No progress with film development

[user237428934]

Half a year ago I began developing and so far I devloped 20 films at home. I have an analog to digital workflow with developing and then scanning the best ones. The development process is always the standard one that was recommended in the manual of the developer (Tetenal Ultrafin plus).

So far I really like the look of Fuji Acros 100 best and I printed some of them with my Canon Pro 9000 on thick matte museum paper. The clean look of this film is what I really like, some might even say it looks almost digital.

(Examples of the Acros-look I like
http://thomaswphotos.wordpress.com/2010/11/07/orte_nizza/film09_15/
http://thomaswphotos.wordpress.com/2010/11/09/orte-nizza2/film09_05/ )

Neopan 400 at 1600 is very nice as experiment but I don't get anything useful out of Nepoan 400 or Tri-X at 400.

My problem is that I don't risk to make development variations. On every film I bring home there is at least one photo I don't want to lose. So it's always better to use the standard-process where I know that I don't risk spoiling it all.

Basically I see two options for solving this dilemma.

- Doing a lot of test films with variations in development (probably even changing the developer) to see if I can get better results out of Neopan 400.

- Using Acros 100 only because this works right now and doing the rest digital.

I know that 20 films is not enough to be perfect but I'm not the man with a lot of patience so option 1 could easily fail.

How did you solve this when you were not content with your development results?

Thanks
Tom

 

[dfoo]

These days before I use a film for something really important I do some tests with it. Namely, I shoot at various exposures (N-2, N-1, N, N+1, N+2) and then develop it at different times to find the one I prefer the most. It takes a bit of time, and wastes some film but its worth it.

 

[nikon_sam]

Basically I see two options for solving this dilemma.

- Doing a lot of test films with variations in development (probably even changing the developer) to see if I can get better results out of Neopan 400.

- Using Acros 100 only because this works right now and doing the rest digital.

I know that 20 films is not enough to be perfect but I'm not the man with a lot of patience so option 1 could easily fail.

How did you solve this when you were not content with your development results?

Thanks
Tom

Tom...

In finding the perfect combination of Film, Developer and Developing Time one has to experiment...That doesn't mean one has to risk losing images...
You find a starting point then slowly and thoughtfully start altering your developing times until you come up with the combo that you like...
The willingness to learn and patience to experiment is key unless you want to spend the rest of your life guessing, hoping and failing...
I find that this younger generation isn't willing to put the time in to learn...they want results NOW...that's where digital comes in for them...
I'm willing to learn, experiment and find better/different results...I have over thirty years in developing film and prints and I'm still learning...
You say you've developed 20 rolls of film...well that's a start...what did you learn from those 20 rolls???
I just threw away 5 rolls of 120 B&W film that I shot and developed testing out a camera body...did I learn anything...Yes...was it worth it???
YES...did it take time and patience...Yes again...
Now I know that this camera works and I can trust it at all speeds, flash sync, exposure and focus...
My time was well spent and yours will be too!!! 😎

 

[maddoc]

I think it takes a lot of practice to get consistent results when self-developing BW film. 20 rolls is a good start but if you want to get really predictable results every time I then I would recommend to stick with only one film + one developer + one light meter until you achieved your goal. Changing films / developers / cameras (in-camera metering, hand-held meter reflective, hand-held meter incident) changes to many variables at once.

 

[venchka]

The examples above prove that "wasting film" is never a waste. Keep good records. Record all of your variables. Even when you scan you could include notes about the photo as a file along with the TIFF file used for printing. Keep notes with your filed negatives as well. It may sound like a waste of time and a waste of film. It isn't. Your effoerts will be rewarded.
Good luck!

ps; Too many people make too many good photos with Tri-X. Change developer for Tri-X. D-76, Xtol, Rodinal all work well for different people.

