They all look purple to me. Can't recall seeing that before.
They all look purple to me. Can't recall seeing that before.
I did nothing in post processing such as color correction and some of it is in the upload maybe because printed out on paper with the right profile the Rodinal one is rich black and neutral but the Pyrocat one is a bit purple very similar to a selenium print done a bit too much. Now, if I ouput it to Silver Effex for my custom conversion it's just fine, but I wanted it as close to a true output scan as possible so the color isn't as concerning to me. I was mainly seeing if I could get more tonal range out of that Delta 100 (as 1:50 was not working for me too well). Given, this is a low key subject so next I'll move on to more test shots and use Pyrocat at ISO 100. I guess all I can say is that Pyrocat at that time and diluation is not a failure and I like Rodinal 1:100 better than 1:50.
Sorry, didn't realise they were scans from prints. So looking at the results they are all usable. You like the Rodinal at 1:100 because it has more contrast? When you rate the film at half the box speed you are effectively giving the film one stop more exposure Of you had reduced the development by 20% of the 50 iso negatives the results would have looked different. Things are complicated by the extended minimal agitation technique you used.
You said you liked the results you got from the lab and that they scanned beautifully, they probably used the recommended time from the maker of the developer. The goal is to give adequate exposure for the shadows and minimum density for the highlight values.
I think there's a little confusion here. I developed these and I scanned the negatives on an Epson V850 flat bed using VueScan software with little to no adjustment. I didn't put "Delta" in a film brand, just chose neutral for BW negative. I don't necessarily like the Rodinal better because in my prior shots with Rodinal at 1:50 I had trouble getting tonal separation in the darker mid tones but mostly the upper areas like sky, white building..etc. So i tried Pyrocat. I would tend to think with Pyrocat the overall lower contrast might be easier to work with given my hybrid workflow. I think I fell into the trap of using Rodinal only for it's sharpness characteristics but hadn't been pleased. So, given this was my first in Rodinal at 1:100 I could sure use it, but now I also have Pyrocat on hand. I could easily change film as I'm not in love with Delta 100, but like I said before I was given approximately 15 boxes of 4x5 all fresh. I guess I could sell it, but I figured I'd use it up as she gave it to me intending me to enjoy it. Let's assume I'm going to use Pyrocat next time, would you recommend a different agitation/time scheme? Thanks Andrew.
How are you determining your exposure? Are you using the zone system or averaging? What is your output digital prints or gelatin silver? You could use the development times you already have and tweak from there. Eighteen or sixteen minute development times seem awfully long to me, I want to see what I've got right now.
You could follow the sp445 tank instructions or decide on an agitation pattern you can keep consistent. Say initial agitation for one minute and then four inversions every minute thereafter. When you are testing keep notes of exposure time and temperature of development then you can tweak you results.
I found Delta hard to get on with it seems a little bland to me, I much prefer Fp4+. I know you got the film given but if it doesn't work for you sell it and buy film you do like.
Spot metering, in this case I metered the roof which is a slate gray so somewhat neutral 18% gray. Develop, scan and print to R2400 or R800 printers. I keep notes on everything so will work from here. I'll try more of the Delta in PC HD and go from there.
What temperature for developers and how consistent was it over the time? In my world, 2 sheets , 4/4/500 dilution, at 70*F, for pyrocat M (similar to HD) would be N+1 territory for Delta at box speed and would likely have more base stain than I like.
Instead of inverting the scan to positives, just show the negatives as scanned together in one 8x10 configuration. Then we could see staining, negative acutance, and contrast.
The magic you are looking for is in the work you are avoiding.
http://www.searing.photography
You mean scan all 4 together on the bed like one large 8x10 negative?? Never thought of that. Also, I went by the MDC and anything I could find out on line and the times I used were based on those, and everyone tells me it was maybe too long. Temperature was consistent (I tend to believe) and spot on at 68*F. I'm going to shoot more and pull back the development time a little bit. So more time gives more stain?
More part B gives more stain. Try 4/3.5/500 for a little less stain, or even 4/3/500. I think your 16 mins at 68*F is probably in the ball park, delta time/temp chart shows 14-ish, but with the agitation scheme you are using and reduced part B which reduces activity, 16mins sounds good to me.
If you have a step wedge put that in front of your negative in holder and shoot a white wall on a sunny day, focused at infinity, with 5 stops over what the meter tells you. That will give you something to measure tonality. Do a few of these and you can see the effect of changing time and our dilutions.
You will love Delta come spring time. It really separates the yellows, yellow-green, and greens very well.
The magic you are looking for is in the work you are avoiding.
http://www.searing.photography
Thank you for that information, that's helpful. Now, I have a really dumb question. Are you supposed to be able to see the stain or the negatives look different? They look pretty standard to me. I did a roll of 120 last night and they're drying so haven't inspected them or scanned them yet.
Bookmarks