Thin negs - help find the cause

f/stopblues

f/stopblues

photo loner
Local time
6:11 AM
Joined
Jul 28, 2005
Messages
619
Hey guys! I shot a roll over the weekend and was all excited to see how things turned out. I felt like I got some solid stuff on it! I developed tonight and when they came out I was immediately let down because they're all so thin.. I'm never going to be able to pull any detail out of the shadows :mad: It was HP5+ in 120 rated at 400, developed in HC110 dilution B, 5 minutes at 20 degrees.

Now I'm trying to find the cause. How can I tell the difference between an underexposure and underdevelopment? I agitated for 10 secs every minute, so couldn't be that.. Any tell-tale signs? Unfortunately I can't scan them cause my scanner only does 35mm.

Help!
 
lack of shadow density == under exposed

too much highlight density == overdevelopment.

sounds like you need to rate it lower, or work on your metering.
allan
 
It could be either underexposure or under development, or both. I don't know HC110 very well; I haven't used it in years, but 5 mins sounds short for 400. I'll leave that to the HC110 users. BTW, what is the dilution of 'B'?

Anyway, it's best to try to rule out one thing. If you remember the lighting conditions and your exposre settings it may help others help you. More details?



:)
 
Allan, we seem to always respond to the same posts! Maybe we're stalking each other?


:)
 
Of course I'm stalking you. Look over your left shoulder right...NOW! :)

I'm still 600 posts behind. Gotta work on that...

allan
 
Or you could switch to Diafine and have your answer.

If your negatives look bad with Diafine, then there is only exposure to blame. One less variable.

Tom
 
I'd vote for underexposed. 5 mins can whizz past though, how do you time you development stage (e.g. when do you turn on the timer, etc.)

Mark
 
And the winner is..."Underexposed"

I think we're all in agreement here.

*Unless*, you didn't mix your developer solution properly (it's weak or very old). Are the negative letters and frame numbers pretty dark solid?
 
Thanks guys.. The frame numbers and all that look normal. I used an incident meter and haven't had that problem in the past, especially since I was taking readings from the shadows. Maybe I need to try rating it at 320. I've been developing 35mm HP5+ in HC110 for a few months now without these problems, but this is one of the first rolls of 120 I've tried. 5 minutes is indeed short.. I got that from the Massive Dev Chart.

Have a good weekend!
 
The massive development chart gives the same times for 35mm and 120. In the past, my 120 negs have always been thinner than my 35mm negs using the exact same film and developer. I would therefore extend your development time for the larger film.

Of course you want to make sure your meter is reading and camera exposing correctly.
 
f/stopblues said:
Thanks guys.. The frame numbers and all that look normal. I used an incident meter and haven't had that problem in the past, especially since I was taking readings from the shadows. Maybe I need to try rating it at 320. I've been developing 35mm HP5+ in HC110 for a few months now without these problems, but this is one of the first rolls of 120 I've tried. 5 minutes is indeed short.. I got that from the Massive Dev Chart.

Have a good weekend!
Click to expand...

Could the camera be the culprit then?


:)
 
RayPA said:
Could the camera be the culprit then?


:)
Click to expand...

Ooh I don't like that answer Ray :p Unfortunately I don't have another MF camera to test it against. I'll try another with a more controlled environment and see how the negs look from there.
 
over expose a few frames intentionally, develop and see that comes out.
IMHO 5 minutes is prettty short, are you presoaking?
I would add a minute presoaking and extend development to 6 minutes
 
I like your sig titrisol :)

No presoak by the way. Ilford has that "wetting agent" so I've steered clear of that for this film.
 
Had the same problem. My thermometer needed longer time to read. Cold developer was my problem. Calibrate your thermometer (boiling/freezing point) and let it stand several minutes in the solution.
 
Kevin said:
The massive development chart gives the same times for 35mm and 120. In the past, my 120 negs have always been thinner than my 35mm negs using the exact same film and developer. I would therefore extend your development time for the larger film....
Click to expand...

As a fixed rule any 120mm film should be given an extra 10% additional time from that successfully used by you for the same film at 35mm format.

Have you already used the same developer for the same film at 35mm, and got good negs?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Now can someone explain the statement about 'presoak' and 'wetting agent' on Ilford film? I presoak Ilford and I see the purple stuff come out but I get good negatives (I think).
 
T_om said:
Or you could switch to Diafine and have your answer.

If your negatives look bad with Diafine, then there is only exposure to blame. One less variable.

Tom
Click to expand...


So, why is that? What are Diafine's special characteristics? I would like to try something besides the Ilford developer I am using, but want something simple and effective.
 
shutterflower said:
So, why is that? What are Diafine's special characteristics? I would like to try something besides the Ilford developer I am using, but want something simple and effective.
Click to expand...

Diafine is a split developer, two parts. Like all split developers it is virtually foolproof, a fixed time in part A, a fixed time in part B. The fixed time in A allows the film to soak up developer, unactivated. Part B activates the developer that is soaked into the emulsion. Split or two-part developers, for this reason, also have a great compensating action, not allowing the highlights to block up too much, and still allowing details in the shadows. Temperature isn't really a consideration either, there's a very wide temperature range with split developers.

:0
 
Just a small word of caution when using HP 5 in Diafine. Expose at an E.I. of 800 instead of 400. I will second or third the recomendation to use Diafine. Dead easy, quick and great results.

dnk512: Are you pre-soaking Ilford Delta films and getting the "purple haze"?

Wayne
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom