Precision and Accuracy in LF Photography: How much is enough?

[Havoc]

Ilford FP4 (now plus) has been a staple for decades, it has been essentially consistent, predictable, reliable. Second to this HP-5. Pick one film.

Suggest Kodak HC-110 or Rodinal as a developer. Pick one, then settle on a dilution ratio then stick to it.
Mix with highly filtered soft water or distilled water. Water quality impacts development quality. Get a Kodak Process thermometer or equally reliable-accurate-precise thermometer then stay with one processing temperature be it 68 or 70 degrees. Know hotter develops faster and more difficult to control.

Use a proper stop bath, and fixer at the same temperature as the developer.

Been using a Jobo processed with Epxert drums for decades. They work, they are absolutely capable of producing consistent results. Get spendy on film processing stuff instead of that new lens or camera or related widget as image meets paper during post process.

Well, that is about what I do! Those photos were all in HC-110 dilution B. Got some graduated cups at the drugstore (an apothecary here in europe). And I use a Jobo with a Paterson timer. Always at 20 °C for b&w (with a second thermometer in the water that says the same as the setting on the Jobo). With Ilford stop and rapid fixer (always those). All chemistry diluted with demineralised water and rinsed with it as well. Doesn't matter what film I use, FP4+, Foma 100, Adox CHS100II, Delta 100... they come out different each time.

I just can't get any consistency at all. Use the same film, camera, meter, lens, development next time and I get nicely sharp negatives with plenty of greys, a nice sky and all I like. The time after that it just comes out a clear sky without any detail and ink black everywhere else. Even if I develop films taken at a different time in the same drum.

[Drew Wiley]

Maybe "precision" and "havoc" just don't mix! Try another web name, and maybe it will all work out.

[Havoc]

Don't think I could get used to it. Have been using it since the day we played lan games on the company network during lunch. (anyone feels for some Decent?)

[Bernice Loui]

What brand of light meter, checked for accuracy?
How is the lighting metered for film exposure?

Do the film test with gray scale step tablet and 18% gray card as previously mentioned.

After this comes shutter speed, lens aperture scale correct for the lens cell set.

Source of this problem can be figured out by breaking down the film image making process one item and step at a time.


Bernice

Well, that is about what I do! Those photos were all in HC-110 dilution B. Got some graduated cups at the drugstore (an apothecary here in europe). And I use a Jobo with a Paterson timer. Always at 20 °C for b&w (with a second thermometer in the water that says the same as the setting on the Jobo). With Ilford stop and rapid fixer (always those). All chemistry diluted with demineralised water and rinsed with it as well. Doesn't matter what film I use, FP4+, Foma 100, Adox CHS100II, Delta 100... they come out different each time.

I just can't get any consistency at all. Use the same film, camera, meter, lens, development next time and I get nicely sharp negatives with plenty of greys, a nice sky and all I like. The time after that it just comes out a clear sky without any detail and ink black everywhere else. Even if I develop films taken at a different time in the same drum.

[Havoc]

Where do I start a new thread about this? I have really no idea if this is a lens, shutter, film, development or other issue.

[otto.f]

Where do I start a new thread about this? I have really no idea if this is a lens, shutter, film, development or other issue.

https://www.largeformatphotography.i...g-amp-Printing

It’s mainly a film development issue, no?

[neil poulsen]

If you know better, then please explain what is the cause. I'm really wanting to know and I want to learn. But your answer doesn't help for that.

Sorry if I sound aggressive but I really am thinking about chucking it all out of the window.

Large format photography is a long term, learning endeavor that requires patience and study. It doesn't happen overnight, and in my view, averaging meters and recommended development times will get you nowhere. Except that, on occasion, you will likely get a nice photograph.

After hearing about, and seeing photographs by Ansel Adams, I became inspired by my 35mm camera. I photographed in black and white Tri-X and developed the film for the recommended time. But the best I could do with my negatives to achieve what I'd seen in Ansel Adams photographs was to increase the contrast and then overexpose. I obtained photographs similar to those that you've shared in the thread.

So I returned to the Ansel Adams books, and others, and I began picking up on Ansel Adams zone system. Decades later, I have a good understanding of this system, and I've spent years developing darkroom and developing procedures that give me the results that I like. And, I've enjoyed making that exploration and journey. So, it's not just about getting the end result.

That's kind of my story, and others may have different stories. But regardless, I think you'll find that LF is indeed a long term endeavor. What kept me satisfied along the way, was that I continued to inch towards the results that I wanted to achieve.

Are you up for that? Are you open to following your own, long term story? If so, as a member of the LF Forum, you'll have a lot of help along the way. What's neat about this environment is that everyone is learning from each other. However, if you're not up for that, and a long term story doesn't appeal to you, then you may want to find a different path.

If not, then you may want to consider a different path.

[Tin Can]

BTW

I selected LF for my final? HOBBY!

for the obvious DIFFICULTY, oodles of old gear and to keep well occupied in retirement

I love projects, always have

Another factor coming on strong, is the bigger the film the easier for me to see, literally.... dimming eyes.

I am actually working on very low vision ULF film cameras for my future

10 years of LF, I just get more interested

[PatrickMarq]

Saw this after typing last post... "Box" speed + different developer/time combinations will produce different results... First rule is to standardize materials and process... And stick with that combination...

Testing, testing, testing...

Steve K

Yes, A while ago I was also on the same path as Havoc. But then I have took a look back to see what has changed: New film (Foma) and developer. Nothing but problems.
I have switched back to Delta 100 and DD-X and voila everything was back as before, one happy person with a 4x5 camera.
The choice to change was only for saving some money.
As I only make contact prints, I know what filter and how to develop my negatives and i'm doing a 'great' job I find, and more important the drive is back to go out and take some images.

[LabRat]

I have one more unpredictable that some others here in that I don't have a darkroom. So I'm depending on a pro lab to be consistent. Frankly, mistakes I've seen in negatives and chromes appear to be mine. But if any one has any suggestions regarding consistency with using labs, I'd be glad to hear them.

For color, really nailing the exposure at the "box speed" EI/ISO speed... Improving metering procedure before exposure... C-41 films have a wider latitude than chromes, but the 3 layers are in best harmony at box speed + Normal processing... Much easier to print/scan without color crossovers and casts... Chromes need almost perfect exposure for a balance of hue saturation and brightness, and to fit the scale where highlights register well into the thinner clear area, while needed shadow information is still visible in the heavier bottom... (I have always called chromes "skinny top/big bottoms")...

Pro labs are usually calibrated to these standards...

Steve K