Jammy
Newbie
Hi Just getting into the idea of shooting some landscape on MF and devloping the negatives myself. I'll be scanning the negs.
In the past I've developed a little bit of Tri-X in Diafine and HCD-2 (pushing) but I've always mde my landscape photographs digitally.
I like a fine and sharp black and white image for my landscapes.
This is the sort of thing I do:
Kisdon Force 01.jpg by jammybstard, on Flickr
Top Withins.jpg by jammybstard, on Flickr
I'd like to achive somthing similar on film in terms of Full tone, sharp and fine.
From the bit of reading I've done on developers fine (grain) and sharp (acutance) are a bit of a trade off. I was hoping based on the exaple you might be able to help me select a type of deveoper to try first? Any thoughts?
Thankyou
In the past I've developed a little bit of Tri-X in Diafine and HCD-2 (pushing) but I've always mde my landscape photographs digitally.
I like a fine and sharp black and white image for my landscapes.
This is the sort of thing I do:
Kisdon Force 01.jpg by jammybstard, on FlickrTop Withins.jpg by jammybstard, on FlickrI'd like to achive somthing similar on film in terms of Full tone, sharp and fine.
From the bit of reading I've done on developers fine (grain) and sharp (acutance) are a bit of a trade off. I was hoping based on the exaple you might be able to help me select a type of deveoper to try first? Any thoughts?
Thankyou
marek_
Established
If you're scanning the negatives with a consumer scanner, I don't really think it will make much difference. You'll have to add sharpening to the scan, and doing this you can make the picture look as sharp as you like. A good scanner will capture a sharper image with more detail. A flatbed won't get near to what is actually on the negative. Your scanning and editing process will determine your results to a large extent. Will you make prints and what size? This will affect the look too. If you were making wet prints, the choice of developer would be more important. Try some Kodak D76 at 1+3 dilution and see if you like the results. Xtol is a developer that is designed to give all the qualities you have mentioned, again you'll have to try and see for yourself.
Good luck
Good luck
stompyq
Well-known
I would personally stick with Diafine for a hybrid scanning workflow. The fact that you get a flat negative that preserves the highlight detail is more important than any of the other factors.
Jammy
Newbie
At the moment I would be scanning on an epson v500 flat bed. It goes upto 6400 DPI and seems to do a good job. I then use lightroom.
I get my printing done at Pro-AM imaging in Bradford. They do a lovely Lab print up to 12" wide. I think they still use an AGFA D-Lab machines at 400dpi on Fuji paper.
I might have access to an enlarger in the future though.
Diafine has become near impossible to find in the UK. and I've just wrecked my last batch (Poared B in to A developing tired). I replaced it with some Spursinn HCD-2 which can push miles But it's one-shot and a bit expensive to use for everyday developing.
I'll have a look at the Kodak offerings mentioned.
Thanks
I get my printing done at Pro-AM imaging in Bradford. They do a lovely Lab print up to 12" wide. I think they still use an AGFA D-Lab machines at 400dpi on Fuji paper.
I might have access to an enlarger in the future though.
Diafine has become near impossible to find in the UK. and I've just wrecked my last batch (Poared B in to A developing tired). I replaced it with some Spursinn HCD-2 which can push miles But it's one-shot and a bit expensive to use for everyday developing.
I'll have a look at the Kodak offerings mentioned.
Thanks
mfogiel
Veteran
As far as scanning goes, I am not sure about V500, but V750 can make a competent 6x enlargement providing you keep the film flat and calibrate focus with adjustable holder. The real resolution though is max 2400dpi.
As far as the rendering - you will probably like more good acutance rather than fine grain, as grain is part of film process anyway. You could try developers like Rodinal, HC110 or HRX-3. Google a bit and see how you like the results. In case of doubt, you can always do as Michael Kenna - go with Tri X and D76 1+1 - look up his site.
As far as the rendering - you will probably like more good acutance rather than fine grain, as grain is part of film process anyway. You could try developers like Rodinal, HC110 or HRX-3. Google a bit and see how you like the results. In case of doubt, you can always do as Michael Kenna - go with Tri X and D76 1+1 - look up his site.
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
First off - get hold of Anchell/Troops Film Developing Cookbook. Get a pair of digital scales and the essential chemicals and make your own developer. For long tonal range look at Td 201, a two bath developer. Grain is reasonable, not super fine. If you are using slow films, Pan-F or something like that, make up some Beutler developer. Good acutance and with slow films moderate grain. The advantage of making your own developer is that you can tailor it to your taste.
Most commercially available developers are designed for long storage - making your own you are not constrained by that. It is actually quite easy - and considerably cheaper too. My Pyrocat HD costs me around $0,08/roll!!!!
Tom
Most commercially available developers are designed for long storage - making your own you are not constrained by that. It is actually quite easy - and considerably cheaper too. My Pyrocat HD costs me around $0,08/roll!!!!
Tom
Ranchu
Veteran
As I understand it, a fine grain developer softens grain rather than making it finer, but a high acutance developer doesn't, and for 35mm you'll want a slow film. 400 speed films usually have two separate emulsion layers, I think for lower contrast. Can't be good for sharpness.
Jammy
Newbie
2400dpi? Is that the max optical resolution of the scanner? I had been led to believe that the tru resolution of the scanner was 4800dpi. It seems hard to find the facts on scanners.
Yes from everones comments It seems it would be better to start by going down the middle and use a general developer like D76.
No point in softening or sharpening the grain for scanning.
Michael Kenna - Very interesting, thanks for that.
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
Seconded. And if you don't already have it, I will recommend Barry Thornton's book, "Edge of Darkness." Thornton was a landscape photographer. His book has extensive discussion around your question. Among other things, he believed that a photo that has grain just at the threshold of visibility makes a picture look sharper by giving the eye something to focus on.
Agreed. If you want fine grain, start with a fine grain film (FP4? Delta 100 Pro?), and develop for sharpness with something like D-76 1:1 or XTOL; or better yet, one of the developers Tom mentioned. Some people use Rodinal with fine grain film to bring out a gradation/pictorial quality they like.
mfogiel
Veteran
Yes, V750 has been tested for resolution, and it was maxing out between 2200-2400 PPI when in the "high resolution" mode, much less if you were using the lens that covers LF.
HHPhoto
Well-known
Hi Jammy,
1. Sharpness and grain are determined to 90-95% by the film, and only the 5-10% rest is influenced by the developer.
Therefore first use a sharp, fine grained film.
In ISO 400/27° that are
1) T-Max 400 (best)
2) Delta 400 and XP 2 Super.
They are all much sharper and finer grained than Tri-X.
If you want even better sharpness, higher resolution and finer grain then go for
- Delta 100, T-Max 100, Acros 100
- PanF+
- Rollei RPX 25, Rollei Ortho 25
- Agfa Copex Rapid and Adox CMS 20 II (the absolute king of sharpness, resolution and fine grain).
2. There are developers which deliver both very good sharpness / acutance and very fine grain.
For example:
- Spur HRX
- Moersch Finol
- Rollei RLS / CG 512.
Cheers, Jan