 

[mfogiel]

Tom,
As a rule, if you use dilute developers, with longer development times, the tollerance for not perfect development time increases. With a film like Tri X for example, it is really difficult to get bad results from a D76 1+1 or DD X 1+9 ( 10 mins will work in either case). If you scan, what is actually important, is to avoid overdevelopment. If the film is on the thin side, but has been properly exposed, you can always get your tonality corrected in PS. The most tollerant films for exposure and development variations are Tri X and HP5+. They are also films with beautiful tonality. I think the grain is something you should accept. For me Acros is just too bland and it also lacks acutance, not to mention that the real speed is about EI 50. Get a brick of Tri X (or Arista Premium 400), a bottle of DD X, expose at EI 400 and start with 10 mins at 20deg C 1+9, agitation 10 secs every minute (also only 10 secs at the beginning). You can easily expose between EI 100 and 1600, and shorten or lengthen the time accordingly. And next time you are passing by Nice, let me know...
Ciao
Marek

 

[btgc]

Both your pictures look like what I'd expect to get. Well, on second picture sky would be intensified by yellow filter, but that's it.
I'm same novice though and need to learn. I stick to standard procesess and accidentally vary time by seconds or minute[-s]. Problem is when half of roll is exposed under one light and another half - under different light. I think it would be wise to cut film and develop them differently. I guess anyone is just doing so?

 

[Requin]

The best way to get to know your films is to do a development test. This is explained in books of e.g. Ansel Adams, Fred Picker, or in German from Andreas Weidner. That's the basic knowledge of HOW TO deal with film. Then you can proceed further.
Good luck

Requin

 

[skibeerr]

Tough I develop for whet printing I can only tell you that a little experimentation never lost me an image, it's the big blunders (mind farts you english speaking folk call it?) that always work for me.

As for taking notes I say YES DO IT!!!

Start with small deviations from standard procedure and shoot film with testing in mind shooting different contrast scenes (so you don't have to be afraid of loosing important images) and keep notes.

Wim

 

[user237428934]

You say you've developed 20 rolls of film...well that's a start...what did you learn from those 20 rolls???

Normally I lose interest in something very quickly, but I still develop film after 6 months. This is a good sign and so it's worth putting some more effort in it. I learned a lot in this time.

Using film cured me from using 100% view. I got some very good A3 prints out of my self developed and self scanned negatives although the 100% view on the screen looks awful. This corrected my view on M8 files with higher ISO.

From the 20 films there were 12 Acros 100. I developed them with the same developer but at different temperatures and with different time factors due to multiple use of the developer. I always calculated the times exactly according to the tetenal instructions and got consistent results. With one film I did a variation in agitation but that was not so good so I returned to the original procedure. Especially they recommend a very short development time (6min/20deg.) with agitations every 3 sec!. Gives very low grain and is perfect for scanning. A bit flat but that can easily be adjusted in Lightroom. I think I will start with that and do 2-3 minor adjustments, just to see if it gets better.

 

[user237428934]

Tom,
As a rule, if you use dilute developers, with longer development times, the tollerance for not perfect development time increases. With a film like Tri X for example, it is really difficult to get bad results from a D76 1+1 or DD X 1+9 ( 10 mins will work in either case). If you scan, what is actually important, is to avoid overdevelopment. If the film is on the thin side, but has been properly exposed, you can always get your tonality corrected in PS. The most tollerant films for exposure and development variations are Tri X and HP5+. They are also films with beautiful tonality. I think the grain is something you should accept. For me Acros is just too bland and it also lacks acutance, not to mention that the real speed is about EI 50. Get a brick of Tri X (or Arista Premium 400), a bottle of DD X, expose at EI 400 and start with 10 mins at 20deg C 1+9, agitation 10 secs every minute (also only 10 secs at the beginning). You can easily expose between EI 100 and 1600, and shorten or lengthen the time accordingly. And next time you are passing by Nice, let me know...
Ciao
Marek

Marek,
the standard procedure for DD X seems to be 1+4. Do you use 1+9 to get longer development times because you wrote the tolerance is better, the longer you develop?

You are right with Acros. It's a little flat but with Lightroom it's easy to get more blacks and contrast. But it's still not a "character" film. I still have some Neopan 400 here so I will try your procedure with Neopan 400 later.

 

[mfogiel]

I use DD X 1+9 because this way you can control the time better, because it is slightly compensating ( highlights do not blow out easily, while shadow detail is good) and because this way it is cheaper and lasts longer.

 

[Haigh]

Much good advice from the above replies. Stay with films like Tri-X or HP5 as has been suggested and write processing times as suggested, at least that way if you like the look of the negs then you can reproduce that look. Scanning has to be recorded the same way. I find scanning a whole new variable in the mix but at least you will have I hope good negs. My test of a neg is not in the scans ( mine are not good) but in the darkroom print.