Bluefire Police film with Developer

Yes, it is like the film I used 40 years ago. 25 minutes was too long and it over developed, but just slightly. I will shoot (I think) at 10-12 EI and then develop for 20 minutes, HC-110, 1:125, 15 seconds initial agitation, then 1 inversion each five minutes (3 total), 68 degrees. I hope this will give some compensation and the reduced time will lower the contrast. At least that is my plan now, but I might think of something different. Donald Qualls suggested this (or close to it) scheme and he seems to be in the ballpark.
 
If you're going down in E.I. you can develop most micro film types in Rodinal 1+150 with reasonable results.
Another option is to use a low contrast document developer (e.g. Rollei Low Contrast, RLC) a recept of Udo Raffay.

For perfect results companies like SPUR made for Rollei and Adox some special developers (ATP-DC divided, Adotech etc.) to optimize the curve fitting. However in most high contrast light situations, every micro film has some problems.

Best regards,

Robert
 
Thanks for the information Robert. The reason I used HC-110 was because the company that I purchased the film from is out of developer. So I just used what I had. Earlier I showed some photos of microfilm developed in a special developer. I worked OK but me not understanding agitation, dilution theory very well (which I still don't), I never modified my development scheme. This one is a good example of high contrast scene with microfilm:

1971:

8071465367_17b4b7879c.jpg
 
3546616704_fcd9ea1e11_z.jpg



ATP1.1 (Rollei), well in fact Agfa Gevaert micro film with extended Red sensitivity in Rodinal 1+150. 6:30 minutes E.I. 15.

Here the same film E.I. 25 in the ATP-DC (Rollei-SPUR) developer 1+11,5 for 6:00 minutes.

2499293155_5c574b34f7_z.jpg


Both done with the same camera and lens: M7 + Summarit 2,5/75mm.
 
Robert, you can get interesting results with microfilm, like you have here. I don't know if you agree but it seems to me after scanning this first roll that you have to carefully pick your subjects. Portraits, nudes, and other indoor scenes seem to me good choices. It has been rainy and cloudy here and those gray skies seem to blow out easily.
 
In the bright sun exposure you see already the problems in the highlights. It is very difficult to control this with any micro film.
 
Right, and I had to try to 'hide' them with post processing. This film sure makes skin look good though (see Roberts). Plus, it is sharp so the convenience of 35mm is made to look like 120. Just use it in low or medium contrast scenes.
 
OK, my second roll was much better than the first, HC-110 1:125, shot at 10, 20 minutes development, 15 seconds initial agitation, then 1 inversion with 1/3 twist at 15 minutes 10 minutes and 5 minutes counting down. Pretty slow which reduces the portability of 35mm photography, you have to use a tripod. It is still high contrast, and also has a gloomy look on a rainy day. Here are a couple:

8264100195_e46c502391.jpg


8265167428_207b1bd878.jpg
 
I guess you could use it for indoor portraits, and indoor still life. I do like it for sunny days late in the afternoon or early morning:

8264098751_516336fca1.jpg
 
Roll 3: 18 minutes HC-110 1:125, 15 seconds initial agitation, 1 inversion with 1/3 twist every 5 minutes, 68 degrees, EI 10. This is my stopping point for development tweaking. Her are two from roll 3:

8599741039_33fac4fbe2.jpg


and outdoors full sun, not high contrast:

8599738853_61f3f9fa19.jpg
 
Thanks Robert, you are right about the limitation of this film in full tone. I does have a nice creaminess, that really is kind to skin.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom