Good Film developing setup needed

[Ko.Fe.]

Lets make it simple. You only need this to develop film. Really, you only need to buy just this:
https://www.fotoimpex.de/shopen/analog-starter-kits/fotoimpex-starter-kit-film-basic.html
The rest you will find for free and it is optional.

And I'm highly recommending this:
https://www.fotoimpex.de/shopen/ana...-entire-photographic-laboratory-for-35mm.html

Because this is what bw film is all about.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Lets make it simple. You only need this to develop film. Really, you only need to buy just this:
https://www.fotoimpex.de/shopen/analog-starter-kits/fotoimpex-starter-kit-film-basic.html
The rest you will find for free and it is optional.

And I'm highly recommending this:
https://www.fotoimpex.de/shopen/ana...-entire-photographic-laboratory-for-35mm.html

Because this is what bw film is all about.

I totally agree!
And mastering these simple goods and materials, while taking good photographs too, takes years, and nobody has ever been the exception, not even the most talented masters...
papo, you need to do a lot of work, not buying a lot of things: sometimes more things in the beginning, can only stop you...
Cheers,
Juan

 

[Roger Hicks]

Hi papo,
Great you want to develop your b&w: that's the best you can do.
I strongly recommend you to act in a way you can learn from your results from the very beginning... IMO there are a few things that are a lot more important than the darkroom goods or the chemicals you use. Here's what any good teacher should tell you:
1. Use just one film, for some months at least, better more than a year.... Use the film you choose at box speed only, for the same time. Best films are, for classic look, Kodak's Tri-X and Ilford's HP5+. Don't shoot too much...
2. Use for the same time, just one developer. The one that's been produced for the longest time is Rodinal: that speaks about how good it is... Apart from a very long and stable life, Rodinal shows film's grain as it is, instead of dissolving it a bit (as D-76/ID-11 or HC-110) or instead of dissolving it a lot or masking it (Perceptol and Pyro). If you use Rodinal, try to use its 1:50 dillution only, for some months: it gives a beautiful tonal range.
3. Get a notebook and write down what you see in every roll you develop. You'll want to come back to see things again and analize them again after some time, even after years, so you'll need to know where is what, and you'll discover new things if it's easy for you to locate every negative for every note.
4. This is the most important one: all meters, in camera ones (reflected light) and handheld ones (incident light) are blind meters: they tell you a metering to set your aperture and speed, but that's not a metering for your photograph to be well exposed, but a metering for making a photograph that in promedy produces an image that's middle gray... And only less than 10% scenes are middle gray in promedy, so very few times a meter can tell you the truth... Meters were and are designed only as a first step in the judgment of light: it's the photographer who has to decide how much less or more light give to the scene from the meter's values, depending on the scene's subject and the scene's contrast. So get in contact with a good photographer to learn in person about the types of light and how to meter different scenes... And use just one camera during that process.
Cheers,
Juan

Dear Juan,

1+2 NO NO NO NO NO.

Be utterly promiscuous in your choice of film and dev at first. You will hit on at least one combination that you really like, and some that you don't. If for doctrinaire reasons you stick with one film and one dev, and get the wrong combination, you're in trouble if you try to stick with it.

Rodinal gives low film speed and huge grain (albeit with quite good sharpness and tonality).

Cheers,

R.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Hi Roger,
Sorry but that's not true.
Rodinal doesn't give huge grain, but natural grain.
Only if not used right, you accentuate grain.
At 18C with careful agitation, its grain is gorgeous, indeed.
If you or anybody else prefer avoiding grain, that's a different story, and you're allowed to, obviously.
Pushing is a good reason for using a different developer, though. The difference of real speed from Rodinal to Microphen, my two favorite developers, is close to 2 stops.
And about sticking with a single film and a single developer to understand basic development, it's great, of course with a good film and a good developer for that film and with controlled exposure, as I recommended.
For the first 2 years of my career, we had to use HP5+ & ID-11 only. The school was IEFC in Barcelona, I guess the best school or one of the best ones in the world teaching Photography only, with more than 1,000 students from all around the world.
After those first 2 years we were allowed to do our projects using other B&W films or color film. We learned to expose using slide film, to see reality...
I agree with them now I have seen students (mine) lost in lots of different films and developers, learning nothing.
It's not about finding "a good combo", but about being able to make one work great: just my personal opinion and experience, and just talking about learning.
Cheers,
Juan

 

