Newbie film/developing troubleshooting

[photorat]

In typical gun ho fashion, I've bought myself my first film camera (M2) and developed my first roll of film myself... Now that the results are crap, I have to work out where the problem lies: meter, camera, developing process...?

Here's a representative example from the roll:

HP5+ developed in D76 1:1 for 8 minutes at 20 deg. C (or 68 deg. F) agitating for 5s every 30s. Scanned at 1200x1200dpi in 'true grey'. As you can see, the result is a true wash of grey. Is this underdeveloped or just underexposed
? I find very conflicting developing times for this film/developer combination on the net...

Thanks for any help,

Jeremy

 

[Keith]

Hi Jeremy,

HP5 with D76 @ 1+1 according to my info should be more like 11 minutes and that comes from the Ilford recommendation inside the film box! Where did you get the info ... 8 minutes would be for straight D76 not diluted!

The Digital Truth site recommends 13 minutes for 1+1 @ 20deg C which is what I used when I developed HP5 with this developer ... and I was agitating for 10 seconds every minute and was getting excellent results!

 

[lZr]

As Keith said, I see it underdeveloped. Can't say nothing about your the exposure value. I used levels and a little bit contrast, but can't see the bottle labels
With your permission, of course

 

[photorat]

Thanks a lot for that, Keith! I can't remember where I saw 8 minutes. Maybe that was indeed for full strength developer. I'll try again with your method.

Jeremy

HP5 with D76 @ 1+1 according to my info should be more like 11 minutes and that comes from the Ilford recommendation inside the film box! Where did you get the info ... 8 minutes would be for straight D76 not diluted!

The Digital Truth site recommends 13 minutes for 1+1 @ 20deg C which is what I used when I developed HP5 with this developer ... and I was agitating for 10 seconds every minute and was getting excellent results!

 

[photorat]

Wow! That's definitely an improvement. I'm relieved to hear it's likely to be just underdeveloped. That's easier to fix than inaccurate shutter speeds or a faulty meter. What an awesome place RFF is. Thanks both for your fast assistance!

Jeremy

As Keith said, I see it underdeveloped. Can't say nothing about your the exposure value. I used levels and a little bit contrast, but can't see the bottle labels
With your permission, of course

 

[photorat]

Well, I tried the second roll at 11min and the results are slightly better but everything still a hazy wash of grey.:bang:

I wonder if the film might be faulty? I did buy it second hand and have been storing it in the fridge. Any other ideas what might be going wrong here?

I think I'll have the next roll developed at the lab in any case so I can be sure it's not in the developing...

 

[40oz]

why not try an entirely different film if the camera is in question?

And no matter what the scans look like, what do the negatives look like? What do scans look like scanned in RGB with no scanner adjustments?

 

[photorat]

Here are the scans of the same frame prior to inversion: in 24 bit colour and true grey.

why not try an entirely different film if the camera is in question?

And no matter what the scans look like, what do the negatives look like? What do scans look like scanned in RGB with no scanner adjustments?

 

[MartinP]

As a check of the camera you could run a C41 based colour film through it, to check focus and approximate shutter speeds etc. or, if you have more patience, you could use a roll of transparency film.

The C41 can be developed anywhere in an hour or so while the E6 will probably take longer (if you can find anywhere locally), but has far less latitude on the exposure so may be a better test of the camera. Both alternatives separate camera-problems from development-problems, and so may help with solving the problem.

Looking at the shots you posted I was wondering how old the developer is, and also whether you let the film warm up for a couple of hours after taking t out of the fridge and before opening the canister ? Cold film can actually get covered in condensation inside the camera !

 

[like2fiddle]

I agree with Martin, I'd try a roll of c41 next; however......I'm wondering how old the film is and whether you mixed your D76 as a full batch or measured out a smaller amount of powder to make your stock solution --

 

[photorat]

Thanks, guys. I mixed 1L of developer from a new sachel and just diluted enough to fill the tank. All the chemicals were new out of the bottle. The film is used by June 2011. I think I'll have the next roll professionally developed. If it comes out the same, at least I'll know it's either the film or the camera. Using a fresh roll from the shop might be the next step after that.

Admittedly, I tend to pull the roll out of the fridge, load the camera and start shooting straightaway. A little more patience might be advisable, so thanks for that.

Cheers,

J

I agree with Martin, I'd try a roll of c41 next; however......I'm wondering how old the film is and whether you mixed your D76 as a full batch or measured out a smaller amount of powder to make your stock solution --

 

[photorat]

Problem solved (and another?)

Problem solved (and another?)

How could I be so stupid. The whole problem was with my scanner (or more accurately, my ignorance). I was just using an ordinary flatbed scanner, not one geared for scanning negatives. I had prints made of the original negative and they look great. So thanks anyway for trying to help me, though I didn't make it easy for you.

Here's another question.

Below picture was taken with my M2 on HP5+, developed in D76 1:1 as per instructions at 20 degrees C for 11 minutes and scanned at a lab. As you can see, it's a little grey and the histogram shows it doesn't cover the full spectrum:

Of course, this can be corrected by tweaking the levels:

but I'm wondering whether developing it longer would produce better results. My kitchen is quite cold these days and maybe the temperature is dropping enough over 11 minutes to effect the developing.

Thanks for your continued patience and assistance!

Jeremy

 

[jolefler]

If worried about temperature drop, just place your tank is a much larger vessel of water at the correct temperature.

I thought the scan of the Lincoln convertible showed enough contrast; as you said, it printed well. I didn't see the neg scan of the market scene, but almost always some tweaking is necessary when reversing neg scans or copy shots. Usually you'll develope some parameters of contrast, etc. that will apply to MOST of your negs.

Yes, an increase in developement time will increase contrast, but also density. Expose for the highlights, develope for the shadows...at least, that's what I heard.

 

[photorat]

Yes, an increase in developement time will increase contrast, but also density. Expose for the highlights, develope for the shadows...at least, that's what I heard.

Thanks for that, jolefler! A bain marie would be a good idea to ensure consistent temperature. But is it not expose for the shadows and develop for the highlights?

I've been trying hard over the past month or so to improve exposure and have read a lot about the zone system. A lot of resources I read say to expose for the subject (and perhaps even over-expose the subject (relative to the meter) if it is in a tonal zone lighter than medium grey (e.g. caucasian skin)).

But that would mean that I should avoid over-developping because it would, as you say, result in more density and thus brighter (potentially blown) highlights. Still, judging from the histogram, I think even in this bright situation where the sky would have accounted for a high exposure value (I wasn't using the zone method then), there is still some latitude for a minute or so longer developing times. But perhaps not if I were using the zone method (in which case it would have been exposed more than it already is)...

So I'll try keeping my tank warm first 🙂 before increasing exposure time.

Thanks again,

Jeremy

 

[photorat]

I thought the scan of the Lincoln convertible showed enough contrast; as you said, it printed well.

Jut picked up on another thing you said. The scan of the Lincoln neg is indeed not that terrible now that I'm comparing it to the ones from the lab. It does improve a lot when tweaking the levels. So may be I can use an ordinary flatbed scanner after all...

Anyone got any decent results with an ordinary flatbed (i.e. without an adaptor for negative film)? Are there any tricks I should know, like using sticky tape or a different background etc.?

Cheers,

Jeremy

 

[Rhoyle]

If using a flatbed, make sure you use one that had the option scanning film properly. You'll notice a huge difference.

BH

 

[venchka]

Like Keith said, try fresh D-76, 1+1, 20 degrees C for 13 minutes. ALSO, make sure that you have at least the minimum amount of D-76 specified by Kodak. You can get the technical data from Kodak online. Kodak is very specific about the amount of D-76 to use per roll of film. You may be exhausting the developer before the end of your developing time. From memory, I think the amount of D-76 and water is 250ml each for a total of 500ml solution for each roll of 36 exp. 35mm film.

 

[photorat]

Am getting better results now with a combination of longer exposures to bring out more shadow detail and compensate for what might be slight underdevelopment and a decent scanner: Epson's V200 which I think is amazingly good value. The preview scan software also makes it extremely efficient to use.

Am discovering that b/w film has a lot of latitude but that there are still good reasons for getting exposure spot on. Much better to err on the side of overexposure. You can always brighten the histogram of course but I find this results in grainy, noisy pictures.

So my next purchase will be a reliable meter and a few late nights reading up on the zone system.

Thanks for all your help.