Developing....success or fail?

T

TareqPhoto

The Survivor
Local time
12:14 AM
Joined
Jul 1, 2010
Messages
227
Location
Ajman, U.A.E.
View My Gallery
Hey all,

This is my first thread in this forum, i started a topic same or similar to this one on another forum and really i got amazed to have answers in 2-3 days exceeding 10 pages.

So my question about this thread is: what is the key for a successful film development? How can i know that my developing is good or bad? Also my questions at that forum was about how someone choose which developer for certain film, why to choose one over another, and how did someone find out about each developer characteristics or mechanism of how it is working and how to know what result it will give for certain film.

Here are shots i did develop by myself, the first rolls i've developed by myself, one at a workshop with their Ilfosol 3 [with wrong dilution but got results anyway] and the another with my TMAX dev at home by myself for first time alone, so let me know what do you think, and discuss this thread topic?

Ilford Delta 100 Pro

img095.jpg


img105.jpg


img104x.jpg


img093n.jpg


img103u.jpg


img096m.jpg


img094a.jpg


Cont>>>
 
A quick look at your shots tells me you are already on your way. Its really not that hard to produce a good negative. One of my favourite photography "how to" writers, David Vestal, says that a good negative is one that allows you to easily print the picture you want. This usually means the full range of densities that the film is capable of producing, but not always, and thats where playing around with exposure ratings and developing times comes in. Expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights is the old adage. At this stage in your learning curve you might get a lot out of reading a few "how to" books. You will get a lot of good answers on this forum but its a bit like learning math from 10 different teachers.

As a final comment. I don't think Delta 100 is a good film for learning with. Its fairly contrasty and if you aren't careful you won't get good shadow detail. Compare the Characteristic Curve (on Ilfords website) with that of HP5, and you will see what I mean. Start out with a film like HP5 or TriX. If you must have finer grain, try FP4 or PlusX. Have fun!
 
Fawley said:
A quick look at your shots tells me you are already on your way. Its really not that hard to produce a good negative. One of my favourite photography "how to" writers, David Vestal, says that a good negative is one that allows you to easily print the picture you want. This usually means the full range of densities that the film is capable of producing, but not always, and thats where playing around with exposure ratings and developing times comes in. Expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights is the old adage. At this stage in your learning curve you might get a lot out of reading a few "how to" books. You will get a lot of good answers on this forum but its a bit like learning math from 10 different teachers.

As a final comment. I don't think Delta 100 is a good film for learning with. Its fairly contrasty and if you aren't careful you won't get good shadow detail. Compare the Characteristic Curve (on Ilfords website) with that of HP5, and you will see what I mean. Start out with a film like HP5 or TriX. If you must have finer grain, try FP4 or PlusX. Have fun!
Click to expand...

Ah cool, thank you very much!
 
A further comment for clarity. If you go to Ilford's website they will give recommended developing times for a long list of standard developers. If you use their recomended time, at the normal EI rating of the film, you should get what Ilford considers a correct negative, assuming your camera meter is reasonably accurate and you exposed properly. If you think the negative is too flat, develop more. Another key to getting a good negative is knowing what a good print looks like. For that, a trip to a gallery is always helpful.
 
Fawley said:
A further comment for clarity. If you go to Ilford's website they will give recommended developing times for a long list of standard developers. If you use their recomended time, at the normal EI rating of the film, you should get what Ilford considers a correct negative, assuming your camera meter is reasonably accurate and you exposed properly. If you think the negative is too flat, develop more. Another key to getting a good negative is knowing what a good print looks like. For that, a trip to a gallery is always helpful.
Click to expand...

I downloaded the tech sheets of all the developers i have, and also the Ilford film sheets of what i have, i always follow the recommended manufacturer's time even on the another forum they told me i should experiment more to get my proper developing time, those times on the sheets are just starting time, it will do the job but they told me it doesn't represent the best always time, so in this case i will spend years shooting a lot of different films and experiment with each film to get the best developing time for each film.
 
so in this case i will spend years shooting a lot of different films and experiment with each film to get the best developing time for each film.[/quote]

Don't be worried about endless experimentation. It's what makes film fun! You could just pick one film and one developer and get to know them. If I could only buy one film it would be Ilford FP4. You sound like you might be interested in investigating the whole zone system thing, complete with film speed and developing tests. But to my mind, its a lot of analytical work and you really don't get to know the way different films show a subject. I took a cue from Vestal and have starting shooting a standard scene with different films and developer times. I own several Minolta SRT 101 bodies which are cheap and readily available. I have picked a standard subject close to my home which has a lot of fine detail and a large brightness range (in my case the base of a tree). I then photograph it with several different camera's, both over and under exposing with each camera. I take careful exposure measurements with a spotmeter so I know the brightness level of individual elements in the picture. Doing this I can compare several films with one developer or several development times with one film.
 
"so in this case i will spend years shooting a lot of different films and experiment with each film to get the best developing time for each film.[/quote]"

Actually my advice would be to limit your experimentation. When you start changing all of the infinite variety of films, exposures, developers, and dilutions, you can drive yourself nuts. You don't have to reinvent the wheel--the massive development chart (Google it) give times for everything.

The basic factors that are useful to me are the contrast of the film (plus-x is high, Acros lower, and Tri-X is low), and which common developers can raise or lower this. Some of this depends on your lenses. Leica lenses, for example, can be very low in contrast, so you can get away with Plus-X on a bright sunny day. I would figure out what results you will get with one fast and one slow film and a common developer such as D-76. That way, you can tailor your results to the weather conditions.
 
hmmmmmm, it seems not an easy work, i would like to do that, but i feel i may not do that due to my situations and conditions in my area, i will keep shooting and developing when i can, for now i just scan, but if i can afford an enlarger then i will see how my prints will look, but affording one type of film to experiment on it is not easy to me, in my area it is difficult to get 120 film nowadays [maybe i can get few 2 or 3 different films], also developers are not much available here, so i only use online to order and this wil take long time [weeks] to get the stuff and more expensive with shipping and at the end i am not sure if the film within weeks during the shipping can handle all the conditions [X-ray, storage condition of boxes, moved from cold to warm to cold....].
Also if i have to pick on e film to experiment on it all the time then it will limit myself of shooting, you know i can't use one film only for everything, and i can't use tripod always if i have to use a slow film in low light, so it means i have to keep shooting specific subject with one film several times and either developing with different developers to see which is better results or to expose the subject different exposures and use one developers and see the tonality range and the zone system and details and whatever, it is a great idea to do this, but i can't do that in short time, it may takes months and nothing can assure that i may spend month experimenting on one subject with one kind of film, and it seems to me on another forum that as long i don't print then this experimenting is almost useless or pointless, what if i will not print for 1 year or so until i can afford something to print, should i stop developing until i can print?
 
Their are many great photographers that use only one film, and that film is usually TriX. If you just go out and shoot it, you'll get to know it. Especially if money and product availability is an issue, I suggest you use TriX and develop it in D76. Kodak products are generally less expensive than Ilford.
 
Tri X in D76 is good (I have been using that combination for 50+ years). Today, though I would look at Tmax-2 400 for both 35 and 120. Grain and tonality is equal to a very good 100 asa film. The fact that you can use the same film stock in both 35 and 120 also will ensure a certain consistency to your negs.
I use it with HC 110, diluting the raw syrup to 1:60 and developing for 11-12 min. Easy, consistent and HC 110 lasts a looong, looong time. A bottle of 500 ml HC 110 will give you enough diluted developer to do close to 200 rolls of 35 mm film.
Doing it this way will give you a/ possibility of hand holding due to the 400 asa speed and b/ you can concentrate on the pictures, not on film/developer combinations. The latter can be fun, but also distracts from the photography.
I like your shots. It is an area of the world that I have no "visual" clue to - so it is interesting to see someones take on it.
Another thing to do is to go to Flickr and "tag" films and/or developers and see what other shooters do with it.
The key is of course to just keep shooting - best way of learning the craft.
 
Fawley said:
Their are many great photographers that use only one film, and that film is usually TriX. If you just go out and shoot it, you'll get to know it. Especially if money and product availability is an issue, I suggest you use TriX and develop it in D76. Kodak products are generally less expensive than Ilford.
Click to expand...

Tom A said:
Tri X in D76 is good (I have been using that combination for 50+ years). Today, though I would look at Tmax-2 400 for both 35 and 120. Grain and tonality is equal to a very good 100 asa film. The fact that you can use the same film stock in both 35 and 120 also will ensure a certain consistency to your negs.
I use it with HC 110, diluting the raw syrup to 1:60 and developing for 11-12 min. Easy, consistent and HC 110 lasts a looong, looong time. A bottle of 500 ml HC 110 will give you enough diluted developer to do close to 200 rolls of 35 mm film.
Doing it this way will give you a/ possibility of hand holding due to the 400 asa speed and b/ you can concentrate on the pictures, not on film/developer combinations. The latter can be fun, but also distracts from the photography.
I like your shots. It is an area of the world that I have no "visual" clue to - so it is interesting to see someones take on it.
Another thing to do is to go to Flickr and "tag" films and/or developers and see what other shooters do with it.
The key is of course to just keep shooting - best way of learning the craft.
Click to expand...

Thank you very much!
 
Hi Tareq,

It looks like you have many of the develop/print basics down, as well as an eye for an interesting picture. On my monitor some of your pictures look a little grainy, which shouldn't really be the case with Delta 100. You can see this in the light areas of your first picture. This sometimes happen when there is a large difference in temperature from say the developer to the stop bath, or if you develop at 21 degrees and then you quickly immerse/wash the film in much colder water from the tap. Basically the film emulsion wrinkles, or "reticulates".

Another point to watch is when you load the film into the developing tank reel. If you are not careful the film will buckle and you will get crescent moon shapes on your negatives. Again, if you look in the first picture you can see two of these crescent shapes near the right edge of the frame.

Anyway, good job with your first roll of film. Keep on shooting, and keep on developing!

~Dom
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom