Three stops overexposed FP4+

[Steve Goldstein]

The moron operating my camera this morning neglected to close down the lens to the taking aperture for one holder, with the result being that my N-2 exposures on FP4+ were overexposed by 3 stops. I'd like to try to salvage the negatives, not because they're great art (Moonrise Over Hernandez they ain't) but as an experiment and an opportunity to learn.

Any suggestions on development time relative to that of properly exposed negatives? I use Pyrocat-HD 1:1:100 in trays if that matters.

I've had a long talk with my assistant and he promises never to do such a stupid thing again. Fortunately there was nobody around to see me talking to myself.

[Michael R]

Develop the way you normally would have. You can't correct for overexposure by changing contrast.

The moron operating my camera this morning neglected to close down the lens to the taking aperture for one holder, with the result being that my N-2 exposures on FP4+ were overexposed by 3 stops. I'd like to try to salvage the negatives, not because they're great art (Moonrise Over Hernandez they ain't) but as an experiment and an opportunity to learn.

Any suggestions on development time relative to that of properly exposed negatives? I use Pyrocat-HD 1:1:100 in trays if that matters.

I've had a long talk with my assistant and he promises never to do such a stupid thing again. Fortunately there was nobody around to see me talking to myself.

[Steve Sherman]

Develop the way you normally would have. You can't correct for overexposure by changing contrast.

Absolutely FALSE...and is the main reason I don't frequent these forms any longer, lots or photographers who like to type. I just coached another photog thru the exact opposite circumstances, yet the copied text below is the same answer for your dilemma. Copied from my email to him.

The way to approach this with the best opportunity for printable negs is to use a compensating development technique. I would not use something like HC 110, if you don’t want to try the Pyro (PyroCat) developer then use the TMax developer in a significantly dilute ratio and extended period of development time. What happens is, in very dilute developer the higher exposed areas use up the developer rather quickly and can no longer continue to add density. The low values however will continue to use the dilute developer until it is exhausted, another agitation cycle begins the entire process again. you may need to repeat this re-agitation step 6-8 times with no agitation for at least 2, possibly 3 minutes. This is why there is a need for extended development times, so the shadows have a chance to completely develop while the highlights are suppressed to a lower density than they would attain if processed normally.
Try and keep the total processing time under 30 minutes, 20-25 minutes is a good starting point. Naturally, the dilution of the developer will dictate the total amount of processing time.

What you don’t want to do is over process the film in the hopes of slightly increasing the density of the shadows while the highlight density goes to a point of being unprintable, that is what would happen if the developer were to used at its NORMAL STRENGTH. Also, Selenium toning the negative only spreads the shadows and highlights farther apart with little to no impact on the shadows, so that is not an option.

Multi-contrast papers will be your friend in this scenario as the denser parts of the neg can be printed with Green or low contrast light while the shadows can be carefully printed with higher contrast light in the hopes of maximizing the relationships in the darker areas. That will require very exact exposure when printing so as not to print too dark. In short, you want as much density in the low values as possible while keeping the highlight density below what you ordinarily process the film too. The MC papers again will produce the desired contrast in the print. All that said, there’s no magic bullet to put information on the neg that was not captured at the time of exposure.

[Steve Sherman]

Develop the way you normally would have. You can't correct for overexposure by changing contrast.

Absolutely FALSE...and is the main reason I don't frequent these forms any longer, lots or photographers who like to type. I just coached another photog thru the exact opposite circumstances, yet the copied text below is the same answer for your dilemma. Copied from my email to him.

The way to approach this with the best opportunity for printable negs is to use a compensating development technique. I would not use something like HC 110, if you don’t want to try the Pyro (PyroCat) developer then use the TMax developer in a significantly dilute ratio and extended period of development time. What happens is, in very dilute developer the higher exposed areas use up the developer rather quickly and can no longer continue to add density. The low values however will continue to use the dilute developer until it is exhausted, another agitation cycle begins the entire process again. You may need to repeat this re-agitation step 6-8 times with no agitation for at least 2, possibly 3 minutes. This is why there is a need for extended development times, so the shadows have a chance to completely develop while the highlights are suppressed to a lower density than they would attain if processed normally.
Try and keep the total processing time under 30 minutes, 20-25 minutes is a good starting point. Naturally, the dilution of the developer will dictate the total amount of processing time.

What you don’t want to do is over process the film in the hopes of slightly increasing the density of the shadows while the highlight density goes to a point of being unprintable, that is what would happen if the developer were to be used at its NORMAL STRENGTH. Also, Selenium toning the negative only spreads the shadows and highlights farther apart with little to no impact on the shadows, so that is not an option.

Multi-contrast papers will be your friend in this scenario as the denser parts of the neg can be printed with Green or low contrast light while the shadows can be carefully printed with higher contrast light in the hopes of maximizing the relationships in the darker areas. That will require very exact exposure when printing so as not to print too dark. In short, you want as much density in the low values as possible while keeping the highlight density below what you ordinarily process the film too. The MC papers again will produce the desired contrast in the print.

[Ulophot]

Steve, I like your sense of humor. It's always a valuable companion at times like this. I've had to confront my assistant a few times, too.

I'm not a Pyro user, but in principle I would tend to agree with Michael, since you had already planned N-2. The additional exposure the lowest values received will be less affected than the high ones, as you know, and trying to compress the negative further with development may not get you very far in this case. Perhaps others with more overexposure experience and Pyro knowledge will suggest otherwise.

I would only add that FP4 may still get you in range of your intentions, with some careful printing. In my experience, it doesn't block up quickly at the high end.

[Greg]

I also have mistakenly overexposed by 3 plus stops on a couple of occasions, and also was using FP4 plus. I processed the film in Diafine and the resulting negatives were totally printable. I don't especially like Diafine as my "normal" go to developer, but when I've overexposed a negative, I have no problem using Diafine.

[Andrew O'Neill]

I would as suggested, develop as you intended. The shadow area(s) (without me knowing what they are), will be quite buoyant... Pyrocat-HD is great at taming high values.

[Jim Noel]

Pyrocat HD will do the best job possible with these negatives. Give it a go at your expected time and temperature.!!

[Michael Wellman]

If you go by the old rule of expose for the shadows and develop for the highlights I would think you would want to do less developing. At the very least a N-2, that may be what some of the others were suggesting when they said to develop normally. I would be a little more aggressive and do at least a N-3 or N-4 development. You will definitely benefit from using Pyrocat. Let us know how it works out

[Steve Goldstein]

I developed them N-2 which was the "normal" development I had planned when I made the exposures. They are certainly dense! I don't think I'll be able to start working with them for a few weeks, but will follow up.