Bill Clark
Veteran
The first line is a joke on me Kevin.
You're English is just fine.
Nice to read your posts here.
You're English is just fine.
Nice to read your posts here.
The first line is a joke on me Kevin.
You're English is just fine.
Nice to read your posts here.
.
You're English is just fine.
That looks very good to my eye Kevin, pretty good tonally possibly a touch of burn out on the white coat but acceptable. It's more impressive as it's an XP2, not really designed for B&W process but nonetheless looks very fine grained.
Well, sort of. Unless you want (slightly) finer grain and higher edge sharpness, at the expense of (slightly) lower true ISO speeds, and (possibly) less compensation. But you are absolutely right that the penalties for under-agitation are far worse, far more common and (for the most part) far less understood by ignorant 'enthusiastic amateurs' than the penalties for over-agitation.Stop skipping around and pick one thing and learn to use it.
A developing test with 6 frames or 12" of film is all that is required.
Over agitation does not exist. Cut your time 10% for continuous over 5/30 sec .
what does exist is insufficient or some non random method that leaves certain areas with insufficient replenishment. People call these surge marks and try to repair with less agitation, exactly the wrong fix.
Over agitation does not exist. Cut your time 10% for continuous over 5/30 sec .
what does exist is insufficient or some non random method that leaves certain areas with insufficient replenishment. People call these surge marks and try to repair with less agitation, exactly the wrong fix.
Well, sort of. Unless you want (slightly) finer grain and higher edge sharpness, at the expense of (slightly) lower true ISO speeds, and (possibly) less compensation. But you are absolutely right that the penalties for under-agitation are far worse, far more common and (for the most part) far less understood by ignorant 'enthusiastic amateurs' than the penalties for over-agitation.
Cheers,
R.