WTF?!?!? Efke 25 5x7

[false_Aesthetic]

Did Efke recently change their formula for the ISO 25 film?

OR

Is there some reason that times for development would change (SIGNIFICANTLY) when when going from 4x5 to 5x7?

Last year I was shooting Efke 4x5 rated at 25 and developing it in PMK for 8 min with a 2 min pre-wash using a slosher tray.

I just developed 6 sheets of 5x7 the same way. They're super thin.

I'm using the same lens, same meter, etc. The only things that have changed are 1: camera size 2: film.

Thoughts?

[John Kasaian]

Are you shooting PL-25 or PL-25 ort?

[David A. Goldfarb]

Could you have made an exposure error, like forgetting bellows compensation (easy to do when moving up in format), or reciprocity (figured after adding in bellows factor)?

These films also can have storage issues, so when you get a new batch, it's good to make a quick test against the old batch for speed--one holder, film from old batch on one side, new batch on the other side, two identical test shots, process together.

[Scott Davis]

Another thought-

If your PMK pyro is of the same batch as the PMK you used for your 4x5 development last year, could your PMK have gone bad? I know PMK has a pretty long shelf life when in stock, but even it doesn't last forever.

[false_Aesthetic]

Film is labeled:

TROPICAL
efke PL 25 M
iso 25/15

Developer was bought in liquid form from BH in October. It's been kept closed in a dark room BUT over the Xmas holiday the temp may have varied significantly. Could this temp change have killed the dev?

I'm running film tests now. We'll see what happens.

[Vaughn]

Tropical -- doesn't that mean that there is extra hardener in the emulsion so that it can be processed at higher temperatures? Was the 4x5 "Tropical" also? If not, it may be taking longer for the developer to get into the emulsion.

Vaughn

[Glenn Thoreson]

Vaughn has a valid point. The tropical version will likely take quite a bit longer to develop at normal temps. You may get better results by raising the temperature. That would keep you times shorter. Do you pre soak? It will likely help with this film.

[Phil Hudson]

I understood that the "tropical" on the Efke film only referred to the film being packed in moisture resistant packaging, but I may be wrong....

[Ted Harris]

Why not send an email to Fotoimpex/Adox directly? They manufacture the film. You can get contact info from their website (www.fotoimpex.de) and they are very responsive. Alternately, call Freestyle tech support who are their US distributors.

[false_Aesthetic]

I sent an email to freestyle this is what was said:


The "tropical" label on the box means that that particular film can be
processed in high temperature developer and place. I think the reason
why you're getting underdeveloped negatives is that the area of the film
is much larger and has more silver content (especially Efke) compared to
4x5 negatives. I suggest processing it for a longer period of time (N+1
or N+2). Time changes also when processing from 120 to 4x5 to 5x7 to
8x10. It is basically due to the fact that the silver content of the
film is much greater than smaller size films.


Does this make sense?

[tim atherton]

they also have a bad history of loading the wrong films into the wrong boxes I think.... (or was that just J7C's re-badging?)

[David A. Goldfarb]

If you're using PMK or another very dilute developer, it makes sense if you are not proportionately increasing the volume of developer for the film area, because the developer could be exhausted before the film is fully developed. This could be a problem, for instance, if you were processing 220 film in the same volume of PMK as you used for 120, because the film area would be double, but the developer volume constant.

Since you are tray developing with a slosher, I would presume that this isn't the problem, just because a 5x7" sheet takes up twice as much space in the tray as a 4x5" sheet, so it should physically require twice the developer.

They did add a hardener to the emulsion at some point, so if your previous film was not hardened, that could be a factor, but I'd try to be sure I'd ruled out exposure errors first. Run a test sheet focusing on a subject at infinity in full daylight with no filters, using the sunny 16 rule to determine exposure, eliminating the need to calculate bellows factor, filter factor or reciprocity and eliminating the possibility of meter error (shutter error is still a potential issue).

[Ted Harris]

Tim, that was J&C

[Turner Reich]

Never assume that what's good for 4x5 is good for 5x7 or 8x10. Always test when changing anything. You should have at least developed one sheet to confirm.

[Vaughn]

I sent an email to freestyle this is what was said:


The "tropical" label on the box means that that particular film can be
processed in high temperature developer and place. I think the reason
why you're getting underdeveloped negatives is that the area of the film
is much larger and has more silver content (especially Efke) compared to
4x5 negatives. I suggest processing it for a longer period of time (N+1
or N+2). Time changes also when processing from 120 to 4x5 to 5x7 to
8x10. It is basically due to the fact that the silver content of the
film is much greater than smaller size films.


Does this make sense?

The second part does not -- if one increases the amount of develop approbiately for the increased surface area being developed. The incorperation of additional hardeners in the emulsion is how they usually make a film "tropical".

You had thin negs -- how were the shadows? Relatively normal detail in there? If you do, that would point to a development issue. If you don't, that points to an exposure issue...perhaps coupled with a development issue.

Good luck!

Vaughn

[DeBone75]

No matter if I prossses 1 4X5 sheet or 4 4X5 sheets at a time there is little or no difference in how the film comes out. Same is true if I develope 4 4X5, 2 5X7 or 1 8X10 they will all look the same if my times , temp and solution are all the same. All have the same amount of silver. So I don't see how 1 5X7 could have that much of a change. Now if you had just developed 8 4X5s and a role or two of 120 in the same soup then I could see the difference. So I would look else where.

[Vaughn]

No matter if I prossses 1 4X5 sheet or 4 4X5 sheets at a time there is little or no difference in how the film comes out. Same is true if I develope 4 4X5, 2 5X7 or 1 8X10 they will all look the same if my times , temp and solution are all the same. All have the same amount of silver. So I don't see how 1 5X7 could have that much of a change. Now if you had just developed 8 4X5s and a role or two of 120 in the same soup then I could see the difference. So I would look else where.

It makes a little difference. A liter of straight D-76 will develop 16 4x5's. Done in groups of four, one would increase the developing time by 10% after each group of four to give each of the four groups the same amount of development (to compensate for the weaken developer). So if the intial time was 10 minutes, the second group would be 11 min, the third group about 12 min and the last group about 13 min. So I imagine if one developed all 16 in a a liter of D-76 (if that is physically possible) one's time would be greater than the normal 10 min, as the developer is getting significantly weaker as the developing time moves along.

But it does sound like there is a greater problem than just tired developer here.

Vaughn

[venchka]

What am I missing? Area is area. Admitedly, the Efke film may have more silver in it. However, wouldn't an equal area of film require the same development time? Also, the film makers don't list additional times for more film in a tank. They do list minimum amounts of developer per 80 sq. in. of film. I'm new to 4x5 sheet film, but I'm not totally inexperienced.

The tropical treatment does seem like another variable to be tested for.

[David A. Goldfarb]

I don't think it's a developer issue, but there really is a difference between a developer like D-76 in normal dilutions and a highly dilute developer like PMK. There's enough capacity in 500ml of D-76 straight or 1+1 to process one roll of 120 or one roll of 220, or probably even two rolls of 220 back to back without a noticable difference. 500ml of PMK can process one roll of 120, but with 220 it might become exhausted before the development time is complete.

[Vaughn]

I don't think it's a developer issue, but there really is a difference between a developer like D-76 in normal dilutions and a highly dilute developer like PMK. There's enough capacity in 500ml of D-76 straight or 1+1 to process one roll of 120 or one roll of 220, or probably even two rolls of 220 back to back without a noticable difference. 500ml of PMK can process one roll of 120, but with 220 it might become exhausted before the development time is complete.

Agreed, so we need more info from FA...

1) Did he have shadow detail on the 5x7's (to tell us if he had proper exposure). The shadow detail should be there even if there was significant under-development...if the negs were exposed properly.

2) Assuming he used the same dilution of PMK for both 4x5 and 5x7, how many 4x5's in what volume PMK does he develop at a time. And what was the volume of PMK did he use for the six 5x7's. This will tell us if he exhausted the developer. According to David, he might need up to 1.5 liters of PMK for six 5x7's. (a 120 roll is about equal in surface area as two 5x7's.)
It is fun playing photo detective, but if posters would provide all the info up front, it would be much easier -- and less guesswork.

Vaughn

David...500ml of straight D-76 can develop two rolls of 120, or one roll of 220, or two 8x10's...anymore than that would exhaust the D-76. Diluted 1:1, 500ml of D-76 can only develop one roll of 120 (or one 8x10)...and be exhausted before it could finish developing a roll of 220.

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/j78/j78.jhtml#004

[David A. Goldfarb]

David...500ml of straight D-76 can develop two rolls of 120, or one roll of 220, or two 8x10's...anymore than that would exhaust the D-76. Diluted 1:1, 500ml of D-76 can only develop one roll of 120 (or one 8x10)...and be exhausted before it could finish developing a roll of 220.

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/j78/j78.jhtml#004

Kodak is probably playing it safe on those numbers. I've certainly done two rolls of 35mm/36 exp. in 500ml of D-76 (1+1), which would be the same as one roll of 220, and I suspect many others have as well.

[false_Aesthetic]

Just to be clear:

I did 5 sheets of 5x7 in 3000 ml of dev. so figure 175 sq inches

The shadows were super thin. SUPER DOOPER THIN 2-3 stops maybe. One or two of the shots could've been thin because I might have mis-figured reciprocity failure but the other three were all "normal" exposures.

[David A. Goldfarb]

The recommendation for PMK is 1 8x10 (or 2 5x7's)/500ml so you look okay on that score.

Were you photographing things that were close (like indoors) or far away?

[Shen45]

With BTZS tubes I process with PMK anywhere from 1:2:70-130 with a maximum prepared developer per film of 60ml. Someone better at maths can work out the developer ratio.

With D76 I use it at the rate of 1:3.5 with Arista Edu Ultra and again that is the mixed developer content per 5x4 sheet. Approx 14 ml D76 per sheet.

For some reason in the tubes there appears to be very little oxidation of the developer even though it is such a small quantity. agitation is not gentle.

The same negs processed in a Jobo have a far greater bf stain when compared to the same film processed in the BTZS tubes with PMK. The PMK looses none of its energy and processes strongly [60mls] out to 20 minutes in the tubes whereas to achieve the same measureable density curve the developer has to be changed at the 10 minute mark in the Jobo system.

Both D76 and PMK are very useful developers.

As for your Efke film I don't think they make any slower than 25iso. From my tests with D76 the 25 was about 8 -10 iso

Steve

[Chauncey Walden]

I use 300ml of PMK 1:2:100 per 8x10 in a slosher type tray. The same in a Jobo with the addition of 1.5ml of an EDTA solution per 300ml of PMK. The first 5x7 Efke 25 I did for 9 minutes at 70 and it was too dense. As for longevity of PMK, I just finished the last of some I mixed over two years ago.

[Vaughn]

Kodak is probably playing it safe on those numbers. I've certainly done two rolls of 35mm/36 exp. in 500ml of D-76 (1+1), which would be the same as one roll of 220, and I suspect many others have as well.

David -- you are right...our students do the same all the time. But now that I think of it, it might be one of the reasons that our #3.5 to 5 contrast filters seem to get used a lot...they tend to go with the recommended times and probably should develop a little longer to counter the stretched D-76.

"The shadows were super thin. SUPER DOOPER THIN 2-3 stops maybe."

I believe that if you are exposing your shadows for Zone III, then 2 to 3 stops less would have no silver exposed/developed -- nothing in the shadows at all (but that may be what you call super-dooper thin.)

I don't know...you have a film with additional harder added to the emulsion, and also using a developer that hardens the emulsion as well. Interesting combination...may not be the cause, but still interesting.

Vaughn

[false_Aesthetic]

Bellows extension was minimal-- I'll say at most 135mm on a 125mm lens.
The shadows were clear and what should've been around zone 5 was more like zone 3.

Incidentally, I compared these negs with what other older ones and there are two differences: 1) the base is much more pink even after 30 min of washing. 2) the Pyro stain is a bit more brown than the green I'm used to.


Thanks for all your help.

[Gene McCluney]

I think the film you got in 5x7 is actually "different" than the film you used in 4x5. I don't think the difference between a 4x5 and 5x7 sheet is enough to make the kind of difference you experienced a developer issue. After all a 5x7 sheet is less than 1/2 of a roll of 35mm film in area. I would go for a longer pre-soak (I personally use 4 minutes), and a longer developing time and see what you get. I would go 30 to 50% longer in developing time for this test.