[sebastel]

ok, it's time for the chips.

but poor olli needs not only learn developing, but also the characteristics of rff's regulars. a bit too much, isn't it?

while strong opinions shall fight to entertain everybody, the beginner needs to identify his favourite approach to control many variables at the same time. my recommendation: a block of hp5 and d76/id11 (powder) or lc29 (liquid) for the time being, and as soon as the routine is settled, consider other combinations.

good idea: check flickr for examples, both for typical results, and the variation to find in identical film/dev combinations.

have fun.
s.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Hi Roger,
Sorry but that's not true.
Rodinal doesn't give huge grain, but natural grain.
Only if not used right, you accentuate grain.
At 18C with careful agitation, its grain is gorgeous, indeed.
If you or anybody else prefer avoiding grain, that's a different story, and you're allowed to, obviously.
Pushing is a good reason for using a different developer, though. The difference of real speed from Rodinal to Microphen, my two favorite developers, is close to 2 stops.
And about sticking with a single film and a single developer to understand basic development, it's great, of course with a good film and a good developer for that film and with controlled exposure, as I recommended.
For the first 2 years of my career, we had to use HP5+ & ID-11 only. The school was IEFC in Barcelona, I guess the best school or one of the best ones in the world teaching Photography only, with more than 1,000 students from all around the world.
After those first 2 years we were allowed to do our projects using other B&W films or color film. We learned to expose using slide film, to see reality...
I agree with them now I have seen students (mine) lost in lots of different films and developers, learning nothing.
It's not about finding "a good combo", but about being able to make one work great: just my personal opinion and experience, and just talking about learning.
Cheers,
Juan

Dear Juan,

If you care to define "huge" as "natural", that is of course your privilege. But it's a bit like the difference between large, medium and small eggs, or super-gigantic, enormous and merely large eggs; all referring to the same three sizes of egg, of course.

And, if Rodinal is so magnificent, why did your old school not standardize on that instead of ID-11?

Furthermore, if there is a 2-stop difference between Rodinal and Microphen, this is further proof that Rodinal loses a stop in speed. Maximum true ISO of (for example) HP5 in Microphen is just under 800. Two stops less than that is just under ISO 200.

Now, what was I saying about low film speed and huge grain...?

Rodinal is more of a religion than a developer. It dates back to 1891, when the smallest negatives used by most serious photographers were quarter-plate or 9x12 cm; contact printing was a lot more usual than enlarging; and if they were made at all, enlargements were normally 2x or 3x at most. Unless you REALLY like grain, it is of extremely limited use for 35mm.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Roger Hicks]

ok, it's time for the chips.

but poor olli needs not only learn developing, but also the characteristics of rff's regulars. a bit too much, isn't it?

while strong opinions shall fight to entertain everybody, the beginner needs to identify his favourite approach to control many variables at the same time. my recommendation: a block of hp5 and d76/id11 (powder) or lc29 (liquid) for the time being, and as soon as the routine is settled, consider other combinations.

good idea: check flickr for examples, both for typical results, and the variation to find in identical film/dev combinations.

have fun.
s.

Flickr is not going to tell you much about what a real print looks like, is it? Not after it's been scanned and put on a computer screen.

I completely agree about HP5, but I'd recommend DD-X because it's easier to use than a powder and doesn't require very high dilutions. At that, there's probably someone, somewhere that can't get superb results out of it, and there are plenty who will get results they prefer from (say) FP4 in ID-11 or Acupan 200 in Perceptol (at about ISO 80-100).

Cheers,

R.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Dear Juan,

If you care to define "huge" as "natural", that is of course your privilege. But it's a bit like the difference between large, medium and small eggs, or super-gigantic, enormous and merely large eggs; all referring to the same three sizes of egg, of course.

And, if Rodinal is so magnificent, why did your old school not standardize on that instead of ID-11?

Furthermore, if there is a 2-stop difference between Rodinal and Microphen, this is further proof that Rodinal loses a stop in speed. Maximum true ISO of (for example) HP5 in Microphen is just under 800. Two stops less than that is just under ISO 200.

Now, what was I saying about low film speed and huge grain...?

Rodinal is more of a religion than a developer. It dates back to 1891, when the smallest negatives used by most serious photographers were quarter-plate or 9x12 cm; contact printing was a lot more usual than enlarging; and if they were made at all, enlargements were normally 2x or 3x at most. Unless you REALLY like grain, it is of extremely limited use for 35mm.

