Do you develop your own B&W film?

Do you develop your own B&W film?

  • Yes - I'm still addicted

    Votes: 727 89.3%

  • No - I opt for convenience

    Votes: 87 10.7%
  • Total voters
    814
Crasis said:
I love internet knowledge. Did you know that the birth rate of elephants has tripled over the past year? :eek:
Click to expand...

no, i did not. good to know.

internet also says that the global warming is just a theory.
 
Just learned to soup film... My first attempt was very successful, the following two... were not. But heck, it's all in the sleigh of hand, right? :)

So, right now I'm stuck using D-76. Not that I don't like it, it's simply that I won't go in a wild goose chase looking for a developer/fixer combo I like, simply because I don't know what's there to like about the result: as long as my negatives are viewable and render decent scans to print, I'll be happy.

BTW, I'm an Ilford film devotee... that I already know! :)
 
SolaresLarrave said:
Just learned to soup film... My first attempt was very successful, the following two... were not.
Click to expand...

Exactly what happened to me :) Then I devised a system for myself, and it seems to work well. It's simply a matter of maitaining consistency. When you get good, you can start playing as if you are cooking (where you don't follow recipes exactly).
 
I'm late to the thread. I develop all my B&W film. I do it in my kitchen. I love being able to come home from shooting, pop on the headphones, and immediately develop everything I've shot. It's very convenient, and I love being right there to see how they come out.

I use HC-110 developer. My last two rolls, though, have seemed a little off. I need to shoot one more before I can figure it out. It's either that my thermometer is giving me bad readings, so I'm slightly underdeveloping, or it's something in my chemicals. Or, uh, it's something in my shooting.

After they've dried I cut 'em up and scan the ones I like. I used to have a darkroom in my garage, for printing, and it was on the verge of taking over my life -- I would spend four hours at a time working on a single photo -- but then I had to move (but it was one of the perks of living with three photography students).

Figuring out everything I needed for developing was a tad daunting, but of course there are many nice checklists on websites. But it's not too difficult, and it's definitely worth it.
 
ChrisN said:
Boy, this one is from way back! it will be interesting to see if any of the earlier contributors have changed their positions!
Click to expand...

I hadn't read this thread recently, because I thought I had answered a similar one a while back. Lo and behold it was this very thread that I answered!!

I have changed a little, I have added 5x7 and 8x10 negatives to my developing. I have been using Diafine for my developer in addition to D-76.

I just recently bought an Epson 4990 scanner (about 2 days before they went on clearance for $200 less than I paid). I am luke warm about scanning right now, probably due to my not progressing up the scanning learning curve very quickly.

Wayne
 
8x10? 8x10?!?

Let me sit here for a minute and try and get my mind around negatives about 4 times the size of 4x5.

...

*faints*

Er, yeah. 8x10 is pretty, but I still wonder how everyone can afford to buy film. I don't care how much money you make...regardless, it's STILL expensive. ;)
 
I develop my own black and white - mostly delta 100 and 400 - in Ilford chemistry. Perceptol is my favourite but also use DDX. The thing that still amazes me is just how easy it is to do your own processing!

Currently, I scan the negs using a KM Elite 5400 - using either Vuescan or Silverfast Ai - and get the printing done by Peak Imaging or supply as TIF files to clients. The results aren't bad...but I'm looking at buying an enlarger and doing it the traditional way...everything I read says that provides far superior results...time to find out.

David
 
I'm currently developing film at my high school for photography class. It's kind of boring shaking a thermos like canister for 10 minutes. Now printing is fun. It's under a safe light, development takes around 2 minutes, and you can see the print while it's developing. And I can kind of chimp while printing.

Also, B&W processing is really expensive. $15/roll for development and a contact sheet. Almost double for pushing.
 
I'm amazed this old thread suddenly came to life again, but I've noticed an increase in the number of people posting that they've started developing B&W film. I think that's great.

I re-read my starting post and nothing has changed for me since then. I've tried a few other developers, namely D-76 and X-Tol, liked them, but returned to my original two: HC-110 and Rodinal. I prefer a long-lasting concentrate and both of these developers turn out good results with slightly different personalities. I like HC-110 for pushing and Rodinal for pulling.

I'm still shooting Tri-X mainly, supplemented with some slower films such as Acros 100. I have some Pan-F to try but haven't got there yet. I miss APX 100. Neopan 400 is also excellent. I don't use T-grain films much.

Still scanning rather than running a darkroom. It works fine for my needs, though my hat's off to anyone doing wet printing. Wet prints are beautiful when done skillfully.

Gene
 
I`ve just started processing B&W, after a very long time. Dug out all the old gear, mixed up a batch of ID-11, fumbled around under the bed clothes LOADING FILM !! Poured in the ID-11 @ 1-1, and 12 mins later Hey Presto !! MAGIC. I even processed a roll of exposed 20yr. Plus-X , a bit flat, but certainly acceptible.
 
Still scanning rather than running a darkroom. It works fine for my needs, though my hat's off to anyone doing wet printing. Wet prints are beautiful when done skillfully.
Click to expand...
Your missing a lot of the fun by not making enlargements.
 
I have my own lab on the first floor of an old hotel that's no longer a hotel, so the rent's cheap. Contains my Simmons/Omega B22XL and a motorized Beseler 45. They are both quite old, but neither seems to work any differently then when they were new. Also a ten foot long tub sink. Possibly the only darkroom in America with a 14 foot high celing. Do I make enlargements? Of course. But the bane of my existence is that I can't get Agfa Portriga Rapid anymore. Developer? D76 and Dektol. Film? PlusX, TriX, HP4, TMAX 100, and Fomapan 200.

Ted
 
I've always developed my own black and white film for a few reasons.

For one thing getting b/w developed at the lab is expensive. It would push my per roll cost to a solid $10-15 dollars, and I would rather put the money into buying more film. Tri-X isn't getting any cheaper...

Another reason why I prefer to develop my own film is control.

I can match developers to certain stocks.

Generally my slower films (100asa) are developed in Rodinal.
Tri-X does into Ilford DD-X or Divided D76.
Delta3200 or anything that needs to be push processed ends up in DD-X.

And of course I can vary the development time etc, depending on what look I am after.


And finally there is the simple convenience of being able to develop a roll when ever it pleases me.;)


I still make wet prints in the 'darkroom', but it's difficult for me, because I don't have a permanent setup. My free time is also limited and I would rather be shooting.

So, I purchased a good Nikon scanner and output via the Fuji LightJet. I can't wait for Ilford to ship their new glossy fiber paper for digital enlargers.


Cheers,

HL
 
Last edited:
Harry, I agree with you. I love developing my own film. I do a little exploring of different developers, dilutions, and times to maximize the film's capabilities. Originally, I did it because that was what I had to do and also it was the cheapest way to explore the subject of photography. It seems that the labs never could do as well as could do even as a rank beginner.

For those that have not tried it, it takes only a minimal amount of equipment. A developing tank, three dark bottles (or bottles stored in a dark area) and thermonmeter. Get some developer, fixer and photo-flo and you're set. I would load the tank in a dark room and hang the developed film in a bathroom (least dusty of the rooms). In about 30 minutes from start to clean-up, I would have film hanging to dry.

Now, I am exploring mixing my own developer so that I can learn more and to find one that will last a long time so I won't pollute the planet as much.

Best of luck,
Phil
 
I put "Yes I am still addicted" but what I should have put (if such a box existed) should have been: "yes, for convenience". To develope a couple of roll of film I just put them in the tank and do all the work in about 1 hour, including washing, in order to obtain exactly the negative I want. If I expose in a special way I know it, and I also know what kind of contrast and rendering of shadows and highlights I like. Then I enlarge exactly what I like the way I like. Sometimes after I enlarge a picture and look at it I might come out with some idea (cropping, solarization, whatever...). If I had to use a lab I should walk more or less 40' speak with the chap about what I did and how I want him to develope my work, then walk another 40' and wait and hope one day before having negatives which possibly are as I want but possibly are not. Assuming they are I should then explain to him how do I want them printed. Any fine tuning would be done on 40'+40' walks, hope, and a lot of explanations to end, in the best case, with something I like but which I only partially created... No thanks!
Convenience could be going digital or shoting Polaroids. Digital is ok, but if I have to choose I prefer spending two hours in the darkroom rather than 2 hours in front of a computer screen (I already have to spend many hours in front of a computer for my work). Polaroids are great but they are a completely different game: no enlargement (unless you use a positive-negative one, but then you are back to darkroom), only one copy, reduced choice in many things, so they are only for some special applications (the positive things, for memebers of this list, is that they are mostly rangefinder cameras!).

Giella lea Fapmu
 
I use Diafine and rate Tri-X at 1250 ASA. Chromes I let labs develop.

I used to make wet prints back in the '70s, but I have to say I didn't find it the transcendental experience some others seem to enjoy. Lots of hours trying to get it right, and I won a local photo contest with one of my B&W prints, but still--I'd rather scan and print digitally. Let's not even go into dodging, burning, bleaching, dyeing, etc.

Another task I'd rather not revisit: developing E-6.

Developing B&W 135 and 120 is fun, though. One of my favorite magical moments is the simultaneous expectation and surprise of seeing what thought I saw when I originally took the picture after I develop the film. Digital doesn't have that magic--it always seems like a deterministic process to me: okay I made picture A, and I will apply filter B in Photoshop, etc. With film, you take a picture of a scene that you imagine will look a certain way, and it always has a surprising difference. Especially with a Holga!
 
Last edited:
When I started photography, back in the mid '70s, I did all my own film and print work, almost from the begining. For a long while there, in the army, I could shoot a can a week (100 ft.) and I think I even had a few weeks i shot two cans. Latter on, when Cibichrome came out, I started bulk rolling Ektachrome and learned to develop with E-6 chemicals. I shot a lot of macro stuff and birds while stationed in the Marshall Islands and after I ETSed, shot a lot of dancers, both ballet and modern. The colors were fantastic and the cibi prints were better (IMO) than anything you could get, short of a master custom lab or professional dye transfer prints.

Later on, as a freelancer, I would do b&w work as a service to other photographers, both product and people. I loved to put in long days printing, especially if it was a model shoot, my own or someone else. Those types of work allow for a lot of experimenting and I did a lot of bleaching and toning for effects that could not be had from other sources.

When I became ill and stopped working in 1990 to become an at home parent, I gave up photography and not until the last few months did I pick it up again.

Tonight there was an email informing me that the last of my chemicals, needed for my b&w darkroom setup, will arrive by UPS tomorrow; thirteen pounds of sodium sulfite...you can do a lot of damage with that... I can hardly wait.

My opinion has always been that, if you shoot b&w, your missing 60% of the thrill if you're not doing your own stuff.

Cheers
 
I develop black and white because I can't afford to take it to a lab and because it's so damn easy. Also, the labs that do a really good job are kind of a pain in the ass to get to, while the labs that are convenient for me do a crap job that I can easily surpass even with my toddler-like capabilities. Also, it's fun to be able to see my negatives the day I shot them, if I want to.

I've only used D-76 so far and am pretty happy with it. Recently I even ventured into the 1:1 dilution and finally started to understand the difference between "worse" and "better" when it comes to results. Eventually I may branch out.

Rolls that are actually important (like, the photos from my brother's wedding) I don't develop myself. I'm sure they would probably come out fine, but I worry about random accidents or mental lapses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom