I was putting them in 3 and 4 and getting black. My thought was I can adjust the shadows down easier than up. I would consider this as my test. From this set of images I can decide what I want to do. I shot all of them in the same way as almost all were landscapes.
Or you could follow standard practice and save yourself a lot of grief, but it’s your time.
“You often feel tired, not because you've done too much, but because you've done too little of what sparks a light in you.”
― Alexander Den Heijer, Nothing You Don't Already Know
Was that specifically T-Max 100 dev'd in Pyrocat at standard dilution and normal temps? What was your exposure details - aperture, shutter speed, time of day? What did you meter and place in Zone 3? What meter are you using?
A lot of variables to consider. Your meter could be 3 stops off for instance.
I know we've talked about the basics of "expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights," but that does assume a few things - such as accurate meters and correct metering, proper development, etc. If putting shadows in Z5 works for you with your gear and such, that's fine - I've certainly heard of people doing that. I just don't advise such a thing generally, especially for TMX which is less forgiving IMO.
Would you be interested in me sharing a couple scans from negatives, with both the "baseline" scan and edited image, along with how I metered / visualized the image?
Everyone can use words however they like, but if you use then differently than standard practice, you're likely to be misunderstood. That will lead to people giving you mistaken advice, which will lead to more confusion.... If you place a shadow on Zone III, and there's not enough tonal separation/detail in the shadows, then your film speed rating is too high. It doesn't matter what the box says. Zone I is at least .1 above fb+f. A scanner can easily get detail at that that level. If you're not getting detail at Zone III, then you're grossly underexposing your film. If you're grossly underexposing your film, how do you know that your development time is ideal? You don't appear to have the basics down, but nonetheless you want to photograph high sbr scenes. Isn't that putting the cart before the horse? Figuring all of this out only takes a few simple tests.
“You often feel tired, not because you've done too much, but because you've done too little of what sparks a light in you.”
― Alexander Den Heijer, Nothing You Don't Already Know
Yup. This. Exactly this.Originally Posted by Peter De Smidt
Bruce Watson
Yes, listen to Peter.
I don't really do Zone tests anymore, but I did do some way back when I first started and was getting the hang of spot metering and visualizing the scene in b&w.
You seem to expose your color films okay, so I'm confused as to what the issues are with your b&w film/processing.
Perhaps too many variables in play, if you are shooting in extreme contrasts, using filters, etc. etc. while trying to nail the basic exposure stuff.
Show us some film that you've had issues with shadow detail on - both a scan, and if possible, a picture of the negative on a light table.
Steven
Have you bracketed exposures and bracked your processing yet so you can figure out how your developer works with your film ?
It's one of the first things I do whenever I use a new film/developer.. If you haven't yet you might consider it before processing all your film and getting crappy negatives because you are just winging it. Not sure if you have a small format camera you can load up with the same emulsion you are using but if you do you can meter at box speed and then bracket whole stops 3 above and 3 below for a variety of exposures of the same scene; do this with a few rolls of various lighting conditions. then ... take 1 developer, sometimes something plain vanilla works best ( like D76 of ID-11 or Sprint Film Developer ) and develop it for what it says to develop at box speed, then you are going to process another roll 30% more and another 30% less ( some do 50% more and less its up to you ) and then look at your film with a loupe, or with a plain sheet of paper behind it, scan or print or whatever you do to get your final image, and look and inspect them and that way you will have a better idea how to proceed with your curent batch of film. I'm not sure about you but sheet film is expensive, going to locations is time and exposing film is effort and to just wing it without having done a little bit of a film and developer/exposure test to me at least would be an expense i wouldn't want to pay for. if you don't have a small format camera, you can do a similar test but with your dark slide making something like an exposure "test strip" by blocking off the light from portions of your negative for a few sheets and process and scan &c the same way. it might be a few sheets or a few short rolls of film but at least it will give you some thing tangible to see how your methods work, especially since your lenses aren't calibrated like anyone else's, you don't agitate or shuffle like anyone else, or have hangers and tanks or nitrogen burst so no matter who gives you advice its what we do and most likely has very little to do with what you are going to do.
as someone who has been using caffneol c with a splash of print developer mixed in for IDK 12+ years, i still say use that, it will be every bit as good an anything else that is out there that you are using.
good luck!
john
I think jnantz sums it up well. Every bit of the chain of events will have variables, and broad but simple tests will save a lot of time and effort. I am impatient, and for a long time “winged it,” with the variable results one would expect. After many years when I was finally able to get back into darkroom work I took a photo class to force myself to get out there and do some assignments. One of them was a controlled exposure and development ring around for a high contrast scene with a 18% gray card in the scene as a control. My meters are calibrated and I test my shutter speeds so I have those under control. We were using TMax 100 and the TMax RS developer. Interestingly the print with the best highlight control and best shadow detail was the exposure at box speed at the recommended development time. Imagine!
I will look for a couple to post up.
I was using a Seikonic digital spot meter, but have since switched to a Pentax analog spot meter.
I get that most do testing of their film choice, developer, etc. I get the money aspects of testing with 35mm vs 4x5 however, using my Canon 1NRS with Tmax100 is an apples to oranges test. The optics are wholly and completely different than my 4x5 optics. It would be like learning to shoot at 1000 meters with a.308 but shooting at 50 meters with a 22 or worse a pellet gun. While certain basics are the same, the required skills tools and knowledge are completely different.
Some make test stripes, some use only 1 developer and some only 1 film ever. This is how they practice and if it works great.
I choose to practice with real thing. I have chosen a film, in this case Tmax100, and I chose to shoot darkest shadow at zone 5 for everything I have done this year. I chose to do real world photography and not test stripes nor trying to rate my film differently than what is on the box. By my using exactly the same shooting technique in the real world on real scenes, I can establish what works for me and my style, not what works on test strips.
My intent here on this post was to get a feel for the developer I should use as my baseline and whether I should just do standard development. I have done and lean towards 2-bath, and semi-stand. I will eventually experiment with slimt in the future. For now, I am trying to determine my style for developing and exposing for a typical scene I shoot. From there, I will then experiment to refine my developing and exposure techniques.
I do appreciate all the comments and advice so far.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks