have you standardized on your film/dev?

dedmonds said:
Tri-x rated at 320 developed in Rodinal 1:35 -- I've been using this combination almost exclusively for the past year.
Click to expand...


Your gallery is a good argument for this. Nice work.
 
Would love to experiment more, but my budget and time doesn't allow for it.

For 35mm I only use bulk rolled HP5+, while for 120 I use all sorts of monochrome film. Anything lower than ISO400 gets the rodinal, while anything higher is souped in Ilfotec DDX. Either way I tend to get high contrast negatives with pronounced grain, which I like. Results are relatively consistent.

If I had my 'druthers, I'd use bulk rolled Presto/Neopan 400.

Clarence
 
Last edited:
I standardize, but use different film/dev combos based on situations. Right tool for the right job and all. I am testing a few new developers, though, so I will say "mostly Rodinal" because that's what I'm using right now, but I want to compare with something with more acutance yet not quite out to FX2 or something. I'm not a homebrew guy at this point.

slow: Pan F plus or Efke 25 - still figuring this out. Mostly Rodinal, though I am considering something like D76 1+3 as well.

100ish: I got FP4 in Rodinal 1+50 figured out, but I am shifting towards a newer emulsion - Delta 100 - in Rodinal or Perceptol 1+3 or D76 1+3

fast: TXT from 200>6400 in Perceptol 1+1, Rodinal 1+50, or Microphen depending on EI

ultra fast but high contrast: Delta 3200 in Microphen.

Sounds like a lot of magic bullet searching, but it's really not. TXT is my go-to film in general.

allan
 
Yes I standardize. I have been shooting HP5+ for at least 15 years. I have used HC-110 for the last 3 years. Used FG7 w/ 15% sodium sulfite for the previous 7 years, and rodinal for the previous remaining years. Standardization and contact printing in wet darkroom for Minimum time to get maximum black will tell you if something has gone wrong with your system. For example, if all of a sudden all shots on a roll look underexposed, maybe there is a meter problem or a shutter problem. Also standardization will let you spot over and under exposures quickly. Having a densitometer helps alot. Every now and then, I'll shoot a zone 1,5,and 8 zone exposure and measure after development to see if everything remains the same.
 
I settled on 35mm Tri-X, EI400, in D-76 1:1 in the mid 70's. Now I use Tri-X at EI400 (incident metered) and have Toronto Image Works process it 'normal'.
 
I only shoot Tri-X between 400 and 1600 ISO/EI, developed in Microphen. Perfectly happy with this combination.
 
I might as well put my 2 cents in: 100 Tmax and 400 Tmax in Xtol 1:1 for all formats; I never push or pull film. If I want to do that I use 3200 Tmax in Tmax 1:4 shot at various ASAs depending upon the situation. I do use other films at times but these are 'standards'.

My older standards were Tri-X in HC110(B); Verichrome Pan in Microdol-X; I don't remember what I used to develop Royal-X Pan with.
 
I don't do a lot of "traditional" B&W, but when I do Diafine is the standard developer, and the film choice is mostly FP-4, Tri-X and a bit of Pan-F. In getting a mixed bag of various films, there was a roll of HP-5 in 120... I was very impressed with its smooth nice tonality in Diafine, so I will have to try some more HP-5 for sure. Too bad it doesn't come in 220...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom