PDA

View Full Version : Does Agitation



Pfiltz
24-Nov-2012, 08:28
work with paper, as in film while developing, to create more contrast?

I have filters, but would like to know if the harder I agitate during development effect contrast?

TIA

jp
24-Nov-2012, 08:41
Not practically. The goal of developing paper is to develop to completion. The dektol or whatever is already a fairly high contrast developer.

AJ Edmondson
24-Nov-2012, 09:23
JP498 gave it to you straight... develop to completion. Find a time and stick to it - going longer shifts the whole range, cutting the time weakens the scale. It is one of the few variables we can pretty well eliminate and you'll find that you progress to the goal of better prints by learning to make your judgments on the basis of your negative contrast and densities (even if you don't measure them.

Joel

Pfiltz
24-Nov-2012, 09:31
Thanks folks. Appreciate the guidance... I'm developing my Arista Developer for 2 minutes on all my work right now. Before I started to print, I always kept ready about how fussy folks where about dust, and what not on the negs... Scanning the negs wasn't a big concern due to PS, but now I see what all the fuss was about.

I actually used my first filter today during printing, for a shot of a bare tree in a field last evening.

I love this stuff.

ImSoNegative
24-Nov-2012, 10:01
I dont know what i would do if i didnt have my filters, they make a big difference, especially if you use uncoated lenses. i have not used the arista developer, read good things about it though

Pfiltz
24-Nov-2012, 11:01
I just did my first ever 8x10 of a great looking house, and using a 1.5 filter on it. I'm going to do one more, because the tops of the trees are lighter than I want, and feel the need to burn it in some in those areas...

What a feeling.:o

SpeedGraphicMan
24-Nov-2012, 11:25
I just did my first ever 8x10 of a great looking house, and using a 1.5 filter on it. I'm going to do one more, because the tops of the trees are lighter than I want, and feel the need to burn it in some in those areas...

What a feeling.:o

Congratulations!

Bruce Watson
25-Nov-2012, 11:42
work with paper, as in film while developing, to create more contrast?

Agitation does not create more contrast, either with negatives or prints. It does not. Read the literature - Henry, Haist, etc.

What it does do, is increase the rate at which fresh developer enters the emulsion. This in turn increases the rate at which density builds in the more exposed areas. The effect is the same as increasing developer time.

IOW, if all you're doing is increasing agitation, you get the exact same effect as increasing your development time. Agitation, in and of itself, has no effect on overall contrast.

Pfiltz
25-Nov-2012, 13:20
Agitation does not create more contrast, either with negatives.

Ahhh...

OK?

Your the first that's said that of all the folks I asked when I was trying to learn to develop film.

That's ok as well.

I'm fairly new to film, 6 months anyway, so I'm still cutting my teeth.

IanG
25-Nov-2012, 13:21
Not practically. The goal of developing paper is to develop to completion. The dektol or whatever is already a fairly high contrast developer.

Not strictly true. The development time should be sufficient to achieve a maximum black, anything past that point affects the contrast and tonality.

With warm tone pappers long development times result in colder tones, shorter development times give far greater warmth and usually require a slight increase in exposure.

Ian

Doremus Scudder
26-Nov-2012, 07:01
I'll go one further with this. The goal of development is to achieve a convincing black. It need not be the maximum the paper is capable of, just so it is what you want and does not leave the print weak and without the contrast range you need.

Some images will be too dark overall if you expose and develop enough for maximum black.

I concur wholeheartedly. I often print to have less than paper D-Max. Max black often looks solid; often I want a shadow that looks like negative, not positive, space.


Agitation does not create more contrast, either with negatives or prints. It does not. Read the literature - Henry, Haist, etc.

What it does do, is increase the rate at which fresh developer enters the emulsion. This in turn increases the rate at which density builds in the more exposed areas. The effect is the same as increasing developer time.

IOW, if all you're doing is increasing agitation, you get the exact same effect as increasing your development time. Agitation, in and of itself, has no effect on overall contrast.

Bruce,

While you are technically correct, you miss the syllogism in your own argument: If A = B, and if B = C; then A = C: If Increased Agitation = Increased Development Time, and if Increased Development Time = Increased Contrast; then Increased Agitation = Increased Contrast.

For all practical purposes, given the same overall developing time, increasing agitation when developing negatives will increase the contrast of the negatives.


For papers, of course, this does not apply nearly as much since we rarely stop paper development before almost full development has taken place, even if we are pulling the print before max black is developed. Those who work with paper negatives treat the paper just like film and control contrast with development. The resulting negatives have nothing like the full range of tones of a print intended for viewing, however.

Best,

Doremus

Bruce Watson
26-Nov-2012, 15:26
Bruce,

While you are technically correct...

Indeed. What I said stands on it's own. But it's not my research, it's Haist's. Feel free to argue with Haist if you must, but please refrain from trying to put words in my mouth.

ic-racer
26-Nov-2012, 18:19
Agitation does not create more contrast, either with negatives or prints.

Got some curves to show?
I do.

Doremus Scudder
27-Nov-2012, 05:48
Indeed. What I said stands on it's own. But it's not my research, it's Haist's. Feel free to argue with Haist if you must, but please refrain from trying to put words in my mouth.

Bruce,

The last thing in the world I would try to do is put words in your mouth. And, I concur with Haist and others when discussing things with the limited technical meaning of "increasing film contrast."

However, what we refer to in practice as a contrast increase, really an increase in the density range of the negative, i.e., a greater difference between lowest and highest densities, does increase with both extended developing time and increased agitation (since the latter equals the former). It is in this meaning of "contrast" that I was couching my comment. I find no harm in using the term contrast and its derivatives (low contrast, high contrast, etc.) to address density range in a negative; in fact, its usage in this meaning seems to be widely accepted.

According to the more narrowly-defined meaning of "contrast," increasing developing time does not increase contrast either, just density range.

So, while you are correct in the more technical, narrowly-defined sense...

Best,

Doremus

Pawlowski6132
27-Nov-2012, 10:26
It does. You just said so.


Agitation does not create more contrast, either with negatives or prints. It does not. Read the literature - Henry, Haist, etc.

What it does do, is increase the rate at which fresh developer enters the emulsion. This in turn increases the rate at which density builds in the more exposed areas. The effect is the same as increasing developer time.

IOW, if all you're doing is increasing agitation, you get the exact same effect as increasing your development time. Agitation, in and of itself, has no effect on overall contrast.