3 questions about Pushing and Pulling

[JeremyLangford]

For the most part, is pushing and/or pulling usually a thing you do just because you have to due to lack of higher or lower speed film?

Is there any advantage in image quality due to pushing or pulling that would make people push or pull, even though they dont have to?

Is there a certain rule so that people know that if they are pushing 2 stops, they should develop 2 minutes longer or something like that? Or do you just have to learn from experience?

 

[rogue_designer]

For the most part, is pushing and/or pulling usually a thing you do just because you have to due to lack of higher or lower speed film?

No. I push because I like the effect it has on the image. I prefer pushed triX over using a higher speed film.

I have never pulled film deliberately. I'll use a slower film if that's what I want.

Is there any advantage in image quality due to pushing or pulling that would make people push or pull, even though they dont have to?

Advantage? Maybe. Pushed film has a different look. The grain is different, the contrast is different. I prefer it, but others may not.

Is there a certain rule so that people know that if they are pushing 2 stops, they should develop 2 minutes longer or something like that? Or do you just have to learn from experience?

There are rules, but they vary depending on the film and the developer. Usually expressed in percentage changes. The massive dev chart at digital truth ( http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.html ) is a good resource for listing various times with different film/developer/speed combinations. But mostly you use this as a starting point, then experiment for what works best for the look you want.

 

[spyder2000]

Pushing/pulling film is a useful tool for purposely compressing or expanding the tonal range of the film as well as compensation for over/underexposure. Sometimes you do it because you want to; other times you do it because you must.

Overexposure and underveleopment (pull) tend to decrease the tonal range. Under exposure and overdevelopment tens to increase that range. Most photographers do all of this to match their processing and printing technique to their conception of what the image is to look like.

A "fair" rule of thumb is 20% of development time for each stop one manipulates via this processing technique. You should test to find what you like best for your circumstances.

 

[x-ray]

You should read the Ansel Adams book series. Pushing and pulling can be for a variety of different reasons. Pushing generally increases contrast and grain. There are a variety of reasons and ways to do this including water bath development to help with shadow detail. High energy developers are another way to push and also extending development is another. Some people push to alter the tonal scale to match a #2 paper others push for effect and others push because slower ISO ratings aren't enough to record the image. Pulling mainly reduces contrast but can be done for other reasons too. I often pull to reduce excessive contrast in order to match a #2 grade paper and preven highlights from blocking. Again there are a number of ways to do this.

There's no formula as such for pushing or pulling. Experimentation is the only assured way to figure it out.

 

[bmattock]

One attempts to have on hand the film speed one intends to use.

However, reality being what it is, such is not always possible. They day turned out to be brighter/darker than suspected, or a new opportunity presented itself, etc. Very few of us can go out armed with fresh rolls of every speed film.

In such cases, pushing or pulling may be preferable to having no photograph at all. There is almost always a compromise involved of one sort or another, although (as noted above), some may prefer a particular effect given by pulling or pushing and intentionally strive for that.

Ultimately, film has characteristics that can be exploited, and this is often considered the mark of a master photographer. It can also be a unique or defining preference of a particular photographer.

Many of us strive to simply master the full use of a particular film emulsion at the rated exposure, and would push or pull only when expediency required it.

I returned from a wedding shoot last weekend. Found myself making indoor shots with ambient light, no flash. I had Tri-X and Delta 100 with me.

I rated the Tri-X at EI 1600 and processed in Diafine. This allowed me to shoot at f/2 and 1/60, hand-held.

 

[rxmd]

I often pull if I do night shots. Contrasts at night can be extreme, and if I have the time to do long exposures it's usually worth it to get creamy greys and not too blown out highlights. So I end up, for example, shooting FP4 at 50 ASA and processing it in Neofin Blue (or something).

 

[bmattock]

I don't know if one can be said to be 'pushing' or 'pulling' film which as been exposed so as to exceed reciprocity. However, I have little experience in that regard.

 

[jfserejo]

Shooting HP5+ at EI200 was one of the best surprises I have lately. I know that Ilford claims that HP5+ shouldn't be used under EI250, but I only can tell by the results and, those please me very much. I didn't notice any decrease in the tonal range, compared to other photos taken at EI400.

HP5+ on HC-110 dilution H at 20ºC (68 F) - 7 minutes with first 30s agitation and two inversions each minute:

Thanks Mark Bowerman. Best regards all,
Joao

 

[Finder]

I have never found a need to push or pull film. I find the quality best at the rated speed.

 

[charjohncarter]

I pull because: 1. sometimes I think, for me, the manufacturer's ISO is wrong, and 2. (and this is the biggest reason, I pull) because I want more and better shadow detail. I'll leave the pushing to someone else; I don't do it.

 

[wde60]

I recently started reading Ansel Adams’ book The Negative, and I’ll try to report on what I am learning.

There is already much useful information above and I would add that pushing and pulling is a combination of exposure AND development.

You may consider pulling your film to reduce contrast in a contrasty situation.
i.e. On a bright sunny day you can overexpose (to get better shadow detail) and then underdevelop (to get less contrast).
See Joao’s lighthouse photo above where he has good shadow detail on the cliff (overexposure) AND good highlights in the white building parts (underdevelopment).

On the other hand, you may want to push your film to increase contrast in a low contrast situation.
In a darker muted scene you can uderexpose the shot and then overdevelop the negative to increase contrast.
In Bill Mattock’s photo above there is a good range of tones in the hair on the dark side of the womans head (from overdevelopment). O.K. Diafine developer is a little different but still a “push” developer.

It’s kind of counter-intuitive to overexpose on a bright sunny day but it works because you take care of it when you develop.

I have been doing some macro work and underexposing the shots taken in the shade, then increasing development.

Foma 200, pushed to 400, Rodinal 1:80, 20 minutes.

 

[bmattock]

I have never found a need to push or pull film. I find the quality best at the rated speed.

With respect, that is nonsense. While the quality of any film may be 'best' at the speed given by its manufacturer, the best film one has is the film one has with oneself when called upon to take a photograph. If one has ISO 100 film and finds oneself in a darkened room, the ability to make adjustments is essential. Not many people carry a wide selection of every speed film with them at all times, to cover every eventuality.

Unless one wishes to experience the satori of imagining one had a photograph instead of actually having one, being flexible in setting exposure rating may be a desirable trait.

A camera with film in it that is incapable of recording an image when called upon to do so is a door-stop.

 

[Finder]

With respect, that is nonsense. While the quality of any film may be 'best' at the speed given by its manufacturer, the best film one has is the film one has with oneself when called upon to take a photograph. If one has ISO 100 film and finds oneself in a darkened room, the ability to make adjustments is essential. Not many people carry a wide selection of every speed film with them at all times, to cover every eventuality.

Unless one wishes to experience the satori of imagining one had a photograph instead of actually having one, being flexible in setting exposure rating may be a desirable trait.

A camera with film in it that is incapable of recording an image when called upon to do so is a door-stop.

Well Bill, it sounds like you are simply disorganized and can't plan to have the film you need. Also, I have never found the film preventing me from making an image, just skill. I happen to have developed the skill.

 

[navilluspm]

Well Bill, it sounds like you are simply disorganized and can't plan to have the film you need.

Calm down. If you want to debate, debate this issue and avoid personal attacks like this. Bill attacked your reasoning and not you personally. I can see both of your points, but no good comes from attacking a person and not the issue. Why not rephrase your comment: "A photographer can try to carry some other film just in case." or "I understand your point, but from a technical point of view, the manufacture made this certain film for this certain situation and, artisic considerations aside, the film speed suggested by the manufacturer in the given situation (according to their data sheets) will give the best technical results."

But please refrain from personal attacks like the one you made and let civility reign on this forum.

 

[Finder]

Calm down. If you want to debate, debate this issue and avoid personal attacks like this. Bill attacked your reasoning and not you personally. I can see both of your points, but no good comes from attacking a person and not the issue. Why not rephrase your comment: "A photographer can try to carry some other film just in case." or "I understand your point, but from a technical point of view, the manufacture made this certain film for this certain situation and, artisic considerations aside, the film speed suggested by the manufacturer in the give situation will give the best technical results."

But please refrain from personal attacks like the one you made and let civility reign on this forum.

Relax. I did not take Bill's comments personally. Nor did I take them very seriously. I don't see my comment as a personal attack on Bill, just a critisim of his method of working. His comment that my advice was "nonsense" was a critism on my comments. (Perhaps you can also give a manner lecture on the use of "nonsense.")

Naturally, Bill like to make strong statements and rattle people's cages. I was just cage rattling myself. Bill's reputation preceeds him and I am just having fun with that.

 

[iridium7777]

i'm a complete noob...

i'm a complete noob...

and don't develop my own film but something funny happened to me...

i shoot 99% fuji reala superia 100. one night when in minneapolis at the baseball game there just wasn't enough light. i moved the iso dial from 100 to 200 and took the whole roll at 200.

when i dropped off the film at their local walgreens i asked the guy if he could develop it at 200 because that's what i shot it at. he didn't know what i was talking about. i asked that he probably needs to change the development time?

the guy said "the machine just does it, i took a fuji training course for 3 days and they didn't tell us anything about this". so i didn't have any choice and just asked him to go ahead and do whatever the machine would do.

i never get the actual prints, i only develop and scan onto cd. when i looked at the scans on the cd i couldn't really find anything displeasing and was completely surprised how good the pictures came out. i'm sure if i was to blow them i could find something wrong with them, but in general i think it came out better. i'd rather have some extra grain and keep the picture instead of completely losing the picture due to camera shake at lower iso...

going with that i recently shot a mixed roll of the same film at 100 and 200 that i've yet to develop, but i hope it's gonna turn out good cuz i'd really like the pictures back.

 

[bmattock]

Relax. I did not take Bill's comments personally. Nor did I take them very seriously. I don't see my comment as a personal attack on Bill, just a critisim of his method of working. His comment that my advice was "nonsense" was a critism on my comments. (Perhaps you can also give a manner lecture on the use of "nonsense.")

Naturally, Bill like to make strong statements and rattle people's cages. I was just cage rattling myself. Bill's reputation preceeds him and I am just having fun with that.

I make strong statements because I am very smart and nearly always right. I am handsome as well. I was not offended. However, collateral damage should probably best be avoided if possible. For example, saying the word 'g-n' near FrankS causes fainting spells.

In answer to your clearly over-the-top reaction, let me simply state that planning is a Good Thing, as is Being Prepared. However, sometimes photographic opportunities present themselves that you could in no way expect. Faced with such a circumstance and the 'wrong' film, one could simply shrug and choose not to shoot, or do the best one can with the tools one has at hand. That might include pushing or pulling to preserve 'something' where there might otherwise have been nothing.

Here endeth the lesson. Go and sin no more.

 

[Finder]

and don't develop my own film but something funny happened to me...

i shoot 99% fuji reala superia 100. one night when in minneapolis at the baseball game there just wasn't enough light. i moved the iso dial from 100 to 200 and took the whole roll at 200.

when i dropped off the film at their local walgreens i asked the guy if he could develop it at 200 because that's what i shot it at. he didn't know what i was talking about. i asked that he probably needs to change the development time?

the guy said "the machine just does it, i took a fuji training course for 3 days and they didn't tell us anything about this". so i didn't have any choice and just asked him to go ahead and do whatever the machine would do.

i never get the actual prints, i only develop and scan onto cd. when i looked at the scans on the cd i couldn't really find anything displeasing and was completely surprised how good the pictures came out. i'm sure if i was to blow them i could find something wrong with them, but in general i think it came out better. i'd rather have some extra grain and keep the picture instead of completely losing the picture due to camera shake at lower iso...

going with that i recently shot a mixed roll of the same film at 100 and 200 that i've yet to develop, but i hope it's gonna turn out good cuz i'd really like the pictures back.

This is not surprising. You only underexposed the film by one stop and the conditions at the game may be such that you could have been compensating for a not-so-good meter reading if you were using the camera meter. The development is just going to change the contrast of the film and the scene itself may have been high contrast anyway so a push would not neccessarily be good.

 

[bmattock]

when i dropped off the film at their local walgreens i asked the guy if he could develop it at 200 because that's what i shot it at. he didn't know what i was talking about. i asked that he probably needs to change the development time?

the guy said "the machine just does it, i took a fuji training course for 3 days and they didn't tell us anything about this". so i didn't have any choice and just asked him to go ahead and do whatever the machine would do.

Most 35mm film has 'DX' encoding on the side of the cartridge. This tells some cameras and some film processing machines what speed film is inside. I am reasonably certain that the default settings could have been overridden by your fine young cannibal, but he simply did not know how. This is not unexpected in one-hour places.

If you wish to shoot any film at over or under the rated speed, take it to a profession film processing place and tell them what speed you rated the film at.

There is often a minimal extra charge for pushing or pulling, but it tends not to be much.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DX_encoding

 

[varjag]

Pulling makes all sense in high contrast situation (e.g. bright July afternoon). It *will* give you wider tonal range than rated at box speed, and avoid blocked shadows. It is not about believing it or not, it is just the way silver halide imaging works.

Box speed is only a starting point, and unless all other components of one's personal process (subject brightness range, processing, chemistry, dilutions, temperature, aesthetic criteria, printing/scanning medium etc etc) match those of manufacturer's lab, saying box speed is *best* is not very meaningful.

E.g. I shoot Tri-X either at EI 200 in Rodinal or EI 640 in Microphen depending on season and lighting condition, and in both cases, they give me similar tonal scale on the neg. Have I shot it at box speed all the time, I would have to deal with a lot more variation in post-processing.