Tmax 100 in D76 +/- development

[Pere Casals]

Yeah, I built a shutter speed tester a while back. I spent three years studying electrical engineering and am pretty darn handy with circuits. That's another hobby of mine. That's how I know they vary from day to day. Some are more stable than others. And I do keep a note of what the actual shutter speeds are, because there are usually at least a few markings that are off. In fact, if I have time, I'll usually check the compound shutters I think I might use that day before I leave the house, to see where it's operating on that particular day. But they can still vary a bit throughout the day and it's not always possible to check the speeds right before I use them. Sometimes I just have to take my chances. Being a compound shutter, I can use the in between speeds and compare them to the sound of a Copal shutter in the field to get a rough guess of how it's working at slower speeds. But as you can imagine, that's a pain to mess with, takes up even more time, and still not that accurate.

I suppose my real problem is I'm cheap and like to buy these old lenses in compound shutter rather than buy nicer, newer lenses in more reliable shutters. Maybe one day I'll have the money to replace all of them with nicer, more reliable lenses.

"Compunds, if clean and in good condition, they are very accurate and reliable. Old lubricants tend to become gummy with age. Modern synthetic oils are much longer lived and also have viscosity which is less temperature dependant"

So your problem may be solved by cleaning and lubricating. Then you'll get repeatble times. But a CLA is more expensive than the shutter is worth.

So you perhaps can try it on your own, as an adventure


Problem with Compounds is "they respond very poorly to the "dip in solvent and blast with compressed air" method of amateur repair. " because diafragm may suffer.


http://www.skgrimes.com/library/used...tters/compound


https://lommen9.home.xs4all.nl/shutters/compound/


I'm to try cleaning a shutter just spraying Interflon Food Lube, a dry teflon lube spray, we'll see...

[interneg]

I completely agree with what you say now.

But, to me, we cannot overlook metering importance. I agree that for some shots it can be quite straight, but IMHO some great scenes need a very well thinked metering.

After the now scheduled Capital Punishment of LF Acros, metering well night scenes will be more difficult.

Regards.

Even so, useful metering is not hard & certainly does not require the mental gymnastics that zone system fanatics believe. A bit of experience & a few boxes of film will tell you more than most manuals.

Night time - consider that in cinema, an EV of about 6-7 is regarded as about right for a reasonably bright city street, while keeping it looking believable - that's about 8-16s at f32 on ISO 100 sort of range - & from what I recall from Howard Bond's tests, TMY-II & Delta 100 lose a stop or less of speed at 2 minutes metered exposure time. At that point, TMY-II is still a stop faster than Acros - in fact, even HP5 is pretty good at the under 30s range.

Don't forget that the vast majority of iconic night time LF photography was done without the aid of Acros, or for that matter, pretty much any of the controlled-crystal-growth core-shell iodide emulsions that enable such good reciprocity characteristics today. They are extremely high-tech and complicated emulsions compared to the k-grain single-run emulsions that can be relatively easily made at home with simple equipment.

[Willie]

A couple things. Remember the old saw "It's the Zone System, not the Pinpoint system".

Then, the 1:1 and one shot advice makes sense. More sense is Ilford ID11 to replace D76. Reason being that D76 gains a bit in activity sitting after being mixed as a stock solution. ID11 does not.

Given you are using Large Format lenses perfect precision outside a controlled lab is nearly impossible. A bit of shutter varience due to temperatures/tolerances - whatever coupled with less than perfect exposure makes it 'get close and work from there'. Gives you a lot to work with from start to finish whether working in the darkroom or with computer printing.

[Pere Casals]

Even so, useful metering is not hard & certainly does not require the mental gymnastics that zone system fanatics believe. A bit of experience & a few boxes of film will tell you more than most manuals.

I'd like to add that perhaps most famous fine print, the "Moonrise", was made without photometer, still a rational exposure was made by calculating from moon brightness. IMHO, with growing skills one knows better when something matters or not, IMHO at the begining accurate metering is more important because that explains to the learners the errors and the margins the exposure has.

IMHO Zone System is not a religion, just a way to tell how curves are. At the end we only have sensitometric curves, nothing else, from a lux reading on the GG and exposure time we can know the density we'll obtain for every spot of the scene. Of course we can have curve families for each developer dilution and agitation routine.

Zone system is just a sound field simplification for that, there are others... precise calculation is BTZS, first part of the book. The second part is about field recipes.

If one understands the BTZS it doesn't matter what field rule uses.

Night time - consider that in cinema, an EV of about 6-7 is regarded as about right for a reasonably bright city street, while keeping it looking believable - that's about 8-16s at f32 on ISO 100 sort of range - & from what I recall from Howard Bond's tests, TMY-II & Delta 100 lose a stop or less of speed at 2 minutes metered exposure time. At that point, TMY-II is still a stop faster than Acros - in fact, even HP5 is pretty good at the under 30s range.

Don't forget that the vast majority of iconic night time LF photography was done without the aid of Acros, or for that matter, pretty much any of the controlled-crystal-growth core-shell iodide emulsions that enable such good reciprocity characteristics today. They are extremely high-tech and complicated emulsions compared to the k-grain single-run emulsions that can be relatively easily made at home with simple equipment.

Of, course, but when one has a night scene with some 7 stops very accurate metering and calculations are needed, becasue shadows fall in LIRF more than lights, and negative contrast goes wild.

For this shot https://www.flickr.com/photos/125592...posted-public/ I had to learn SCR-SCIM, with laser printed marks (Ross way), IIRC you pointed me doing that.

Negative has very good information of all areas, but it took me 30min metering, next time perhaps I'll be able to meter that in 15min. I remember that there was no error margin, and I had the HP5 film calibration made with matching 15s exposure, calibrated with the matching agitation routine.

First I did a braketing with a SLR/HP5, I retourned next weekend with the cambo and a HP5 calibration graph specially made for the matching 15s exposure and reduced agitation.

The negative was good and I made a digital version in some 10min, still a sound darkroom contact copy took me a lot, I don't know how many hours of testing and learning. And I'm not finished.


Acros is always good for night, not necessary for all night shots, but as the scene requires DOF (with near&distant subjects) one goes to long exposures, and one starts to lose scene dynamic range, as LIRF starts eating toe.

Then I bought Acros sheets, and 3 weeks later they say: we kill that.

In those conditions Acros delivers some 2 or 3 additional gold stops. So it will be a painful LF loss.

I found an alternative: hypersensitization. There is plenty information from astronomers. Looking to the future I'll go to this adventure rather than cold storing.


Regards.

[jim10219]

"Compunds, if clean and in good condition, they are very accurate and reliable. Old lubricants tend to become gummy with age. Modern synthetic oils are much longer lived and also have viscosity which is less temperature dependant"

So your problem may be solved by cleaning and lubricating. Then you'll get repeatble times. But a CLA is more expensive than the shutter is worth.

So you perhaps can try it on your own, as an adventure


Problem with Compounds is "they respond very poorly to the "dip in solvent and blast with compressed air" method of amateur repair. " because diafragm may suffer.


http://www.skgrimes.com/library/used...tters/compound


https://lommen9.home.xs4all.nl/shutters/compound/


I'm to try cleaning a shutter just spraying Interflon Food Lube, a dry teflon lube spray, we'll see...

Quite true. I've actually CLA'd them myself already, which may explain why they're not wholly accurate (ha!). Unfortunately, two of my "Compound #3" shutters were in pretty rough shape to begin with. I actually bought a third just for parts to get the other two working. Also the springs have lost some of their tension making that difficult balancing act between them somewhat unbalanced. That, and the pistons came with a good bit of corrosion, and the paper seals are gone or badly decomposed. It's been a bit of a chore figuring out just how much air should leak from those things. Too much, and they only have one speed. Not enough, and they won't at all. My old Wollensak compound shutter became fairly consistent after a homemade CLA, but it was in better shape to begin with. I'm pretty mechanically inclined, and with a DSLR by my side, I have no problems fully dismantling, cleaning, and rebuilding a shutter. At least up to the Compur Rim Set variety. I've yet to attempt any of the newer designs. Just take it slow and document every step along the way, and it's not usually too bad. I found some manuals online which gave me a good idea of what to lubricate and what not to. Though they weren't too clear on which lubricants to use, but some trial and error has helped me figure that part out! It's been a fun project anyway.

The good news is I've spent a whole lot more time than money on these lenses, and they somewhat work well enough that I can use them and 90% of the time get something usable from them. I do love to repair stuff, so to me it's time well spent, even if they're never going to be good as new! I'd probably be a repairman of some sort if there was any money in it. But a brief stint as an electronics repairman taught me that in today's throw away world, few people see the value in spending more on a repair than what it costs to replace it. And I can't say I'd blame them. I'd rather replace these lenses with something newer and better than send them off to be properly repaired by an expert myself. Just a fact of the times.

[Pere Casals]

Quite true. I've actually CLA'd them myself already, which may explain why they're not wholly accurate (ha!). Unfortunately, two of my "Compound #3" shutters were in pretty rough shape to begin with. I actually bought a third just for parts to get the other two working. Also the springs have lost some of their tension making that difficult balancing act between them somewhat unbalanced. That, and the pistons came with a good bit of corrosion, and the paper seals are gone or badly decomposed. It's been a bit of a chore figuring out just how much air should leak from those things. Too much, and they only have one speed. Not enough, and they won't at all. My old Wollensak compound shutter became fairly consistent after a homemade CLA, but it was in better shape to begin with. I'm pretty mechanically inclined, and with a DSLR by my side, I have no problems fully dismantling, cleaning, and rebuilding a shutter. At least up to the Compur Rim Set variety. I've yet to attempt any of the newer designs. Just take it slow and document every step along the way, and it's not usually too bad. I found some manuals online which gave me a good idea of what to lubricate and what not to. Though they weren't too clear on which lubricants to use, but some trial and error has helped me figure that part out! It's been a fun project anyway.

The good news is I've spent a whole lot more time than money on these lenses, and they somewhat work well enough that I can use them and 90% of the time get something usable from them. I do love to repair stuff, so to me it's time well spent, even if they're never going to be good as new! I'd probably be a repairman of some sort if there was any money in it. But a brief stint as an electronics repairman taught me that in today's throw away world, few people see the value in spending more on a repair than what it costs to replace it. And I can't say I'd blame them. I'd rather replace these lenses with something newer and better than send them off to be properly repaired by an expert myself. Just a fact of the times.

Do you know where I can find a repair manual that covers the compound #5 of my Symmar, 1964 vintage ?

It is in pretty good shape, but I'd like to understand well how it works for the case I need to solve something...


Until now I've only gone inside Seikos, now I've one openned, in course to understand what happens there...

[Kevin J. Kolosky]

Yeah, I built a shutter speed tester a while back. I spent three years studying electrical engineering and am pretty darn handy with circuits. That's another hobby of mine. That's how I know they vary from day to day. Some are more stable than others. And I do keep a note of what the actual shutter speeds are, because there are usually at least a few markings that are off. In fact, if I have time, I'll usually check the compound shutters I think I might use that day before I leave the house, to see where it's operating on that particular day. But they can still vary a bit throughout the day and it's not always possible to check the speeds right before I use them. Sometimes I just have to take my chances. Being a compound shutter, I can use the in between speeds and compare them to the sound of a Copal shutter in the field to get a rough guess of how it's working at slower speeds. But as you can imagine, that's a pain to mess with, takes up even more time, and still not that accurate.

I suppose my real problem is I'm cheap and like to buy these old lenses in compound shutter rather than buy nicer, newer lenses in more reliable shutters. Maybe one day I'll have the money to replace all of them with nicer, more reliable lenses.

I'd like to see and hear more about that shutter tester that you built.

Also, remember, even though exposure controls mostly the low values, and development the high values, when using the zone system and changing development times the low values will be affected. That is why many photographers will alter the ISO of their film by a half stop one way or the other when they are going to use either reduced or extended development.

[Pere Casals]

I'd like to see and hear more about that shutter tester that you built.

Even you did not ask to me, let point next...


Here it shows how Audacity is used to measure time, but used photocell (shf 309) is discontinued .

http://www.mraggett.co.uk/shuttertes...ttertester.htm


Here you have a plain photocell, wired and boxed, PC and smartphone versions...



It is what I bought, but I use an USB oscilloscope to take the readings.

[DG 3313]

I like T Max-100 sheets in fresh D-76, metered at ISO 64 and developed @ room temperature in a 1:1 solution for 10.5 minutes (rotary drum).

[jim10219]

I'd like to see and hear more about that shutter tester that you built.

Also, remember, even though exposure controls mostly the low values, and development the high values, when using the zone system and changing development times the low values will be affected. That is why many photographers will alter the ISO of their film by a half stop one way or the other when they are going to use either reduced or extended development.

Pere's example is pretty much what I did. Though mine doesn't have the second diode, uses a slightly different phototransistor, and runs off a 9V. But the basic idea is the same. Just a battery, phototransistor, capacitor to smooth out the noise, a resistor to control the current, and flash light to trigger the phototransistor through the shutter, and a computer recording program to measure the time. The one issue I have with it is it has a limit to how fast it can measure due to the reaction speed of the phototransistor. At around 1/200, mine stops reading faster speeds, which isn't really an issue for compound shutters, as they almost never go faster than 1/100 (or even that fast in reality).

Even you did not ask to me, let point next...


Here it shows how Audacity is used to measure time, but used photocell (shf 309) is discontinued .

http://www.mraggett.co.uk/shuttertes...ttertester.htm


Here you have a plain photocell, wired and boxed, PC and smartphone versions...



It is what I bought, but I use an USB oscilloscope to take the readings.