HP5, Delta 400, XP2, Kentmere 400???

[Ccoppola82]

Yup! Give it a shot. The reasoning behind doing this in my case at least, is because on roll film, we encounter scenes of varying contrast throughout the roll. This method provides a sort of fail safe to get printable negatives on all our shots.

When shooting large format, a photographer could measure an accurate reading for the shadows and highlights, and expose and develop for the perfect negative using N, N-, or N+ development because it is one negative at a time. We can’t do that with roll film, so we must make some sort of compromise in order to get useable images throughout our roll.

Another way to tackle the varying contrasts within a roll is two bath development. Just another way to approach the same problem. The theory behind that is that Bath A soaks up the developer into the emulsion, but the PH is such that it does not activate and little to no development takes place. In bath B, the PH activates the developer held in the negative. This exhausts the developer In the highlights quickly, thereby restraining them from blocking up, yet allows the shadows to develop slowly. We then end up with a relatively flat negative throughout the roll, which is good shadow and highlight detail. Again, adjust contrast in Post or darkroom with VC paper and contrast filters.

A great book to pick up is Barry Thornton’s “Edge of darkness” where I think a lot of this info is covered. Barry was a kick ass printer imho.

Good luck and get shooting!

 

[crave1ne]

Yup! Give it a shot. The reasoning behind doing this in my case at least, is because on roll film, we encounter scenes of varying contrast throughout the roll. This method provides a sort of fail safe to get printable negatives on all our shots.

When shooting large format, a photographer could measure an accurate reading for the shadows and highlights, and expose and develop for the perfect negative using N, N-, or N+ development because it is one negative at a time. We can’t do that with roll film, so we must make some sort of compromise in order to get useable images throughout our roll.

Another way to tackle the varying contrasts within a roll is two bath development. Just another way to approach the same problem. The theory behind that is that Bath A soaks up the developer into the emulsion, but the PH is such that it does not activate and little to no development takes place. In bath B, the PH activates the developer held in the negative. This exhausts the developer In the highlights quickly, thereby restraining them from blocking up, yet allows the shadows to develop slowly. We then end up with a relatively flat negative throughout the roll, which is good shadow and highlight detail. Again, adjust contrast in Post or darkroom with VC paper and contrast filters.

A great book to pick up is Barry Thornton’s “Edge of darkness” where I think a lot of this info is covered. Barry was a kick ass printer imho.

Good luck and get shooting!

Again, thank you for the info, its much appreciated.. I'm Googling Barry Thornton, and looks like I have a new book to pick up when I get paid next week!

 

[lawrence]

Not sure how useful this scan is as an example but it's a slight crop of a 35mm negative shot on Kentmere 400 and developed in stock ATM49 (a fine grain developer now sold under the Adox brand). I understand what you mean about HP5+ as it has a kind of 'salt & pepper' look to the grain, which can occasionally look quite attractive but other times not.

 

[Ccoppola82]

A couple samples of HP5/Kentmere

A couple samples of HP5/Kentmere

Here are a couple samples of HP5 and Kentmere 400 The keywords are listed on the bottom and say what film, EI,/lens/developer was used as well.

HP5 (the sea Dunes were exposted at 400, it was low contrast afternoon)
9-13.jpg by Chris Coppola, on Flickr
9-6.jpg by Chris Coppola, on Flickr9-4-Edit.jpg by Chris Coppola, on Flickr

These were shot under High Contrast, so EI was set at 200
CapeCod 7-10.jpg by Chris Coppola, on Flickr
CapeCod 7-19-Edit.jpg by Chris Coppola, on Flickr

KENTMERE 400 Samples
32-22.jpg by Chris Coppola, on Flickr
Image 19.jpg by Chris Coppola, on Flickr
30-23.jpg by Chris Coppola, on Flickr
30-10.jpg by Chris Coppola, on Flickr

There are a lot more on my Flickr page. I write down all the info I can remember into the keywords. Sometimes I forget what I used and don't want to mislead. Theres some pics of ultrafine 400, bergger 400, and a few others mixed throughout the page. Hope it helps!

Chris

 

[David Hughes]

Thank you for this reply.. I think this is what I was needing... I have one camera that I can select ISO. When I'm doing this with my other camera's without light meters and selecting ISO. Should I still stick with Sunny 16 at these different speeds?

using 400 speed film...

your example on a normal sunny day rate it at speed 200.... Id set my shutter for 1/250 and adjust aperture as needed with sunny 16.. then when developing, adjust time by 20%?

In your shoes I'd invest in a meter; there are hundreds if not thousands around new or secondhand and then - once the meter has been mastered - start worrying about developing etc.

As pushing films to what I see as extreme speeds has been mentioned I reckon funny 16 is the first weak link in the chain to tackle.

Anyway, that's just my 2d worth. Have fun.

Regards, David