mob81
Well-known
Is ilford dd-x a fine grain developer? If not what is? Because I want to use 50 iso or less "very bright days in Saudi"
Also, what does "shooting for shadow and develop for highlight (or the other way around)"?
Also, what does "shooting for shadow and develop for highlight (or the other way around)"?
tlitody
Well-known
DD-X is a normal grain developer when compared to something like perceptol which is a really fine grain developer(Powder developer). But slow films tend to be finer grained than medium and fast films so unless you want to make big enlargements (20x16) then DD-X should be fine enough.
Another alternative is Tetenal Ultrafin Plus which gives a little finer grain than DD-X but less film speed.
tlitody
Well-known
expose for shadows and develop for highlights requires a spot meter and the knowledge how to use it accurately to get it right which is quite a steep learning curve. Suggest you read Ansel Adams "The negative" if you are into landscape photography.
newspaperguy
Well-known
.
For an even smoother path,
find a used copy of Fred Picker's ZONE VI Workshop.
His work with HC 110 will amaze you.
While you're at it, look for a copy of his THE FINE PRINT.
Two worthy additions to any B&W shooter/printer's library.
.
For an even smoother path,
find a used copy of Fred Picker's ZONE VI Workshop.
His work with HC 110 will amaze you.
While you're at it, look for a copy of his THE FINE PRINT.
Two worthy additions to any B&W shooter/printer's library.
.
user237428934
User deletion pending
I have Tetenal Ultrafin Plus and in combination with Acros 100 this is absolutely fine grain.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
'Fine grain' is a slippery term. Almost ALL modern developers were regarded as 'fine grain' when they were introduced.
But no, DD-X is a slightly speed increasing developer = slightly bigger grain as against (say) D-76.
"Expose for the shadows" means "Give generous exposure" (or "Meter the shadows directly, if you know what you're doing.")
"Develop for the highlights" means adjust your development to the subject brightness range, i.e. on a bright sunny day curtail development slightly (-10%) and on a flat, dull day, give up to 50% more.
As with most things on the internet, the importance of this is wildly overstated by many people. Looking at the following may give you a start on how to approach things:
http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/meters and metering.html
Cheers,
R.
But no, DD-X is a slightly speed increasing developer = slightly bigger grain as against (say) D-76.
"Expose for the shadows" means "Give generous exposure" (or "Meter the shadows directly, if you know what you're doing.")
"Develop for the highlights" means adjust your development to the subject brightness range, i.e. on a bright sunny day curtail development slightly (-10%) and on a flat, dull day, give up to 50% more.
As with most things on the internet, the importance of this is wildly overstated by many people. Looking at the following may give you a start on how to approach things:
http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/meters and metering.html
Cheers,
R.
sepiareverb
genius and moron
Back in the day one could get Microdol-X as a liquid in brown glass bottles.
haempe
Well-known
I think, Neofine Blue should give you acceptable results with low speed films.
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
Neofin blue (Beutler) is no fine grain developer - indeed it is a speed-increasing developer for fine grain films (where it does not matter that it does nothing to improve grain).
mob81
Well-known
Thanks guys,
newspaperguy, I'll look for the ZONE VI Workshop "thanks for the recommendation"
Roger, thanks for the link, very informative
newspaperguy, I'll look for the ZONE VI Workshop "thanks for the recommendation"
Roger, thanks for the link, very informative
Monokrome
Member
The problem with slow mono films is that they don't handle high contrast lighting situations very well.
I am sure that DDX is a good developer for general use, but be careful when choosing films.
PKR
Veteran
Roger; Does diluting a developer like d76 (1:1) have any effect on grain size?
mfogiel
Veteran
One of the best liquid developers for slow films is FX39, it will give you small grain, great acutance, very important with slow films, which generally exhibit small acutance, and it also gives very nice tonality and good dynamic range ( it is slightly compensating).
However, in my opinion, for "very bright days in Saudi" it might actually be better to use Tri X, expose it at EI 200 or even EI 100, and develop on the short side in any liquid developer, like DD X or HC 110 or Rodinal. This way you will get a very extended dynamic range, and full shadow detail.
However, in my opinion, for "very bright days in Saudi" it might actually be better to use Tri X, expose it at EI 200 or even EI 100, and develop on the short side in any liquid developer, like DD X or HC 110 or Rodinal. This way you will get a very extended dynamic range, and full shadow detail.
icamp
Member
Expose for the shadows would be to give less exposure..your metered shadow gives you 125/f5.6, exposure for shadow would be 125/f8. The more exposure you give will push everything up the contrast range of the film which can result in a lack of highlight detail and blocked shadows, a shorter range of zones will be recorded on the film.
Experiment with EI and dev times to get the look you want.
As mentioned above Tri-x, neopan 400, around EI 100-200 would be a good choice in my opinion.
Experiment with EI and dev times to get the look you want.
As mentioned above Tri-x, neopan 400, around EI 100-200 would be a good choice in my opinion.
venchka
Veteran
Xtol is 5 liters of liquid developer. Mixed 1:3 it delivers very fine grain. Some will disagree, but I have had good results with a variety of films from Kodak, Ilford, Efke & Foma.
mob81
Well-known
Thanks again guys.
Rodinal is impossible to get "no shipping where I live" and xtol is just to much for me to mix and use, if there was a 1L package!
I'll try tri-x at 200 and develop with HC-110 probably dull E or H and see from there. I really liked ilford delta 100 and I heard in DD-X it would look even better!
With HC-110 dull B the grain of ilford delta was obvious and no way near what I expected as fine grain "may be had my hopes too high!" but still a wonderful film for me.
Regards,
Mohammed
Rodinal is impossible to get "no shipping where I live" and xtol is just to much for me to mix and use, if there was a 1L package!
I'll try tri-x at 200 and develop with HC-110 probably dull E or H and see from there. I really liked ilford delta 100 and I heard in DD-X it would look even better!
With HC-110 dull B the grain of ilford delta was obvious and no way near what I expected as fine grain "may be had my hopes too high!" but still a wonderful film for me.
Regards,
Mohammed
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Ansel Adams reckoned that when he got a spot meter, his exposures INCREASED by one stop on average, i.e. reflected broad area reading = 1/125 @ f/5.6, spot = 1/60 @ f/5.6.
Though I do not compare myself with AA, I'd say that's a pretty fair observation.
No, more exposure CAN'T give you blocked shadows (think about it) and if you're wet printing they won't blow highlights either.
EI 100-200 is already overexposing 1-2 stops so you may be thinking backwards on this one.
Cheers,
R.
Jani_from_Finland
Well-known
Anyone having experience with Tetenal Ultrafin Plus developer and Fuji Neopan 400 (35mm) film, how does the grain and shadow/highlight look and what dilution would give best result x time?
I will test this tomorrow, but i want to hear personal opinions of this combination.
I will test this tomorrow, but i want to hear personal opinions of this combination.
tlitody
Well-known
I haven't used that combo but the film developing chart that comes with each bottle has good starting points. Follow their advice. They give two figures depending on the CI you require.
Ultrafin Plus gives a very straight curve on the films I have tested but my testing isn't complete. Designed for t-grain films, it gives the shadows a lift so that you get a very short toe. i.e. shadow values retain separation unlike some developers which give a long toe and cause shadows to block unless extra exposure is given.(i.e. loss of film speed to retain shadow separation).
Highlights are not excessive with this developer and diluting to 1+5 or 1+6 will start to introduce compensation effects. You'll have to play with it a bit but I think you won't be disappointed.
Ultrafin Plus gives a very straight curve on the films I have tested but my testing isn't complete. Designed for t-grain films, it gives the shadows a lift so that you get a very short toe. i.e. shadow values retain separation unlike some developers which give a long toe and cause shadows to block unless extra exposure is given.(i.e. loss of film speed to retain shadow separation).
Highlights are not excessive with this developer and diluting to 1+5 or 1+6 will start to introduce compensation effects. You'll have to play with it a bit but I think you won't be disappointed.
icamp
Member
Ansel Adams reckoned that when he got a spot meter, his exposures INCREASED by one stop on average, i.e. reflected broad area reading = 1/125 @ f/5.6, spot = 1/60 @ f/5.6.
Though I do not compare myself with AA, I'd say that's a pretty fair observation.
No, more exposure CAN'T give you blocked shadows (think about it) and if you're wet printing they won't blow highlights either.
EI 100-200 is already overexposing 1-2 stops so you may be thinking backwards on this one.
Cheers,
R.
As the OP is asking "shoot for shadows,dev for highlights" is not to place shadow detail with exposure as i described in my post ?? Dev for the highlights explains itself.If understand you correctly..you would meter shadows and give more exposure ? to me that is going from a zone 5 meter reading to zone 6, shadow detail is around zone 4 and 3.. the other direction as i understand it, but if it works for you..cool
As OP is shooting in what i assume is extreme contrast in Saudi, developing for a dull day in Dublin with a 50 iso film will be difficult to record the contrast range i think, so the highlights would be of concern in this situation to me. Giving more exposure does raise the shadows ,thats why i mention an EI of 100-200 as a starting point to compensate for reduced dev time with high contrast to fit the range on to film.
In my opinion..using a spot meter is not as important as finding your own personal EI / dev times and testing your chosen materials to get what you want..you cant get detail if is not recorded on film.
Thanks
Though I do not compare myself with AA, I'd say that's a pretty fair observation.
No, more exposure CAN'T give you blocked shadows (think about it) and if you're wet printing they won't blow highlights either.
EI 100-200 is already overexposing 1-2 stops so you may be thinking backwards on this one.
Cheers,
R.
As the OP is asking "shoot for shadows,dev for highlights" is not to place shadow detail with exposure as i described in my post ?? Dev for the highlights explains itself.If understand you correctly..you would meter shadows and give more exposure ? to me that is going from a zone 5 meter reading to zone 6, shadow detail is around zone 4 and 3.. the other direction as i understand it, but if it works for you..cool
As OP is shooting in what i assume is extreme contrast in Saudi, developing for a dull day in Dublin with a 50 iso film will be difficult to record the contrast range i think, so the highlights would be of concern in this situation to me. Giving more exposure does raise the shadows ,thats why i mention an EI of 100-200 as a starting point to compensate for reduced dev time with high contrast to fit the range on to film.
In my opinion..using a spot meter is not as important as finding your own personal EI / dev times and testing your chosen materials to get what you want..you cant get detail if is not recorded on film.
Thanks