kb244
Well-known
Many years ago I had a brief run with Kodak Ultratec, an orthochromatic film that seems to be safe under both red light and amber (the one we use on campus seems fine with it, but we have to keep the lids on it shorter to keep it dim, because with them opened up more, they will slightly fog ilford multigrade paper).
At the time I treated it as ISO 6 (rated as 10 on the original paperwork), and developed it in diluted dektol. But I can't remember the specifics of what I did.
So earlier today, I put it into the bulk loader as I have nearly 100 foot of it still, and loaded up a small 10ct roll to try in my Canon 7. Since I remembered the film being extremely sharp and fine grain I figured it would be a nice test of rangefinder's focus (which did turn out to be helpful).
I mixed up a tray of Kodak HC-110 dilution B, and under the amber safelight I went ahead and developed my test roll that I had exposed as ISO 6, using my Minolta Autometer IVf for incident readings. Except I forgot that the film might have drastically different speeds when it comes to tungsten lights.
The temperature was 64F. I thought it was on 68F but the campus thermometer on the main tap was slow to show the drop in temperature, I measured the temperature of the tray while the strip was in the stop bath to be sure what it was at when finished. I pulled it out at the 4 minute mark as the negatives seemed good enough (if it wasn't I could least guestimate where I need to go from there), put it in the stop bath, wash, fixer for about 4~ minutes, then fixer remover, then a running wash for about 10 minutes. The school uses the sprint system, but I didn't want to use that developer as I prefer hc-110 in the long run.
Other than finding out I needed to calibrate my rangefinder, I was pleased with the results so far as a nice starting point.
These are initial scan results (meaning as a scan I can bring up the black/white point and adjust the curve before scanning), but I'm curious to see how they actually print, and any tips on printing on the enlarger with a clear ektar base like that would be appreciated (mainly using ilford multigrade RC for the school stuff, but I been printing with a pack of Agfa Brovira that expired in 1957 as well as a box of ilford multigrade warm toned semi-mat fiber based 8x10).
These are the three out-the-window shots. For initial metering I was lazy and just used my Olympus E-M5 mirrorless to find a safe 'middle', which ended up being a 1/500 f/5.6 ISO 200, which I figured 1/125 f/2 for ISO 6 for my starting point.
Frame 1 : 1/125 f/2
Frame 2 : 1/60 f/2
*cloud cover blocked the sun slightly at this point*
Frame 3 : 1/30 f/2
The Canon 50mm f/1.8 (type 6) lens was used for these three.
The indoor shots not quite as nice probably because I need to boost my exposure time a bit for the tungsten/fluorescent, which apparently it is 'seeing', though I'm not sure how much blue light they emit (or if the film is strictly blue sensitive or not).
The 50mm lens was used here as well. The incident meter read 1 second at f/2, so I shot both the hallway ones at the same with different focus (both of which were much closer than actual focusing point). The white board at the end was shot at 1 second at f/2, with the meter reading giving between f/2 and f/2.8.
The half a frame at the end is because apparently I loaded too much of the film in that I didn't quite get my 10 frames. But I decided to snap the shot anyways knowing it would overlap the previous (was hoping it would include the crosshair I drew on the board for the purpose of focus check).
And these shots of inside the lab itself, room's fluorescent lights turned on, and the window curtains fully open to a brighter partly cloudy day outside (around 2~3pm). The first frame was 1 second at f/2.8 with the incident meter giving me halfway between f/2 and f/2.8. The second was the same exposure time, but the incident meter gave between f/2.8 and f/4. The 1951 Canon Serenar 35mm f/2.8 was uses for these two shots.
The window one with the light viewing stand seemed nice so I gave it a higher scan on the lab's Epson V700. (I'll have to try again with my dedicated 35mm scanner Canon FS4000 I have here at home later, left it at the school for later enlargement printing).
I really love how sharp it is on the scan as well as how smooth it is relatively speaking, my only hope is that I can print it close to that.
So the question is, do I want to treat the film slower (ie: ... ISO 3? Looking at the 1/60 outside frame, that seems right for my development time/temp), or should I attempt to go warmer(68)/longer(~5-6 mins?) in the development? Just from the scan I really like how the grain in the daylight lit shots came out on the frames that were dense enough.
At the current sharpness/grain this would be just lovely in my Univex Mercury II half-frame camera once I verify the shutter speeds are correct (They seem to be over by a third of a stop, if consistent that should be fine, since if one speed is good they all are, as it's a torque based rotary shutter on the Mercury II, though I only have T/B, 1/20, 1/30, 1/40, 1/60, 1/100, 1/200, 1/300, 1/1000 to pick from, as opposed to T/B, 1 second to 1/1000 in full stops on my Canon 7).
At the time I treated it as ISO 6 (rated as 10 on the original paperwork), and developed it in diluted dektol. But I can't remember the specifics of what I did.
So earlier today, I put it into the bulk loader as I have nearly 100 foot of it still, and loaded up a small 10ct roll to try in my Canon 7. Since I remembered the film being extremely sharp and fine grain I figured it would be a nice test of rangefinder's focus (which did turn out to be helpful).
I mixed up a tray of Kodak HC-110 dilution B, and under the amber safelight I went ahead and developed my test roll that I had exposed as ISO 6, using my Minolta Autometer IVf for incident readings. Except I forgot that the film might have drastically different speeds when it comes to tungsten lights.
The temperature was 64F. I thought it was on 68F but the campus thermometer on the main tap was slow to show the drop in temperature, I measured the temperature of the tray while the strip was in the stop bath to be sure what it was at when finished. I pulled it out at the 4 minute mark as the negatives seemed good enough (if it wasn't I could least guestimate where I need to go from there), put it in the stop bath, wash, fixer for about 4~ minutes, then fixer remover, then a running wash for about 10 minutes. The school uses the sprint system, but I didn't want to use that developer as I prefer hc-110 in the long run.
Other than finding out I needed to calibrate my rangefinder, I was pleased with the results so far as a nice starting point.
These are initial scan results (meaning as a scan I can bring up the black/white point and adjust the curve before scanning), but I'm curious to see how they actually print, and any tips on printing on the enlarger with a clear ektar base like that would be appreciated (mainly using ilford multigrade RC for the school stuff, but I been printing with a pack of Agfa Brovira that expired in 1957 as well as a box of ilford multigrade warm toned semi-mat fiber based 8x10).
These are the three out-the-window shots. For initial metering I was lazy and just used my Olympus E-M5 mirrorless to find a safe 'middle', which ended up being a 1/500 f/5.6 ISO 200, which I figured 1/125 f/2 for ISO 6 for my starting point.
Frame 1 : 1/125 f/2
Frame 2 : 1/60 f/2
*cloud cover blocked the sun slightly at this point*
Frame 3 : 1/30 f/2
The Canon 50mm f/1.8 (type 6) lens was used for these three.
The indoor shots not quite as nice probably because I need to boost my exposure time a bit for the tungsten/fluorescent, which apparently it is 'seeing', though I'm not sure how much blue light they emit (or if the film is strictly blue sensitive or not).
The 50mm lens was used here as well. The incident meter read 1 second at f/2, so I shot both the hallway ones at the same with different focus (both of which were much closer than actual focusing point). The white board at the end was shot at 1 second at f/2, with the meter reading giving between f/2 and f/2.8.
The half a frame at the end is because apparently I loaded too much of the film in that I didn't quite get my 10 frames. But I decided to snap the shot anyways knowing it would overlap the previous (was hoping it would include the crosshair I drew on the board for the purpose of focus check).
And these shots of inside the lab itself, room's fluorescent lights turned on, and the window curtains fully open to a brighter partly cloudy day outside (around 2~3pm). The first frame was 1 second at f/2.8 with the incident meter giving me halfway between f/2 and f/2.8. The second was the same exposure time, but the incident meter gave between f/2.8 and f/4. The 1951 Canon Serenar 35mm f/2.8 was uses for these two shots.
The window one with the light viewing stand seemed nice so I gave it a higher scan on the lab's Epson V700. (I'll have to try again with my dedicated 35mm scanner Canon FS4000 I have here at home later, left it at the school for later enlargement printing).
I really love how sharp it is on the scan as well as how smooth it is relatively speaking, my only hope is that I can print it close to that.
So the question is, do I want to treat the film slower (ie: ... ISO 3? Looking at the 1/60 outside frame, that seems right for my development time/temp), or should I attempt to go warmer(68)/longer(~5-6 mins?) in the development? Just from the scan I really like how the grain in the daylight lit shots came out on the frames that were dense enough.
At the current sharpness/grain this would be just lovely in my Univex Mercury II half-frame camera once I verify the shutter speeds are correct (They seem to be over by a third of a stop, if consistent that should be fine, since if one speed is good they all are, as it's a torque based rotary shutter on the Mercury II, though I only have T/B, 1/20, 1/30, 1/40, 1/60, 1/100, 1/200, 1/300, 1/1000 to pick from, as opposed to T/B, 1 second to 1/1000 in full stops on my Canon 7).
