Toby
On the alert
colinh said:Thanks everyone for the praise for the second shot. I posted it to my Close Up Candid Street Photography gallery 4 days ago and it got (yes, he's off again...) *sniff* zero comments up till now.
😀
The left 1/3 and top 1/3 have been cropped (which leaves less than half the original negative area 🙁 ) I could have left the top 1/3 (making a square) but it wouldn't be as good. Also, I try to use the 900 pixels for The Good Bits (TM).
It was shot on Neopan 400, developed in Rodinal 1+50 for a nominal 11 min (20 deg C). The negative is a bit odd. 25% of the pixels are below 15/255 and 21% are over 195/255. I.e only 54% of the pixels are in the central 72 % of the grey scale.
Does this just indicate too much subject contrast, or (also) incorrect development?
colin
Just sounds like neopan 400 to me which can get extremely contrasty very quickly. For street work where you have little opportunity for contrast control HP5 or Tri x are a better bet because they are so much more forgiving. I'd go with ID 11 or D76 as well if you are scanning as rodinal is quite a grainy developer and scanning tends to emphasise grain so you can get a bit of a double whammy. Film with more latitude will help you work faster on the street as you be fussing over exposure come crunch time. Personally on a day with even light I just meter off tarmac or grass and get on with it🙂