Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,713   Posts: 1,514,713   Online: 849
      
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13
  1. #1
    Michael Slade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    502

    Brush development - some thoughts

    I've exposed and processed six sheets of 12x20 FP4 so far, and here's a short report.

    I am developing in Ilfosol S diluted 1:14 (more on that later...), in 16x20 trays. 9.5 mins @ 68-70ish deg. f., one sheet at a time.

    First sheet had tremendous underdevelopment in the center of the sheet, so I decided to go straight to the brush.

    I am using the Richeson 'Magic Brush', 2-inches wide and was brushing in random patterns all over the film for the entire development. After looking at a few sheets I went to brushing for a minute, resting for a minute, until the development was done.

    I have no scratches at all, and the development is very consistent, complete and most importnat of all, it is even in all regards.

    I am wondering if anyone has a different technique to share or any thoughts on why I would brush continually vs. alternating brushing/resting? Frankly I just thought my arm could use a rest, so I went to the brush/rest technique.

    The negatives are being rated at ISO 50, which I believe might still be a little fast.

    The negatives when developed are generally quite flat, except in areas of extreme overexposure, such as bright sky from inside a potato-cellar (very dark). My best exposure, straight late afternoon sun, high diffused clouds, moderate contrast range, still looks very soft & flat.

    I am using Ilfosol S because it is the developer that Ilford recommends with FP4. I am using the 1:14 dilution in order to fill the entire tray. I am thinking that the 1:8 dilution might be a little punchier for the development.

    Short of PMK, which I am tempted to jump into anyway, are there other developers and times which might result in a slightly contrastier negative?

    Just looking for some general feedback about the brushing development technique and maybe some ideas about rating the FP4 and development.

    Thanks!

    Oh...no prints yet, sorry.

  2. #2
    TheFlyingCamera's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Washington DC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    8,154
    Blog Entries
    51
    Images
    432
    Well, look a Pyrocat HD instead of PMK - I think you'll have better luck with it as far as even development is concerned, especially with such large sheets of film.

  3. #3
    Michael Slade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    502
    10-4, thanks.

  4. #4
    juan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    St. Simons Island, Georgia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,637
    Images
    4
    I use brush development for 8x10. I use a 2" hake brush - I think the bristles are softer than the Richeson and there's no need to keep them together as there is when coating an emulsion.

    I brush in a pattern - horizontally from top to bottom, then vertically from left to right, then horizontally again from bottom to top, then vertically again from right to left. I don't know if this method is any better than any other, but I've never had a negative that's unevenly developed.
    juan

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Seattle
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    1,212
    Images
    47
    I second the pyrocat suggestion. I am now using pyrocat-p as it is easier to mix. Otherwise they are about the same. You should be able to get more speed also. I shoot Fp-4 at 100. If you are going to do intermittant agitation, start with ten min 1:1:100. I am now doing semi stand 1.5:1:200 agitatation once half way thru. 23 min @ 72. 1.6 DR

  6. #6
    Jeremy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Denton, TX
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,767
    Images
    56
    I say get a larger hake brush, it's what i use for brush developing my 8x10 (I use a 3" for that). No reason to waste a "magic" brush on developing your negs when a $5 of whatever hake brush will suffice.
    Let's see what I've got in the magic trash can for Mateo!

    blog
    website

  7. #7
    Kerik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    California
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,465
    Images
    238
    I've been using PMK and Rollo Pyro with FP4 for MANY years. PMK when the light is harsh and Rollo when it's soft. I develop up to 3 sheets of 12x20 or 14x17 at a time in a tray. Face down, shuffling from the bottom to the top. I tried a quick side-by-side test with Pyrocat HD vs. Rollo using FP4 in soft light. The Rollo was the clear winner for me, although it was a just one-time test. I've had such great results with PMK and Rollo, that if it ain't broke...
    Kerik Kouklis
    Platinum/Gum/Collodion
    www.kerik.com
    2014 Workshop Schedule Online

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Greenville, SC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    4,813
    Images
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Slade
    Short of PMK, which I am tempted to jump into anyway, are there other developers and times which might result in a slightly contrastier negative?

    Just looking for some general feedback about the brushing development technique and maybe some ideas about rating the FP4 and development.

    (
    I don't know what process you are developing for, but even it is for Pt./Pd. you could get plenty of contrast even in very low contrast scenes with a non-staining developer like D-76 1:1. Getting the right contrast involves nothing more and nothing less than understanding the necessary ES of your printing process, and how long you need to develop a given film in a specific developer to get the required density range.

    In other words, you don't need to switch developers, at least not at this point. You just need to increase time of development, or use a stronger dilution of the developer. It is really that simple.

    Also, do you have a lot of experience with brush development? If not, it really does not make much sense to me to be experimenting with a new method of development at the same time you are working with a new, and very large, format.


    Sandy

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Yorkville, Il
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    324
    For processing 11x14 it's come down to using Pyrocat HD @ 1:1:200 semi stand in three separate trays with a 4" .99 cent foam paint brush although I hear a 8" Hake brush is better. The brush development was the best way I could keep from scratching the notoriously soft Efke film. I'm using night vision goggles during all this so a single tray is probably what you'll want to stick with.

  10. #10
    Michael Slade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    502
    Quote Originally Posted by sanking
    I don't know what process you are developing for, but even it is for Pt./Pd. you could get plenty of contrast even in very low contrast scenes with a non-staining developer like D-76 1:1. Getting the right contrast involves nothing more and nothing less than understanding the necessary ES of your printing process, and how long you need to develop a given film in a specific developer to get the required density range.

    In other words, you don't need to switch developers, at least not at this point. You just need to increase time of development, or use a stronger dilution of the developer. It is really that simple.
    I am in complete agreement with this. I am getting a handle on the accuracy of the shutters, the development times, and just the basic physical operation of the camera. Lots to learn in a short time, but I feel I have a good grasp of it after 2 weeks of shooting. Quite a bit different than the 8x10, but mostly in terms of the physical 'grunt' it takes to get the camera operational, and the bit of a stretch it takes to focus.

    It is interesting to have to move around to the front of the camera to make any rise/fall adjustments and then move around to the back and see if you like what you did. Much different in that regard from the 4x5 I learned view camera movements on!

    Right now I'm developing for silver prints, but with the goal of pt/pd, VDB, carbon, etc... I want to establish a 'baseline' of comfort with all of the equipment, film and developing before I make my final tweaks for the negatives for different printing techniques.

    Quote Originally Posted by sanking
    Also, do you have a lot of experience with brush development? If not, it really does not make much sense to me to be experimenting with a new method of development at the same time you are working with a new, and very large, format.

    Sandy
    I'm not really sure that you need to have a lot of experience with the brush development to make it work well. The soft brush and gentle random brush strokes are giving me perfectly even development. Other than changing out the brush for a hake brush (I can't even find a decent hake brush in Rexburg, Idaho), I wouldn't change anything about the technique, or even second guess doing it in the first place.

    The results w/out the brush were disasterous, and I don't feel it's worth the risk of ruining more negatives just to try to get the agigation in the tray to work. Hake brush purchase coming up later today now that I'm back in Salt Lake for the weekend.

    Thanks for the feedback about the staining developers. I'll get some of it and prepare to use it in a while.

    I made two more views last night driving down yesterday evening. Photographed the Red Rock Pass where ancient Lake Bonneville drained northward into the Snake River valley. Should be a nice addition to my Great Salt Lake project.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin