le vrai rdu
Well-known
I am scanning my trix shooted at 12500 iso, it works, I will try to post scan now or in a few hours, (it is night here 😉 )
trix 12500 isos, rodinal 1+100 stand dev 4h , It works :)
- Thread starter le vrai rdu
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 50
- Views 3K
le vrai rdu
Well-known
here my first scan:
At such a sensitivity one must be metering carefully 🙂
I shot in daylight also
I Think I am near iso 10000 rather than 12500. Next time I will change the rodinal bath after 2hours of souping I think 🙂
I am now scanning the rest of the roll
At such a sensitivity one must be metering carefully 🙂
I shot in daylight also
I Think I am near iso 10000 rather than 12500. Next time I will change the rodinal bath after 2hours of souping I think 🙂
I am now scanning the rest of the roll
J J Kapsberger
Well-known
Very intriguing. Just pour in the Rodinal and let it sit for 4 hours? No agitation? Do you sit the tank in a bath to keep the temperature constant?
le vrai rdu
Well-known
J J Kapsberger said:
I return the tank queitly every 1/2 hours , I don't put in in a bath, some others pictures, f5.6, 1/1000 (picture + crop )
feenej
Well-known
Last weekend I did the same at 2 hours. It seemed like about 3200 ASA, maybe 6400, but I had a loss in tonal range Like what you see when you push film too much.
le vrai rdu
Well-known
sitemistic said:
Just try it 😉 (with daylight pictures, to make sure it works really 😉 )
le vrai rdu
Well-known
feenej said:
I used 2h30 for 3200 isos 😉
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=53464
le vrai rdu
Well-known
Whynot but I have to say that I don't have the same amount of grey (I don't know how to say it, I mean, at 400 iso I have a far bigger amount of tonality )
le vrai rdu
Well-known
I am posting some more on my flickr, will post here the most significant
for the daylight peicture, I am absolutely sure of my light measure, and I think the treatement gave me a 10000 isos film, I will try to improve the treatement times 🙂
for the daylight peicture, I am absolutely sure of my light measure, and I think the treatement gave me a 10000 isos film, I will try to improve the treatement times 🙂
le vrai rdu
Well-known
sitemistic said:
I metered all at 12500 iso but it seem that I didn't souped enought, so I have something like 10000 iso I think
I am absolutely sure of my daylight measures, not very sure for my night light metering
le vrai rdu
Well-known
sitemistic said:
It was at 17h , I was 1/1000 f5.6 and equivalent couples 😉
J J Kapsberger
Well-known
sitemistic said:
Perhaps Le vrai rdu is le vrai Dieu?
J J Kapsberger
Well-known
The night time shots are certainly more pleasing to my eye.
le vrai rdu
Well-known
time to sleep, see you tomorow 🙂
le vrai rdu
Well-known
thank you sitemistic, I have to say I am quite surprised by stand dev, It doesn't seem to increase grain, just reducing a bit grey tonality 🙂
40oz
...
Here's one I shot recently on Tri-X and dev'd for 6400 in straight D-76:
http://lakespc.com/pics/BlackAndWhite/TriX_At_6400/BikeTest.jpg
It was shot in my living room under fairly normal lighting just as a sanity test, metered with both a handheld and an SLR to be sure of the light level.
I am not really surprised at good results being found not even one stop faster. I certainly don't have the patience to tend film for four hours, so I won't be trying Rodinal any time soon, but it looks OK to me.
It's pretty clear one loses a fair amount of range, blowing out whites before gaining any significant detail in the shadows as shown by the 6th image you posted, of the bus. The sky is blown out, but there isn't any significant detail between blacks. My shot of the bikes, you can just barely make out the difference between the blacks of the tires if you look close (it's easier to see on the full-res scan), but any highlights along the chrome frame and on the sprocket are totally blown. I've got a ton of shots of those two bikes, and the reduction in tonal range is easy to see even if I couldn't identify what it was at first.
Regardless, it's quite amazing what you can do with simple film and lens.
http://lakespc.com/pics/BlackAndWhite/TriX_At_6400/BikeTest.jpg
It was shot in my living room under fairly normal lighting just as a sanity test, metered with both a handheld and an SLR to be sure of the light level.
I am not really surprised at good results being found not even one stop faster. I certainly don't have the patience to tend film for four hours, so I won't be trying Rodinal any time soon, but it looks OK to me.
It's pretty clear one loses a fair amount of range, blowing out whites before gaining any significant detail in the shadows as shown by the 6th image you posted, of the bus. The sky is blown out, but there isn't any significant detail between blacks. My shot of the bikes, you can just barely make out the difference between the blacks of the tires if you look close (it's easier to see on the full-res scan), but any highlights along the chrome frame and on the sprocket are totally blown. I've got a ton of shots of those two bikes, and the reduction in tonal range is easy to see even if I couldn't identify what it was at first.
Regardless, it's quite amazing what you can do with simple film and lens.
Last edited:
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Rodinal seems to be amazing stuff at lower dilutions and longer times with minimal or no agitation.
For night shots where mid-tones and overall tonal scale isn't really as important as just getting the shot, this regimen seems quite promising.
I'm going to do some experimenting at some point; I may even throw in some XTOL just to see what happens.
Cyrille, I do want to know about how you metered. You say careful metering is important, which I can appreciate. Do you pick a middle grey and meter? Do you meter for various brightness levels and average? Or just pick a Zone III, say, and adjust accordingly.
Salut,
Earl
For night shots where mid-tones and overall tonal scale isn't really as important as just getting the shot, this regimen seems quite promising.
I'm going to do some experimenting at some point; I may even throw in some XTOL just to see what happens.
Cyrille, I do want to know about how you metered. You say careful metering is important, which I can appreciate. Do you pick a middle grey and meter? Do you meter for various brightness levels and average? Or just pick a Zone III, say, and adjust accordingly.
Salut,
Earl
charjohncarter
Veteran
I'm not big on pushing film, too much lost (look at the histograms). I agree with kaiyen, you just can't change the range of film. Stand, compensating will, maybe, give you an inch more, but not too much. Night photography, to me hasn't changed much in my life time. It is just plain the same as it always has been. Close to blown highlights and that is fine. And too much dark areas which is what you would expect. This is one I did at dusk or a little after in Turkey recently, handheld (against a light pole), TMax100, HC-110h, shot normal, developed normal. And with a P&S from the 90's.
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
For a long time I held to the "one true speed" belief system. And when defined by "good shadows, full tonal range", it's true.
But there's a BIG difference between dusk and dark of night with minimal artificial light the only source.
But there's a BIG difference between dusk and dark of night with minimal artificial light the only source.
kaiyen
local man of mystery
This is an interesting thread to answer...
First, I agree with sitemistic and applaud the effort to experiment and take film to its limits.
However...there are some howevers.
As Trius has indicated, it is critical to know how the metering was done. Until that is accounted for, your results are...fun and probably meaningful to you for future experimentation, but not particularly meaningful to anyone else that is thinking about doing this (unless he or she is also just testing). You can set your ISO dial to 1000000000000 if you wanted to and get great looking negatives, but that doesn't mean that's your EI.
The best way is to shoot a grey card as you go across an ISO range, then use a densitometer to find base fog + .1, and that's zone I. If you needed the one set with the ISO dial at 320, then your EI for that developer using that development method is 320. Etc.
Also, 4 hours is unnecessary. You will not get much compensation after about 1.5 hours. You might get some edge effects (I forget the name of the effect) from active developer actually diffusing across the barrier from a high to low density area, creating a slight "glow" around objects and very strong micro contrast, but you don't need 4 hours to do that. In fact, you're risking bromide drag at that kind of time range.
When I get home, what I'll do is load up some TXT, find a dark towel that will be a nice zone III (I don't have a densitometer, so this won't be a perfect test but we'll get into a general area) along with another one that is a good zone V and photograph it at EI's from 400 to 12,800. I'll try to include something bright in there too, like a zone VIII, which would normally be just shy of blown out. This will all be done with spot-metering.
For the heck of it I'll do similar tests with FP4 and some other film. I got a Paterson tank that can do 3 reels.
I'll do 1+100 for 1.5 hours and then see what happens.
The reason for the zone V inclusion is that I will likely lose Zone III after...if I have it at 800 at _all_ (as in anything there at all) I will be shocked. But the point of pushing is to keep the midtones up, right? So the question becomes - at what point have I reached the limit of TXT's pushability, in Rodinal stand development, if pushability is defined as the ability to maintain midtones? Let's set the real goal of the test to be keeping midtones. But I'll do a judgment call on EI as well, of course.
The VIII is there to see how well compensation works. If it stays under control then that means compensation has kept it that way. Being in any developer that long should eventually blow it out and make it solid silver.
allan
First, I agree with sitemistic and applaud the effort to experiment and take film to its limits.
However...there are some howevers.
As Trius has indicated, it is critical to know how the metering was done. Until that is accounted for, your results are...fun and probably meaningful to you for future experimentation, but not particularly meaningful to anyone else that is thinking about doing this (unless he or she is also just testing). You can set your ISO dial to 1000000000000 if you wanted to and get great looking negatives, but that doesn't mean that's your EI.
The best way is to shoot a grey card as you go across an ISO range, then use a densitometer to find base fog + .1, and that's zone I. If you needed the one set with the ISO dial at 320, then your EI for that developer using that development method is 320. Etc.
Also, 4 hours is unnecessary. You will not get much compensation after about 1.5 hours. You might get some edge effects (I forget the name of the effect) from active developer actually diffusing across the barrier from a high to low density area, creating a slight "glow" around objects and very strong micro contrast, but you don't need 4 hours to do that. In fact, you're risking bromide drag at that kind of time range.
When I get home, what I'll do is load up some TXT, find a dark towel that will be a nice zone III (I don't have a densitometer, so this won't be a perfect test but we'll get into a general area) along with another one that is a good zone V and photograph it at EI's from 400 to 12,800. I'll try to include something bright in there too, like a zone VIII, which would normally be just shy of blown out. This will all be done with spot-metering.
For the heck of it I'll do similar tests with FP4 and some other film. I got a Paterson tank that can do 3 reels.
I'll do 1+100 for 1.5 hours and then see what happens.
The reason for the zone V inclusion is that I will likely lose Zone III after...if I have it at 800 at _all_ (as in anything there at all) I will be shocked. But the point of pushing is to keep the midtones up, right? So the question becomes - at what point have I reached the limit of TXT's pushability, in Rodinal stand development, if pushability is defined as the ability to maintain midtones? Let's set the real goal of the test to be keeping midtones. But I'll do a judgment call on EI as well, of course.
The VIII is there to see how well compensation works. If it stays under control then that means compensation has kept it that way. Being in any developer that long should eventually blow it out and make it solid silver.
allan
