Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,936   Posts: 1,585,628   Online: 744
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 24
  1. #11
    ath
    ath is offline
    ath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    890
    If you want strong s-shaped curves try some Rollei 80S or Superpan 200 (and probably all the other film originally intended for aerial surveillance).
    Regards,
    Andreas

  2. #12
    Richard Sintchak (rich815)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    San Francisco area (Albany, California)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,264
    Images
    1
    I would agree with many above that developer choice is less important than exposure and development technique, and your result will depend even more on how you apply that to the lighting situation you have. As a good starting point I'd throw out there the initial suggestion of pulling back a little at exposure time (i.e., shooting a 400 speed film at 200) and developing for 10-30% less time than standard. At least I've found that to help preserve some nice even tonality.
    -----------------------

    "Well, my photos are actually much better than they look..."

    Richard S.
    Albany, CA (San Francisco bay area)

    My Flickr River of photographs
    http://flickriver.com/photos/rich815...r-interesting/

    My Photography Website
    http://www.lightshadowandtone.com

  3. #13
    artonpaper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    325
    Images
    135
    What about Rodinol? Great with Tri-X. Several different dilutions, each giving subtle, but different results. I always use at 1:31. I've never liked D-76. Does that make me an atheist in a bible class?

  4. #14
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    Yes! Heathen!
    Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.

    http://www.flickr.com/kediwah

  5. #15
    artonpaper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    325
    Images
    135
    I'm doing my part for crowd control in heaven. Your tag line says all, really.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Los Alamos, NM
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,075
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold33 View Post
    That's true. But...



    That's not so true. The perception of contrast is greatly sensitive to the context: if you put a well-illuminated egg on a black or on a white piece of paper, the contrast of his volume will not be the same as if you put it on a grey paper. The straight curve of modern films is thus indirectly responsable for loss of contrast perception in mid-tones (compared with old films). From a physical point of view, there is no difference, but the human eye makes it.

    Given the fact that all these films are very (too much) consistent in their contrast progression (for my taste), I wonder how to make them a little more "flat" or "soft" in the dark and illuminated areas.
    I do agree. That is what makes the question difficult. Real life application is not quite as stark as the example, but the principle is quite important. That means that a lot depends on technique and the kind of pictures you take. A shot with lots of contrasty detail is much different than one with large contrasty blocks or one having slow gradations. Acutance developers, compensating developers, and regular fine-grain developers will produce quite noticeably different negatives of any subject with fine detail or fine contrasts. For most work, the ordinary developers like D-76 or Xtol (or even DK-50) will give excellent results. When there is fine contrast, an acutance developer or a compensating developer may help bring it out, but these can easily be overdone. Some feel that the masking effects of pyro stain (as with PMK) help to give smooth midtones. You just have to experiment until you learn the correspondence between your film, the subject, and the developer. If you shoot roll film, shoot 20 or so rolls and develop them in a few of the more common, general purpose developers; then choose which you like best and stick with it for a while. For sheet film, that is also a good way to start, but you can get fussier depending on the subject.

  7. #17
    MaximusM3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    NY
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    756
    Images
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by artonpaper View Post
    What about Rodinol? Great with Tri-X. Several different dilutions, each giving subtle, but different results. I always use at 1:31. I've never liked D-76. Does that make me an atheist in a bible class?
    Oh yeah, Doug! The honest grain developer, to rule them all!

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    2,820
    One expands midtone contrast simply by overdevelopment (plus development). Simple enough.
    But then the question becomes the fate of the highlights and deep shadows, and whether or not you can print detail in them if desired. Underexpose/overdevelop and you might get deep shadows with good midtone and highlight expansion. Perception of detail will depend upon edge effect, acutance, subject texture, all kinds of nuances. But an S-curve doesn't necessarily equate to any of this. A long straight line or upswept curve is easier to work with in this respect, or you might
    blow out the highlights.

  9. #19
    EASmithV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Maryland
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,885
    Blog Entries
    4
    Images
    123
    Quote Originally Posted by clayne View Post
    D-76, XTOL... *not* HC-110
    why not HC110?
    www.EASmithV.com

    "The camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera."— Dorothea Lange
    http://www.flickr.com/easmithv/
    RIP Kodachrome

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    NYC
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    413
    Quote Originally Posted by EASmithV View Post
    why not HC110?
    I wondered about that too. HC-110 may have softer contrast in the toe than a lot of developers, but as far as mid-tone and highlight contrast and micro-contrast I actually can't think of a non-specialized developer that exhibits more of it. That is, w/ the standard off the shelf films.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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