Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: rescuing idiots: developing backwards film

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Edinburgh, Scotland
    Posts
    105

    rescuing idiots: developing backwards film

    I found something yesterday I had never done before: a couple of sheets of film loaded backwards in the holders. They were exposed normally, on HP5+ rated at 400, in very soft low-contrasty outside light...

    Is there any chance of rescuing them with a couple of extra stops of development? More? Less? Or has exposing them from the wrong side given them such faint wisps of light through the dye and base that even processing as 1600 or so is likely to be a washout? Anyone clawed back from such idiocy before?

    note to self for future reference: do not take part in an interesting conversation while loading a dozen holders.

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    now in Tucson, AZ
    Posts
    2,776

    Re: rescuing idiots: developing backwards film

    I've done that once or twice, but only found out after developing. The images were way thin- not even worth proofing. You've got nothing to lose- I'd say push the film as far as you can and see what happens.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    2,639

    Re: rescuing idiots: developing backwards film

    I've done that too, but only with Ortho, which has no notches. A real bugger to load!!

  4. #4
    Jim Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Chillicothe Missouri USA
    Posts
    2,702

    Re: rescuing idiots: developing backwards film

    Whatever 4x5 film I used back in the 60s lost about one stop of light through the antihalation layer when loaded upside down. This might vary widely with other films. Try developing as though it was underexposed by one or, maybe better yet, two stops.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Massachusetts USA
    Posts
    8,241

    Re: rescuing idiots: developing backwards film

    This is certainly a case where DBI (development by inspection) comes in handy. I have made other blunders, and been able to remedy them on the spot, by using my handy Infra Red monocular while developing my film.

    I once discovered - while the negatives were in the soup - that my developer was too old. I simply mixed up some new developer, and added it. By that time, there was no way to determine the "correct" developing time, so I just developed the negatives until each looked... perfect. Things worked out just fine.

    The viewing device has paid for itself many times over.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    St. Louis, Missouri
    Posts
    323

    Re: rescuing idiots: developing backwards film

    If the images are important to you, expose some more film the same way and do some experiments.
    Jerome

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Edinburgh, Scotland
    Posts
    105

    Re: rescuing idiots: developing backwards film

    so... in the end there were four backwards negs out of sixteen. The negs weren't crucial, but from a playing-about-project, so I pushed a couple of them two stops (to 1600) in HC-110, and stand-developed the other two in 1:150 Rodinal. One of the pushed negs looks pretty good and almost normal, the other, um, seems like I underexposed it to start with and it's horribly thin. Damn. Of the stand-developed ones, ditto, though the thin one looks almost usable.

    None of them, though, were pictures to write home about and none of them would have been serious keepers even if the exposure and development had been perfection incarnate. I think the luck fairy was with me after all, as, fortunately all the better ones were loaded right way around. Phew!

    If I make a habit of this, and I seriously hope I don't, I'll have to look into the kit for developing by inspection.

    Thanks for the ideas!

  8. #8
    Vaughn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Humboldt County, CA
    Posts
    7,229

    Re: rescuing idiots: developing backwards film

    Depending on how critical one's focusing is, the emulsion of the backward film would not the same plane as the ground glass -- but just the thickness of the film off. Closed down it may not even be an issue, but if things are tighter, it could cause problems.

    Vaughn

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Edinburgh, Scotland
    Posts
    105

    Re: rescuing idiots: developing backwards film

    This is one of the pushed but very thin and hugely grainy results. I took to the streets with the LF camera for the first time, and accosted perfect strangers (mostly street performers from the Fringe Festival) and chatted them up until they agreed to pose for me. And, as I was already being brave, I decided to go wide open on almost all of them as well.

    Five other, more regular ones, from that day are here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/heyoka

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Massachusetts USA
    Posts
    8,241

    Re: rescuing idiots: developing backwards film

    I think this one is really wonderful.

Similar Threads

  1. Developing 8x10 sheet film in JOBO CPE processor?
    By Emil Ems in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 29-May-2010, 17:56
  2. Polaroid Land Film Holder #500
    By Russell Graves in forum Cameras & Camera Accessories
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 12-Aug-2008, 07:33
  3. converting slides to B&W
    By Magnus W in forum Digital Processing
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 31-Jul-2006, 04:51
  4. 8K film recorders for repro vs. original film
    By bglick in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 21-Sep-2005, 10:38
  5. Developing 4x5 film
    By Pat Bunn in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 14-Jul-2004, 09:54

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •