Massive Dev Chart Usage

Massive Dev Chart Usage

  • All of it, I try everything I can.

    Votes: 9 11.1%

  • About 25% of it, I like to test out some of the names I know.

    Votes: 18 22.2%

  • About 1%, I stick to what I use and use the MDC as a memory jogger.

    Votes: 54 66.7%
  • Total voters
    81
Al Kaplan said:
They don't even need to have the SAME devloping time. If one requires 9 minutes and the other one requires 10 then giving them both 9.5 minutes should give perfectly good negatives. there are so many other variables anyway.
Click to expand...
Yup. Especially when I am in a hurry.
 
Most of the time I use the Massive Dev chart as a reminder, for films that I use less often. It can also be handy as a starting point for developers not listed on film boxes.
And more than once it has helped when supplies at the photo store were low, and I had to take what they had. One way to try new things, I suppose.

There was also a time when I had to develop some mystery rolls of film found in a cupboard. It worked, but the film wasn't worth the effort.
 
The only time I consult the MDC is when trying a new film-developer combination that I don't have any data for. otherwise I have my little Moleskine marked "Film development" with all my voodoo black magic in it.

I also hardly ever use a new film or developer these days since I settled on a few films and Xtol. I think I've tried all the variables and have my preferences sorted out.

Marty
 
It's a starting point from which you can work to optimize your developing results.
For most regular developers there is data but from less used or not commercial available developers (e.g. W665) you have to search out all parameters yourself.


Best regards,

Robert
 
It's a good refernce and I use it occasionally. I seem to have discovered that I can develop all the films I habitually shoot in Xtol @1+1 for eight minutes. Neopan400, Tri-X, Pan F+, Plus-X, Rollei Retro, Adox CHS art 100 .... they all seem pretty happy at this dilution and time with identicl agitation!

Makes life simple .... when I want to break out and be daring I use Rodinal! :p
 
I do occasionally refer to the MDC - but I also have tons of information from my own experiments with film and "soups".
I like Flickr in this aspect - if the poster bothers to tag with film/Dev/Time as it gives you a quick reference from the posted shot and how it was developed.
Developing advice on film should always be taken as "guidelines" only as the way we shoot and meter probably affect the type of negative we get more than what developer we use.
I just finished developing 55 rolls shot in Europe and as I decided to take Neopan 400 Presto 400 and the Legacy Pro 400 - I did develop them in a variety of my "standards", HC 110 in 1:60/Rodinal 1:50/Pyrocat HD/Beutler.
Scanning them shows some subtle variations in how they were rendered - the Pyrocat HD gives me abot 1/2 stop less speed, the Beutler 1/2 stop more. Both tonal range and grain is very similar in all of them!
I like my negative "denser" than most other shooters - this gives me shadow details that can be worked on. I tend to develop a bit longer than MDC recommends to get that. Holding down the agitation to 2 turns/minute helps keep the highlights in check.
Oh, by the way - Legacy Pro 400 and Presto 400 are the same films!
 
Tom A said:
I do occasionally refer to the MDC - but I also have tons of information from my own experiments with film and "soups".
I like Flickr in this aspect - if the poster bothers to tag with film/Dev/Time as it gives you a quick reference from the posted shot and how it was developed.
Developing advice on film should always be taken as "guidelines" only as the way we shoot and meter probably affect the type of negative we get more than what developer we use.
I just finished developing 55 rolls shot in Europe and as I decided to take Neopan 400 Presto 400 and the Legacy Pro 400 - I did develop them in a variety of my "standards", HC 110 in 1:60/Rodinal 1:50/Pyrocat HD/Beutler.
Scanning them shows some subtle variations in how they were rendered - the Pyrocat HD gives me abot 1/2 stop less speed, the Beutler 1/2 stop more. Both tonal range and grain is very similar in all of them!
I like my negative "denser" than most other shooters - this gives me shadow details that can be worked on. I tend to develop a bit longer than MDC recommends to get that. Holding down the agitation to 2 turns/minute helps keep the highlights in check.
Oh, by the way - Legacy Pro 400 and Presto 400 are the same films!
Click to expand...

Please explain, Tom. I thought the common wisdom was 'expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights'.
 
I know that I was the one who "made up" the TP+TD-3 data... :)

>>Whoever makes up that data needs to calibrate their thermometers or densitometers or get some fresh paper developer/paper or however they they do it.
 
HMFriedman said:
Please explain, Tom. I thought the common wisdom was 'expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights'.
Click to expand...

"Expose for shadows and develop for highlights" is the common wisdom - but like all statements - you have to take it with a grain of salt. Once you start "working" a film, you establish your own parameters for how you want the negatives to look. The more punchy negs might be a bit tougher to print - but they look better in my eyes. I like my prints a bit dark, details in the shadows, even in the deep shadows though you might have to look for them there.
The flatter contrast gives you a print with good midtones - but though suitable for reproduction (easier to scan or print in a book/magazine) they tend to look a bit boring. If you look at original prints from HCB or the othe oldr french masters - they tend to be evenly "grey" in their tones (The Decisive Moment with its rotogravure is a good example) and then you look at Ansel Adams/Jean Loup Sieff/Larry Clark and the extreme case Ralph Gibson - dark, broody prints with highlights bright but the main details are in the lower tones.
Hmm, three rolls a day is on par with my regular travel shooting. usually three cameras/1 roll/day per camera. It all depends on how much of a trip is travel/driving time and how much is wandering around. The more footwork - the more films!
Problem is of course when you got it all processed and is faced with editing and scanning (or printing). I ended up with 345 shots on my Flickr set - some good, some OK and some that are for my own reference and would be of little interest to anybody else.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom