Michael_527
29-Jul-2000, 22:10
Hello All,
I was introduced to the development by inspection method recently at a workshop. I had the opportunity to do some of the processing myself, and felt that this might ba a method that I should consider for my own processing.
We were using Ilford and Bergger films at the workshop. Back at home, I've gotte n the right filter and a switch setup so that I can do my own development by ins pection. I have been using TMAX 400 recently, so that's what I started my tests with.
The problem is, I don't see the density changes through the base side like I was able to with the Bergger and Ilford films. It appears that the TMAX (in D-76) does not clear enough to see the density through the base, as is the traditional method for development by inspection.
I know the anti-haliation dies take a good bit to clear in TMAX 400. Does this make the films essentially unsuitable for development by inspection in the tradi tional method? Clearly, you can still look at the emulsion side, but that's not the way everyone does it, presumably because the negative looks overly dense fr om the emulsion side.
Any suggestions would be appreciated.
I was introduced to the development by inspection method recently at a workshop. I had the opportunity to do some of the processing myself, and felt that this might ba a method that I should consider for my own processing.
We were using Ilford and Bergger films at the workshop. Back at home, I've gotte n the right filter and a switch setup so that I can do my own development by ins pection. I have been using TMAX 400 recently, so that's what I started my tests with.
The problem is, I don't see the density changes through the base side like I was able to with the Bergger and Ilford films. It appears that the TMAX (in D-76) does not clear enough to see the density through the base, as is the traditional method for development by inspection.
I know the anti-haliation dies take a good bit to clear in TMAX 400. Does this make the films essentially unsuitable for development by inspection in the tradi tional method? Clearly, you can still look at the emulsion side, but that's not the way everyone does it, presumably because the negative looks overly dense fr om the emulsion side.
Any suggestions would be appreciated.