Canon Junkie
Established
Hello,
I am new to rangefinder photography, and have been using digital upto a few months ago. Upon getting my first Canonet, I bought a bunch of different film. A few rolls I shot were TMax P3200. Getting this film in a bulk purchase of various film I didn't really know much about it. I searched the net and found that it should be exposed at ASA 800/1000 for best results. Well.... I did that, and sent the film to Kodak (via mailer from B&H). What I got back were about 10 prints per roll (out of 36) that were very dark, and the rest couldn;t even be printed. Now I didn't give any specific instructions to Kodak as to how to develop. Should I have specified that I shot the film at ASA 800? Now that I have these negatives, is there a way to salvage the pictures by increasing the exposure/developing time for the prints? I really want to save some of these shots as they are somewhat important!
Thanks!
I am new to rangefinder photography, and have been using digital upto a few months ago. Upon getting my first Canonet, I bought a bunch of different film. A few rolls I shot were TMax P3200. Getting this film in a bulk purchase of various film I didn't really know much about it. I searched the net and found that it should be exposed at ASA 800/1000 for best results. Well.... I did that, and sent the film to Kodak (via mailer from B&H). What I got back were about 10 prints per roll (out of 36) that were very dark, and the rest couldn;t even be printed. Now I didn't give any specific instructions to Kodak as to how to develop. Should I have specified that I shot the film at ASA 800? Now that I have these negatives, is there a way to salvage the pictures by increasing the exposure/developing time for the prints? I really want to save some of these shots as they are somewhat important!
Thanks!
It's not quite clear to me what happened with your film. It could have been bad processing, but that seems unlikely from Kodak, unless the mailer was for color negative or slide film. Then the possibility exists that it went through the wrong development process. I understand that SOME image does usually result when this happens.
Indeed, scanning B&H for Kodak processing mailers, I see none offered for traditonal B&W film like TMax. Did your mailer say "For Color Prints" on the package?
There could also have been an exposure problem with the camera, and yet another possibility is operator error (you!).
For other rolls of TMax or other traditional B&W films, you might call around to various labs in your area to ask about regular B&W processing; what their services are and what they charge. You will want to tell the lab what ISO you set your meter/camera for.
There IS a kind of B&W film that uses standard (C41) color processing, and these are called "chromogenic" films... Kodak offers one called Kodak 400CN, Ilford's is XP2 Super, Fuji has Neopan 400CN, and Konica has one too. These are all 400 ISO B&W films that use color processing, and the box and canister will say "C-41 Process". So for these, the Kodak Color Print mailer is the right one to use.
To answer your question about the already processed TMax film, I don't think there is any recovery possible at this point.
You could take the negs to a pro lab and see if they can squeeze any more out of them in reprinting...
Indeed, scanning B&H for Kodak processing mailers, I see none offered for traditonal B&W film like TMax. Did your mailer say "For Color Prints" on the package?
There could also have been an exposure problem with the camera, and yet another possibility is operator error (you!).
For other rolls of TMax or other traditional B&W films, you might call around to various labs in your area to ask about regular B&W processing; what their services are and what they charge. You will want to tell the lab what ISO you set your meter/camera for.
There IS a kind of B&W film that uses standard (C41) color processing, and these are called "chromogenic" films... Kodak offers one called Kodak 400CN, Ilford's is XP2 Super, Fuji has Neopan 400CN, and Konica has one too. These are all 400 ISO B&W films that use color processing, and the box and canister will say "C-41 Process". So for these, the Kodak Color Print mailer is the right one to use.
To answer your question about the already processed TMax film, I don't think there is any recovery possible at this point.
You could take the negs to a pro lab and see if they can squeeze any more out of them in reprinting...Canon Junkie
Established
The mailer I used is the DP36 mailer that states that you can develop color or b&w prints, and I have done so many times with tri x. The metering on the camera is not off my much (maybe just a little due to battery). But nothing to get results like this. I was thinking that the lab treated this like 3200ASA film and underdeveloped it by 2f stops. The prints that did come out are very bland looking, and are completely off with their exposure, but I don't think it was the camera or me... I will take it to a lab to see if there is anything that can be done... thanks for the reply!
S
sockdaddy
Guest
Farmer's Reducer?
Maybe some Chromium Intensifier?
S
Stu :)
Guest
Sounds odd and strange.
Chromium Intensifier is your best bet, that is if the images is there but you can only save badly developed film by 1-3 stops.
Other 'messy' options are to either give the film a real good bath in some selenium toner and wash well, or tone the film in a blue toner and redevelop with a push developer (like Fotospeed FD30) and repeat until happy, then give the film a quick rinse, fix for 2 minutes and wash for another 10 minutes in running water.
Have you considered developing your own B&W in the future, it's not that scary and you only need the minimalist set up (tank, chemistry, thermometer, 3-4 jugs, something to measure out the chemistry and a tap).
Stu
Chromium Intensifier is your best bet, that is if the images is there but you can only save badly developed film by 1-3 stops.
Other 'messy' options are to either give the film a real good bath in some selenium toner and wash well, or tone the film in a blue toner and redevelop with a push developer (like Fotospeed FD30) and repeat until happy, then give the film a quick rinse, fix for 2 minutes and wash for another 10 minutes in running water.
Have you considered developing your own B&W in the future, it's not that scary and you only need the minimalist set up (tank, chemistry, thermometer, 3-4 jugs, something to measure out the chemistry and a tap).
Stu
jdos2
Well-known
(Hint for the new wet chemical processor: it don't get much easier than DIAFINE)
R
Roman
Guest
But if the film was shot at 800, and developed for 3200, chromium intensifier is NOT the thing to use, since it is the exact opposite of what's needed - Farmer's Reducer to bring down those extra-dense, thick negs to useable ranges (chromium intensifier - or selenium toning of negs - is used e.g when shooting at 3200 and developing for 800 - which will give you very thin negs).
If you do your own wet darkroom printing, just try using the negs first - use higher paper contrast grades (or more magenta, with a color enlarger), and you'll have to increase the exposure times a lot, but you might get something out of the negs - very grainy prints, possibly the highlights will be blocked; some people shoot deliberately for that look (e.g. Ralph Gibson, who overexposes and overdevelops TriX in Rodinal for his grainy images, or Anton Corbijn in his pre-lith times - remember the U2 'Joshua Tree' album cover?)
Roman
If you do your own wet darkroom printing, just try using the negs first - use higher paper contrast grades (or more magenta, with a color enlarger), and you'll have to increase the exposure times a lot, but you might get something out of the negs - very grainy prints, possibly the highlights will be blocked; some people shoot deliberately for that look (e.g. Ralph Gibson, who overexposes and overdevelops TriX in Rodinal for his grainy images, or Anton Corbijn in his pre-lith times - remember the U2 'Joshua Tree' album cover?)
Roman
Wayne R. Scott
Half fast Leica User
Here is a third vote for Farmer's reducer, you definitely do NOT want to intensify your negatives, unless you want to use them to view the next solar eclipse.
Wayne
Wayne
Canon Junkie
Established
Thanks everyone! I really appreciate the advice. I am printing this thread out and bringing it to a local lab to see so that I can refference it and see what they can do for me. I have been thinking about processing my own film, but don't really have the room that I need... maybe in the future!
Farmer's Reducer, if the negatives are very dense. But the evidence seemed to me to indicate extremely thin negs ("dark prints"), and for this the intensifier might help some. So, Canon Junkie, have a look at the negs and tell us how they look to you!
canonetc
canonetc
Underdeveloped 3200
Underdeveloped 3200
Cjunkie, it sounds like you have thin negs. Is that correct? If so, here's something I do in that situation:
If you can get access to a darkroom, insert TWO contrast filters into your enlarger. Try a #4 (on top) and a #3 (beneath it), and set the lens aperture at f/16. By layering my filters I am using them to cut/control the intensity of light pouring through the thin negative and hitting the paper. By doing test strips you can determine your time for a rough print, then proceed from there. Look forward to some burning and dodging, but at least you'll have the prints you wanted.
I wish I had some samples to show you. I'll have to dig them out of the archive.
Good luck,
Chris
canonetc
Underdeveloped 3200
Cjunkie, it sounds like you have thin negs. Is that correct? If so, here's something I do in that situation:
If you can get access to a darkroom, insert TWO contrast filters into your enlarger. Try a #4 (on top) and a #3 (beneath it), and set the lens aperture at f/16. By layering my filters I am using them to cut/control the intensity of light pouring through the thin negative and hitting the paper. By doing test strips you can determine your time for a rough print, then proceed from there. Look forward to some burning and dodging, but at least you'll have the prints you wanted.
I wish I had some samples to show you. I'll have to dig them out of the archive.
Good luck,
Chris
canonetc