SergioGuerra
Well-known
Greetings!
I have found some very very old HP5 (1994) that was no preserved in any fridge. I bought it because it was dirt cheap, and have been testing it.
I am shooting at asa 400 and developing with HC-110, B dilution, 5 min at 20ºC. I agitate/reverse the tank for the first 30sec and 5 secs every 30 secs after that.
The results are usable, but the grain is huge. All the pictures are very grainy, and although I like that effect on some pictures, I wont like it to all.
Examples:
Example-1
Example-2
I would like to know what would be the best way to get less grain from such an old film: exposure time? Developing time? Agitation? etc
ps: I bought 60 meters of this film for 10 dolars ehehehe
Thanks,
Sergio
I have found some very very old HP5 (1994) that was no preserved in any fridge. I bought it because it was dirt cheap, and have been testing it.
I am shooting at asa 400 and developing with HC-110, B dilution, 5 min at 20ºC. I agitate/reverse the tank for the first 30sec and 5 secs every 30 secs after that.
The results are usable, but the grain is huge. All the pictures are very grainy, and although I like that effect on some pictures, I wont like it to all.
Examples:
Example-1
Example-2
I would like to know what would be the best way to get less grain from such an old film: exposure time? Developing time? Agitation? etc
ps: I bought 60 meters of this film for 10 dolars ehehehe
Thanks,
Sergio
George S.
How many is enough?
I think you got good results under the circumstances. Old film stored at room temperature loses its exposure latitude, and finer details. Your example #1 is a difficult lighting situation for any film. The harsh, bright window light could have destroyed the shot, but it didn't. I think the film held up fairly well. Shot $2 suffers mostly from grain, as you said. I think the possible answer for you is in the choice of developer, but I'll leave that to others who are more versed than I to suggest what to try.
kaiyen
local man of mystery
Film from 1994 isn't that old, even if not refrigerated. You gotta make some adjustments, but it's doable.
First off, I'm impressed with your shadow detail in the first shot. I would wager that you have somehow managed to avoid too much radiation exposure in the last decade. Generally, with tri-x I'd recommend a 1 stop increase in exposure. Your second shot has a pitch black coat, so maybe 1/2 stop would be wise. Of course, I don't know how you're metering so that's a tough recommendation to make. 1/2 stop is likely in the ballpark.
The grain is quite strong in the 2nd shot, yes. I suggest you consider a different developer, something that will minimize grain while helping compensate for loss of speed. Microphen would be my first try.
allan
ps - I think your first photo is beautiful. I really like it.
First off, I'm impressed with your shadow detail in the first shot. I would wager that you have somehow managed to avoid too much radiation exposure in the last decade. Generally, with tri-x I'd recommend a 1 stop increase in exposure. Your second shot has a pitch black coat, so maybe 1/2 stop would be wise. Of course, I don't know how you're metering so that's a tough recommendation to make. 1/2 stop is likely in the ballpark.
The grain is quite strong in the 2nd shot, yes. I suggest you consider a different developer, something that will minimize grain while helping compensate for loss of speed. Microphen would be my first try.
allan
ps - I think your first photo is beautiful. I really like it.
SergioGuerra
Well-known
Hmmm.. thanks for the tips... The film was stored on a metal case, not sure if that is relevant to the radiation exposure during the storage time.
I shoot a lot using sunny 16 rule, so it is a bit hard to do some "scientific" thoughts on my exposition (specially on the inside picture).
If I stop down 1 stop do I have to compensate on developing times?
Thanks
Sergio
I shoot a lot using sunny 16 rule, so it is a bit hard to do some "scientific" thoughts on my exposition (specially on the inside picture).
If I stop down 1 stop do I have to compensate on developing times?
Thanks
Sergio
aad
Not so new now.
I think you might want to try dilution H for starters, a little less agitation maybe, , 8 minutes?
kaiyen
local man of mystery
SergioGuerra said:
Unless it was stored in a lead box with 10" walls the cosmic rays are still going to get through
Hm. Sunny 16 makes it difficult. I would switch to sunny 11 and see if that helps. The radiation increases base fog which, not surprisingly, kills your shadows faster than with new film. So you need to increase the exposure to get the shadow detail you normally would get.
Well, first of all, you want to open up a stop, not close down. Closing down would decrease exposure. But I think that's just a typo and you know that, based on this conversation.
You will need to compensate for development time a bit, yes. Microphen is also nice because it's a relatively low contrast developer. It's pretty easy to control contrast. So increase exposure by 1 stop and decrease dev time by, say, 10%. That seems like a good starting point to me.
The comment about reduced agitation with increased dilution of HC-110 isn't a bad idea, either. Might be worth a try since you already got it. It'll have the same effect - increased dilution == less grain, and reduced agitation == slightly more speed and controlled contrast.
allan
SergioGuerra
Well-known
I think I will try that, and will still use hc-110, since I got a lot of it and wouldnt want to store different developers a long time...
I will post later the updates on the tests... I got a new roll of this film on the camera so wont take that long
Thanks!
Sergio
I will post later the updates on the tests... I got a new roll of this film on the camera so wont take that long
Thanks!
Sergio