Pulling Film?

M

matu

Guest
What should I spect of exposing an ASA 400 film at ASA 50?(adjusting development times)
Will I get same grain?, I've read that contrast and higlight will vary, but
suposing you have run out of Daylight film, can you pull Indoor film
with some fairly thin grain?
I think I'm going to experiment it anyway, but this is something that I dont't get
it striaght.

Thanks

Pablo
 
Thanks zeos, I'm shooting B&W, Tri-X 400 HP5+ the most of the time.
I'm intrigued about grain and sharpness, can I get "similar" results to Plus-X 125?

Pablo
 
Sticking my head above the parapet here but as far as I am aware, the grain structure of a film is pretty much set at the time of manufacture. HP5 will never look like PanF no matter what you do to it. Choice of developer does have an effect, the so called fine grain ones tend to work by actually dissolving the edge of grain clumps, softening their outline and reducing the apparent grain. As there is no such thing as a free lunch this comes at the cost often of a certain loss of sharpness.

Where is all this leading? Expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights as the saying goes. Well, if you expose HP5 at ISO 50 and pull the development sufficiently to avoid bomb proof highlights. For sake of argument, you have managed to get your zone 9 highlights to land in zone 9 buy your skillfull development what will you have got?. The shadow values will have had 3 stops more light than usual. Your zone 1 shadows will be landing somewhere around zone 4 (a dark mid tone). In short a very compressed tonal range in the neg - a flat neg.

More likely you will get an over exposed neg with bullet proof highlights. Lord only knows what would happen to the tonality/grain etc. Run a roll and see! Just do not expect to be producing prints of Edward Weston like quaility.

Hope this helps.

C
 
First of all, you're aren't going to get much of anything exposing TXT or HP5 at 50. It'll be almost all silver, me thinks. Very dense.

However, there are two ways of looking at this. The first is establishing an EI that "happens" to be lower than box speed, with development time less than manufacturer recommended. This is _not_ pulling film. This is merely calibrating your process. For you, for your techniques, you may need to rate TXT at 320 or even 250 _all_the_time_ because you need a certain amount of shadow detail. So, for you, TXT at 320 in D76 1+1 for 9 minutes would be "normal," even though it's slower than box speed and you develop for less (I'm just guessing on the time, I don't use D76 much).

Therefore, actually pulling is to then overexpose from _your_ calibrated EI, and then to decrease development further from your "normal" time. There are a number of reasons. Personally, once I get my EI and times down I stick to them. However, it's possible you're in a situation that is really contrasty and you _must_ get the shadows. Therefore, it might make sense to downrate a bit more to ensure there is enough exposure in the shadows. Alternatively, you might be going for a very flat look, which will also require overexposure and compensation during development.

Of course, there is no such thing as "indoor" and "outdoor" film in B&W, so that question isn't relevant.

There really isn't any way to get TXT or HP5 to look like Plus-X (PXP?). You can reduce grain, but you'll lose sharpness. If you pull the film too much, it'll look flatter than Plus-X.

allan
 
Matu,

If you can find some Ilford's Perceptol I have been told it is excellent for fine grain and long tonal range. However, it is my understanding that it is no longer made.

A clone of Perceptol called "Moersch EFG" is available at http://www.retrophotographic.com/. It doesn't come with instructions so you might have to get help from forum members about dilutions and development times and agitation.
 
Well, thanks for the suggestions and input.
I knew that pulling a 400 asa down to 50 sounds crazy, but as Allan notes some people do it (At 320 or 250). Thinking in that direction I was trying to understand what makes it more sharpen and contrasty rating it lower than EI of the box.
Now, going the oposite direction is clear that rating at higher ASA (pushing) you get more grain, so I had this doubt about reducing EI (pulling) to get sharp and finer grain.
I like exposing Tri-X at 320, but I like it better for outdoor pictures Plus-X, the Agfa Pan 100 or tmax-100.
I have tried different developers, including Tetenal Ultrafin, but I like the way it behaves XTol, that is awfull only with my Tmax rolls.
Know I think that I'll to put a roll on my camera and do the test, just for having my own experience.
Thanks a lot.
 
Well, thanks for the suggestions and input.
I knew that pulling a 400 asa down to 50 sounds crazy, but as Allan notes some people do it (At 320 or 250). Thinking in that direction I was trying to understand what makes it more sharpen and contrasty rating it lower than EI of the box.
Now, going the oposite direction is clear that rating at higher ASA (pushing) you get more grain, so I had this doubt about reducing EI (pulling) to get sharp and finer grain.
I like exposing Tri-X at 320, but I like it better for outdoor pictures Plus-X, the Agfa Pan 100 or tmax-100.
I have tried different developers, including Tetenal Ultrafin, but I like the way it behaves XTol, that is awfull only with my Tmax rolls.
Know I think that I'll to put a roll on my camera and do the test, just for having my own experience.
Thanks a lot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom