Need some advice (re-born home developer!)

[zwarte_kat]

I haven't developed film since college, and completely forgot how to do it. Been going to the lap until now, but figured I'd try it myself again with one of those dark bags, and I got started reading the internet.

In short; Love it!

Longer version; I have a few questions on how to improve.

It went reasonably well. The photos are definitely usable. Will try to upload an example today! I developed for almost a minute too long though, very stupid. I suspect because of this the negatives are a bit more contrasty and the grain more rough. Does that sound right? Does this mean developing shorter means less contrast? I'm having trouble with finding the relation between time, temperature, dilution, and the result on internet. Does anyone have a source that explains this clearly?

I also didn't use any stop bath chemicals, but thinking about Ilfotol. How commonly do people use such chemicals? In most of the tutorials they use water. In case of what problems should I switch to using Ilfotol (stains?)

I live in a shared house, sharing everything including the showers and toilets. I cannot hang my negatives there. I also want to scan them sooner, one of the reasons I am trying home developer! What tricks can be safely used to dry negs faster. I have heard of squeegies, hair dryers, and cloths. What do you guys do to dry them fast? If I just hang them they attract a lot of dust.

A lot of questions I know. they are all details though. It was a lot of fun and went great, can't wait to do the next roll!

cheers,
Rudy

 

[taskoni]

Hey Rudy.

As a start I would recommend to use standard developers and times according to this charts.

http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.php

Pay attention of the water temperature too. Keep it around 20C unless is stated otherwise. Stop bath is not needed, I use water instead for 30 sec. I fix twice as long as the times given.

Less developing time will underexpose your image.

Don't force the negative, don't use squeegee. You can use a dust free cabinet for drying the negs. Give it time to dry well, don't rush it.

Just curious, if you want immediate result why not use a digital camera? Anyway you are scanning you negatives, not wet printing them.

Regards,

Boris

 

[oftheherd]

Unless you have very short development times, an extra minute shouldn't cause too adverse a reaction on the negative. Still, development times as given by the developer or shown on the massive development chart are best followed unless you are deliberately running tests on deviation.

I always use stop bath unless the manufacturer specifically says not to use it. Many do not and believe they get as good a result. If that will be your solution, then you should do a 1 minute pre-soak. Stop bath stops development immediately, water wash takes about a minute. Stop bath also preserves fixer. But only you can decide after some experimentation.

I have used dryers that blow warm air through the a steel reel. I have seen people make dryers from plastic clothing bags with slow running hair dryers in the bottom. I have used a machine that spun the steel reel until the film was dry. I have also hung the film in the bathroom, a solution you have already stated isn't available to you. With any of those solutions, the problem is will dust be introduced onto the film. That should be avoided. You surely must have your own sleeping space. You might experiment with one of the solutions above, including hanging them with a drip bucket below. But again, be careful of dust.

A very good source to renew you past experiences is http://www.rogerandfrances.com/ (choose photo school as well as any other part) which is a site by Mr. Hicks who frequents RFF and shares his great knowledge and experience.

 

[zwarte_kat]

Thank you

Thank you

Thanks Boris, will look for a cabinet-like solution. I wonder if there are hanging neg covers or something. I live in a dusty place, so if it hangs to dry long, it will collect dust. If I can prevent that, then I don't mind waiting longer.

I shoot digital as well. I want to do both. I like rangefinder cameras, to shoot analog style, and I like the look of BW film without crop from my rangefinder lenses. I might get an M9 or full frame DSLR later this year, still thinking about it. For now I also use an X100, and Canon 7D DSLRs at work.

Cheers,
Rudy

 

[sjgslack]

You may not like this but I find it useful: There is an app which uses the data from the massive dev chart and does timing for you (also tells you when to agitate, etc:

https://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/massive-dev-chart-timer/id402405770?mt=8

Maybe not in the spirit of the thing, but it works really well and is a great reference for different film / developer combinations.

 

[zwarte_kat]

Thanks OftheHerd.

I think there is very little effort and cost added to using a stopbath, and I already bought Ilfostop, so I will use it I guess.

Yes I can hang the negatives in my room, or in a corner in the hall or somewhere. Will look at some of your suggestions.

I have found that the film curls a bit, but not to big of an issue for scanning. Might get some Better scanning glass though, and see if I can spot a difference.

Will shortly upload a sample. in the highlights especially it seems as if the grain is bigger, and the grains kind of merge together there. They sort of resemble cells I guess (not a cellular biologist, reference taken from popular culture!).

Will browse Roger's website!

 

[Terry Christian]

Developing film for a longer time than specified effectively "pushes" it, resulting in more speed but also more contrast. The amount of push would depend on the specific film and the developer you're using.

Definitely don't use Ilfotol as stop bath. Ilfotol is a wetting agent, used to prevent hard water stains and marks on drying film.

I've also heard that hair dryers are a bad idea, since they can blast any dust already in the air against the still-wet negatives, lodging the dust in the negs. For faster drying negatives, a common trick is to put a capful of isopropyl alcohol (the stronger, the better) into your final wash. This helps the wash water evaporate more quickly.

 

[zwarte_kat]

Thanks Terry. Sorry I meant Ilfostop! Let's hope I don't make the same mistake when developing!

Your advice about the dryer makes sense. I will find some way to guard the neg from it's environment, and patiently wait till it's dry.

Here is one of the scans, epson V700 (or V600, Japanese name is different, but the one with 4 trays). Leica M6 plus Zeiss Sonnar 50mm 1.5, Neopan 400 in d-76 1:1, about 10:20 min.


Scan Full by Rudy Shots, on Flickr

No image adjustments have been made. Here is a 100% crop:

Scan Crop by Rudy Shots, on Flickr

Flickr exaggerates the effect somewhat, but I guess that only helps. If you look at the highlights in his vest and the sky through the tree, you can see a cell-like structure. I wonder what causes this?

Sorry for the weird picture, it was a test roll for developing purposes. It's kind of funny in a way I guess 🙂

 

[sjgslack]

What settings are you using for the scan?

 

[FrankS]

Why use ilfostop when water will do?

I've read somewhere long ago that using an acidic stop bath for film runs the risk of emulsion bubbling but have never seen it myself because for film I have only ever used (for 30 years) a water bath to end development.

 

[zwarte_kat]

3200dpi, 24 bit. BW negative setting, but it creates a color image (not grayscale). I made some level adjustments, but just did a rescan where I reset the settings and removed unsharp mask from medium to none. The highlights had the same structure, though slightly less pronounced due to no unsharp mask. I found it interesting that it only seems to effect light tones.

 

[Vics]

After 45 years of using stop bath I stopped, and now use a water bath. No difference. I'm one of the lucky few who own the Honeywell Kleen-Dri film dryers. They dry my negs in 45 minutes with no water marks or spots or dust. Sadly, no longer available.

 

[sjgslack]

Interesting that -- I have the same scanner and the only thing different that I do is create a greyscale image (also the resolution is slightly different)... I've never seen that pattern I don't think....

Is there a reason you produce a colour image?

 

[Roger Hicks]

After 45 years of using stop bath I stopped, and now use a water bath. No difference. I'm one of the lucky few who own the Honeywell Kleen-Dri film dryers. They dry my negs in 45 minutes with no water marks or spots or dust. Sadly, no longer available.

Not that lucky. I gave up with mine after truly awful drying marks. Worse than I've ever had drying films any other way.

As for water wash/stop bath, I see little or no difference except in large areas of equal tone, but habitually use a (very weak) acetic acid stop on the grounds of (a) large areas of equal tine (b) prolonged fixer life (c) cery low cost.

Cheers,

R.

 

[zwarte_kat]

Usually I find the image looks better with color, but it's a decision I made over a year ago, so don't exactly remember what it was exactly.
I have scanned plenty of negs with that scanner, but this is the first time I noticed this effect. That's why I thought it had something to do with the developing.

Will shoot and develop another test roll. I also didn't have any wetting agent, so I will by some Ilfotol and use that. I also used a squeegee for this roll. could I have rubbed it to hard. I can't imagine how that would create such an effect though.

Thanks for the link sjgslack, I had already discovered that website, cool to see the app.

As for the Ilfostop, guess I will try both, and just use water if there is no difference.

 

[sjgslack]

Interesting that... I might try a few in colour and see if I get the same effect.

I have to say that I do use a squeegee - partly to reduce water marks and partly to speed up drying time.

Silas

 

[Godfrey]

My B&W processing, for what it's worth:

The evening before I process my film, I mix up the required amount of developer and fixer, fill a jug with all the water I'll need (pre-wet, stop rinse, and five changes of water for primary washing). I let them stand on the counter where I'm going to do the processing so that they are all at the same exact same temperature.

Note: I normally process film at room temperatures from 70°F to 76°F. If it's too cold or too hot, I wait for the temperature to fall into this range. I'm rarely in a rush... ;-)

When I'm going to do the processing, I measure the temperature of the developer and check the temp-dilution-time chart for the developer I'm using to find the recommended time for the EI I exposed the film at. Whatever time I see, I add 20% to it. You always want to process for at least 4-5 minutes ... I like 8 minutes. adjust developer dilution to achieve these times.

With a clip of unprocessed film, immerse in fixer and measure time for it to clear. double that for fixing time.

Process:

- pour in pre-soak water, tap and agitate lightly* to release water bubbles, let stand 30 seconds, pour out pre-soak water.

- pour in developer and agitate lightly for ten seconds. agitate very lightly* for five seconds every two minutes. pour out.

- pour in stop water and agitate lightly for ten seconds. pour out.

- pour in fixer and agitate lightly for ten seconds. agitate lightly for five seconds every minute. pour out.

- repeat five times: pour in wash water, agitate strongly* for ten seconds, pause for 20, agitate strongly again, pause for 20, pour out.

- open tank and gently rinse film and tank with cool running water (within 5°F of room temperature, let stand with film covered. Add a drop or two of wetting agent and swirl around to mix and distribute, then pour out water.

- hang film in shower stall with door partially open until dry.

The result with properly exposed negatives is a slightly thin, slightly flat negative without blocked up highlights, good edge transitions, and plenty of details in the shadows. This is the perfect negative for scanning IMO: it delivers the most data to the image processing software.

--- agitation ---
Agitation in the processing scheme is essential but too much builds contrast. Too little can cause uneven development, just like too short a processing time.

* agitate very lightly - tip the processing tank 20 degrees off vertical twice in five seconds

* agitate lightly - tip the processing tank 20 degrees off vertical three times in five seconds

* agitate - tip the processing tank 20 degrees off vertical four times in five seconds.

* agitate strongly - tip the processing tank 20 degrees off vertical six times in eight seconds.

No need to be horrendously precise about it. Do it enough times, observe the results, and you'll get a good feel for what's "enough", "too much" and "too little" ... ;-)

G

 

[sjgslack]

If you are a lazy person (like me) you could try the following -- it can yield great results, especially for scanning:

http://jbhildebrand.com/2011/tutorials/workflow-tutorial-2-stand-development-with-rodinal/

I did a couple of rolls like this yesterday and i was pleased with the results.

 

[Terry Christian]

If you're using an Epson scanner, make sure the Digital ICE setting is turned OFF. It works wonderfully on color photos, but introduces bad artifacts on B&W.

 

[Godfrey]

If you're using an Epson scanner, make sure the Digital ICE setting is turned OFF. It works wonderfully on color photos, but introduces bad artifacts on B&W.

This is true of any scanner, film or flatbed, which includes infrared-based scratch and dust removal hardware and software. The infrared scan data from standard B&W film sees the opaque silver grains as dust and tries to remove them... with bizarre results.

Exception: C41 process B&W films work beautifully with the IR dust/scratch removal. C41 process B&W films include films like Ilford XP2 Super (one of my favorites), a couple of Kodak emulsions, and Agfa Vario. C41 process films leech out the silver grains and replace them with dye blobs which are not opaque to IR light.

The inverse exception is Kodachrome 25: Kodachrome 25 film has pigments embedded which can sometimes be opaque to IR light, just like standard B&W films, with similarly bizarre results. This depends on the specific scanner and software implementation.

G