How you would have process shot?

Nh3

Well-known
Local time
8:51 AM
Joined
Mar 3, 2008
Messages
889
Arista-2 400 (Agfa APX 400?) Rodinal 1+25/12 minutes.

This is was a side lit shot in terrible afternoon light with hazy sky. I shot with a low apreture to isolate the warrior from the background and processed the film +2 to give it a bit more contrast. It did not work.

What could I have done to give the picture more punch with darker tones - or I should have used Tri-x?


Untitled-1014.jpg


/Damn typo in the title... like all my threads...
 
I think part of your problem is that your shooting with a bright sky behind and it's causing flare and lowering your overall contrast. Is this a darkroom print or a scanned neg?
 
If you don't mind, here's what I could do with levels/curves. I really don't think it's a technically bad image; have you tried re-scanning it with different presets?
 

Attachments

  • Untitled-10141.jpg
    Untitled-10141.jpg
    128.1 KB · Views: 0
Seriously, I know where you were shooting from and that light would be almost impossible to deal with. I know it's "old news style advice" but next time shoot from west side facing the Old City Hall. Anyone would have a tough time with the light you were using. I don't think I would have even tried.

If I was at that event I'd have loaded 100 ISO (pick your fave BW) and had the west side of the stage staked out facing east and south. (NW if after 5.00PM in the summer and SW if before 5.00PM) I think the film/camera worked because there's detail in your scan showing the feather striations and detail on the mocassins.

At this stage I'd go with the replies dealing with PS and curve adjustment from Erik or Paul. Future development I'd not use Rodinal in 400 ISO film. It brings out too much grain. I use rodinal, but with any film above 200 ISO I use HC110 for ensuring finer grain.
 
///Alan Astonish: Thanks, that was a really useful tip. I'll remember it.

pesphoto: this is a scanned negative.

jan normandale: I know what you mean, but i wanted to totally isolate the warrior from the drummer and the audience, and this was the only angel possible.

sojournerphoto: thanks, I'll try that.



I have been thinking about this and I thought perhaps i should have pulled the film to 200?
 
I have been thinking about this and I thought perhaps i should have pulled the film to 200?

A large part of the problem is the use of Rodinal with this film. Regarding ways to get the most out of this by pull processing your film PM this link to RFF member Kaiyen / Allan who's a lot of experience doing what you want. He should be able to help with some ideas.
 
Last edited:
I actually like APX 400 in Rodinal. I think his mistake was doing a 2 stop expansion. Modern films just don't take this well in bright light conditions. In such contrasy bright sun conditions, I would have given N-1 development.

tiffany1.jpg

APX 400 in Rodinal. This is the 120 size film.

gedda.jpg


amy-pruitt3.jpg


chicago1.jpg


chicago3.jpg


The rest of these are 35mm APX 400 in Rodinal.
 
Though I know Rodinal is a rather high-actuance developer, what effect would it have on highlights/shadows?


On my screen, (which is not necessarily a benchmark and since this image is also low resolution) I see a lot of grain. I suppose if you are looking for grain that's fine. I actually like it. Check Chris' images above. You'll see it as a result of the Rodinal.

I believe nh3 is discussing 'all aspects' of his shot not just highlights/shadows. For this reason I suggested the developer adds graininess to the image. If he wants the grain he can continue with the Rodinal. If not he can change developers.
 
Back
Top Bottom