BOY Did I screw up

[akfreak]

I just realized I set the ISO ON MY METER TO ISO100 but I was shooting Ilford HP5 + 400. Ooops. I developed the first 2 negatives in HC-110 Dilution H 1:63 and based on my water bath temp 72 I had to devlop them for 6 mins to pull them. I may be be able to dodge some of the extreme highlights on zone 8 during the print. However having to pull my first shots 2 stops is not good.

I feel like such a bone head. I was so confident, I really felt comfortable during the shoot. I was previsualizing, exposing for shadows and planning to dev shorter for the highlights.

Now I have a mess on my hands. The negs have great density but zone 7 is now zone 8ish and I have lost some highlight detail. and that sucks.

I just hope I dont do that again, I even wrote 100 iso on the film carriers, so stupid. I shoot at iso 100 most of the time and use fast glass and or strobes to light a scene, to control the noise. Damn digital is ingrained in my head. I have to be in film mode if I plan to do anything worth a damn back in film world.

I am sure none o you have ever done this on accident.

[Larry Gebhardt]

I wouldn't worry. The negatives will be overall a bit denser than you are used to, but the contrast range should be about the same as your normally shot negatives, with the exception of more contrast in the shadows. So try printing them and I bet you will be surprised.

[Brian Ellis]

If you're getting blown out highlights and if your remaining negatives have important Zone VII details like the ones you've already processed just reduce your developing time a little, like maybe 15%, and that should bring the highlights down into easily printable range. Generally better to overexpose b&w film than under.

[akfreak]

Looking at the dry negatives I think I will be able to save them. Pulling two stops isn't what I had in mind my first go round, Live and learn I guess.

[Roger Cole]

First, it probably isn't a two stop overexposure anyway. Most films are rated based on development to higher contrast than most of us actually want. I shoot most 400 films at 200 or 320. Secondly, two stops isn't much for modern B&W films. I'm not very familiar with HP5+ having not shot any in many years, but with T-grain films with no shoulder within normal range I'd say forget it, process normally and you'll have nice negatives. A bit dense and with a bit more grain, which is probably not a problem in sheet film formats, but also with gobs of shadow detail. With Tri-X (400, not familiar with the sheet film 320 except by reading) you'd also be fine - maybe not quite as much room for error but this wouldn't be a problem.

Pulling such negatives may or may not be a good idea. If you have scenes with a wide range and are really concerned with blowing out highlights you could do an N-1 or N-2. Otherwise if they are normal scenes I'd develop normally. The reason is that both overexposure and underdevelopment can lower contrast (underdevelopment definitely - the overexposure itself won't unless it does push highlight detail onto the shoulder and even then, there's some shoulder with reduced slope long before it levels off enough to lose all detail) and you could get some really flat negatives. Hard filters on VC paper give somewhat distorted curves and don't look the best, and really hard graded paper isn't as easy to find as it used to be. You can always further intensify them - a bath in selenium will add contrast - and there are other ways to ratchet up print contrast if you need to do so, but again if they are normal range scenes I'd just develop normally.

But then again I have come to prefer rather "gutsy" negatives anyway.

[cyrus]

I think two stops is just barely within the development latitude.

[Brad Rippe]

Don't worry, I've done the following TWICE in the last year. In a deep forest my Pentax digital read 4 sec, but since it was such dim light, I read the meter and set the lens at 1/4 sec.
Needless to say, I had very little exposure on the negative. I still haven't developed the last batch of film, now about 8 months old, maybe I'll try 2 hrs in 90 degree HC110 straight out of the bottle? I'll let you know how it goes......

[akfreak]

Would love to see what happens with straight hc110, Brad.

Roger my -30% time I'm dev. Using hc110 solution H worked pretty good. I didn't loose contrast I did loose some highlights in the brightest areas. I had placed shadow detail on zone 5 and planned b-2 when I took the shot. Now finding I had over exposed by 2 stops it was a guess as to the dev time. Sol. H is supposed to be 10th mins I did 6;45 and still lost some highlights. I think I can fix

[Brian Ellis]

Don't worry, I've done the following TWICE in the last year. In a deep forest my Pentax digital read 4 sec, but since it was such dim light, I read the meter and set the lens at 1/4 sec.
Needless to say, I had very little exposure on the negative. I still haven't developed the last batch of film, now about 8 months old, maybe I'll try 2 hrs in 90 degree HC110 straight out of the bottle? I'll let you know how it goes......

A four stop overexposure could probably be salvaged but I doubt that your four stop underexposure can be. Doing the things you mention would add some density to the midtones and highlights but will do little or nothing to the shadows, which is the main area where underexposure creates problems.

[BetterSense]

I don't think I would even notice a 2-stop 'overexposure' unless the scene had some real extreme contrast. 2 extra stops on modern B&W film is nothing but a safety factor and should not affect printing whatsoever unless you routinely expose your films on the toe and develop accordingly, in which case a 2-stop overexposure is more like a correct exposure and could send your highlight contrast up.