Arista EDU 100 Ultra meets FG7...

[fishtek]

My latest attempt to find a processing routine and developer that brings the best out of Arista's EDU 100 Ultra now takes a run at Edwal's FG7. These shots were taken locally, with my Bessa R. Film was rated at 100 ISO, and exposed using the on-board meter. The film was processed with FG7 at 1:3, for 3.5 minutes, at 68 degrees. Agitation by initial inversion, then a single inversion each minute.

In my mind, they're acceptable, but needed a bit of PP, mostly lightening the images. Either over-exposed, or over-developed, I suppose. This is an ongoing experiment, and if my examples help anybody out who's looking for this info, that's a good thing...

Regards!
Don

 

[charjohncarter]

Which do you like best: HC-110, Rodinol, or FG7?

 

[kaiyen]

Over exposure and/or overdevelopment would not result in needing to lighten the image. Over exposure would reduce contrast, yielding a flat negative, which would probably look light to the eye. Overdevelopment would push your highlights out further, and it would also look lighter. Unless you also threw underexposure in there then your shadows would still be light, too.

One thing while doing these tests would be to make sure your post is done as similar as possible.

I envy the time you have to shoot for pleasure at all, much less for testing. School has eaten up my time. Though I guess when I do get out to photograph, getting paid for it makes me feel better...

allan

 

[Benjamin Marks]

Allan: what kind of school? I remember when I was in college, I got into the darkroom for a serious 7-8 hour printing session a couple of times a week. Now that I am out in the world . . .haven't been in the darkroom for a year! Yikes.

Ben

 

[fishtek]

Allen....

What is responsible for the darker images, if it isn't over exposure or over development? My highlights and shadows don't seem to be extreme, so I've just assumed that "tweaking" the settings in the camera would help. I'd be glad for any advice.

Regards!
Don

 

[Trius]

I always used FG-7 @ 1:15, about 9 minutes, IIRC. 3.5 minutes is way too short a time for small tank procesing, IMO. I'm pretty certain the 1:3 @ 3.5min is for automated processing; I hesitate to use any developer/dilution that calls for < 5 minutes.

The first one looks underexposed to me, as there is very little detail in the tree trunk on the left.

 

[JJW]

Trius is right. Use FG-7 diluted 1:15.

When you are testing film, maintain consistency. Shoot one scene under the same lighting conditions and bracket the exposure, noting what you have done. That way you can tell if the film/developer combo works best at the rated EI or above or below. Zero in on the best looking exposures for your style and printing technique and then play with any other parameters (e.g. filtration, development time, agitation etc.).

It's not scientific, but it will get you into the ballpark.

FWIW, FG-7 is a rather excellent compensating high acutance developer. I don't know anything about Arista EDU, but FG-7 should give you very good results with a traditional slow film like PAN F+ for outdoor shooting.

 

[Trius]

Yes, FG-7's principal charm (for me at least), is its compensating property, as well as tonal rendition. I never paid much attention to acutance, but now that I think about it, it was pretty good. The optional addition of sulfite gave finer grain and lower acutance, of course.

 

[Stephanie Brim]

The recipe for FG-7 is online somewhere, right? I've been meaning to get some chemicals (and masks and gloves to wear while mixing them) anyway due to the fact that I'm getting an enlarger soon (yay!) so that I can mix up the print developer that I want to use (Ansco 130), so it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to add a few chemicals to my order.

 

[fishtek]

Thanks, Folks! I appreciate your feedback. Please see my newer post on this subject...1:15, 7 minutes, etc...

I'm starting to LIKE this FG-7 a lot. I'll keep experimenting with the Rodinal, too, though.

Regards!
Don