Cheers,

R.

Roger, seriously, I wasn´t trying to make you see things my way... And to continue discussing has no sense at all after the really important fact: that's offering clearly our opinions in a public site that will have in the future more readers than in the present.

I don't get why you say that I want to define huge as natural: I just didn't... In any way... My prints made from slow film well developed in Rodinal have small grain, and those made with faster film in rodinal have a bit more grain, but a beautiful and crisp grain always. The real, natural grain film has. And no one has ever said those prints are horrible because of that grain, but it's OK if you hate it... Some of us like it very much.

As I am not "the school I studied at" I can't tell you for sure why they decided, long before me, to use ID-11 instead of Rodinal... My opinion, as you ask for it, is that they might did it because D-76, same formula, is a world standard, and because its look is a middle point as I said: grain that's not too sharp, and not too dissolved or masked. I don´t think you should imagine rodinal is a religion for people... I use Microphen more, because I push often. Hating rodinal is strange: it's not a bad person, it's a chemical that offers us things, and everyone's free to use it or not. And some of us find it magnificent and even more, no matter if it loses speed.
Cheers,
Juan

 

[huddy]

Equipment

• Fotoimpex/Paterson tanks (The 2 roll variety is a good place to start) with 2 reels.
• Darkroom bag if you don't have access to a darkroom/dark closet.

Chemicals:

• 1 Quart Diafine Kit (a 2 part panthermic developer that isn't temperature sensitive and gives an effective 1 stop speed boost)
• Ilford Rapid Fixer or similar
• Kodak Photo-Flo or similar drying agent.
• Distilled/well-filtered water.

Remaining equipment:

• 1 glass stirring rod for fixer Brown Plastic/Glass containers for Diafine (preferable to have a wide mouth).
• 2x 1000mL beakers to hold stop bath water and fixer. Nice easy to read measurements and has room to expand to a 3 roll tank. I'd get 4x of these if you can't find widemouthed jars for the developer.
• Film Drying Clips
  (either use them on both ends, or 1 at the top hanging from a hangar, and a clothes pin at the bottom to econmize.
• I dry my film in a small coat closet that has minimal dust/airflow. If you don't have an amenity like that and don't have an otherwise safe location for the film to dry, a garmet bag or similar is a must.

I mention using Diafine. I think it's a great beginners develoepr as it doesn't require tight temperature controls (within reason) and produces excellent results with a speed boost for many films, lasts a lllllooooonnnng time, is economical, and downright easy. I am able to use a single developer and two films (Fuji Acros and Kodak TriX) while shooting at speeds from ISO 160-1250, with great results and flexibility. If you're interested in more info, see this thread on shooting TriX at 1600/3200 where CalZone provides good info: https://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=2630795

 

[sebastel]

one person's owl is the other one's nithingale.


@Juan:
interesting to see that your favourite developers are my favourite developers.

why i like rodinal:
1. it easily brings out the "look" that i want to achieve. not much postprocessing. btw, i scan negatives, currently i don't use an enlarger/silver based positive process. (i know, a lot of BOOOOOOO will come over me now)
2. it keeps useable (fresh) for a long time
3. it is a liquid concentrate
4. i mainly use ISO100 film
5. even in ISO400 film, i don't consider the grainy appearance a problem
6. i like how my negatives look (oh, i mentioned this already?)
7. i dare to follow my own experience and preferences

but i don't think that rodinal is the right choice for everybody. (hence my recommendation for standard developers)
shall we return to the topic?

 

[sebastel]

Flickr is not going to tell you much about what a real print looks like, is it? Not after it's been scanned and put on a computer screen.

depends on what you're after.

to see the fine points of printing, flickr (or any web representation) is not a good idea. i well remember the effect an original ansel adams print had on me. that was technically brilliant, (... leaving out the "but" part as it is not related to what we're discussing here).

now let's assume you are overwhelmed by the choices and number of combinations. here flickr (or any other reasonably tagged collection of pictures) can give you some ideas to find a film/developer combination that suits you.

still i'd recommend to use a standard combo at least until you feel comfortable with the procedures.

 

[mslatfly]

Have any of you tried Sprint developer and fixer? What are your opinions compared to others? They are available at a store in Baltimore. plus I went to a local community college to re-learn developing film, and that's what the school used (hadn't done it for 25 years at that time, plus I got some good darkroom time out of it).