I was terrified to destroy any more photos "overprocessing." Better to have a light image than none at all. As recommended, a lot of careful testing / approach is in order.

These responses are all very clear and amazing. Unexpected. Thank you all... over the world.

Clieben
20-Feb-2019, 13:52
The Massive Dev app says 14 min.
Are you both referring to negative or print? The negative is definitely very thin. Ty.

Clieben
20-Feb-2019, 13:53
30-50 seconds development time ? that's your problem there. I don't shoot Ilford, but would imagine Rodinal at 1:50, dev time shld be somewhere around 10 minutes or so (probably more ?).

Negative or print? Thank you.

Clieben
20-Feb-2019, 13:56
I haven't developed a print in the dark room yet, but the fixer seems to be for paper, not film. Does anyone know if it will have the same effect? Maybe the instructions he has is for developing prints, not negative.

"I have never in my life made music for money or fame. God walks out of the room when you are thinking about money." -- Quincy Jones

Think about this all the time, reading your signature on these boards.

Clieben
20-Feb-2019, 13:58
The most important thing I think is the failure in developing the negative... possibly the reciprocity failure, noone mentioned I'm using the wrong chemicals so I suppose they are good. Will be purchasing the books and some negative film solely to learn.

HoodedOne
20-Feb-2019, 15:12
Are you both referring to negative or print? The negative is definitely very thin. Ty.

It's the time for developing a Ilford Delta 100 negative in Rodinal/R09 1+50

https://digitaltruth.com/devchart.php?Film=%25Ilford+Delta+100%25&Developer=Rodinal&mdc=Search&TempUnits=C&TimeUnits=D

Pere Casals
20-Feb-2019, 15:22
possibly the reciprocity failure, noone mentioned I'm using the wrong

No much reciprocity failure in your case, but remember that Rodinal is not a full speed developer, you have an speed loss of 1/3 to 2/3 stop.

Perhaps it's better to start with D-76 or Xtol, because you have full box speed and some compensating effect. Then in the future you may try with other developers to find what you like. You may want the Rodinal character, but I'd I start with D-76 or Xtol, or with ilford equivalents, some are liquid and convenient.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WSvQh17SxkE

Willie
20-Feb-2019, 17:25
Read Horenstein on Basic Photography and learn to tell the difference in underexposure compared to underdevelopment. This will help a lot as you move forward.

Clieben
21-Feb-2019, 03:20
Thank you Pere and Willie. I will look into the D76 or XTOL. I chose rodinal because I once saw an incredible low contrast (...) print on here that had that as the developer... Printing out this entire thread and following every suggestion as well. Thank you.

Clieben
21-Feb-2019, 03:30
Well that video gets straight to the point... Ty Pere.

Pere Casals
21-Feb-2019, 04:35
I once saw an incredible low contrast

There are low contrast developers, but in this case (Rodinal) Low Contrast comes more from how we use developer that from developer itself.

Rodinal is not a low contrast developer. A main feature rodinal sports is that it isn't a solvent developer, so grains shows well. Other developers have solvent effect, so grains are less perceived (specially in small formats), in the Xtol case this is conbined with high "sharpness" what is not not a common combination, as solvent effect usually adds an slight blur.

Anyway in LF grain is way less important, of course.

Let me point that I consider Rodinal an excellent aesthetic tool, also there is nothing worth in starting with it, just saying that starting with a D-76 or Xtol it's a bit easier because they are more (say) "general purpose" rather than specialized.

Of course Xtol/D-76 allows custom specialized usage, but D-76 is the standard to what all developers are compared, so it's a good reference in a learning process, with Xtol adding 1/3 stops advantage in the shadows.

Regards

pepeguitarra
21-Feb-2019, 09:06
I enjoy the way this (actual) college professor explain thing. Here is a video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OdpfRqDDZyw) that may apply to what you are doing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OdpfRqDDZyw