Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,901   Posts: 1,555,803   Online: 791
      
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 33
  1. #21
    baachitraka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Bremen, Germany.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,431
    Quote Originally Posted by thenikonknight View Post
    Here are the results from my 1st attempt using this combination.
    I used a Patterson 2 reel tank (two rolls were processed together). I used the following ratio:

    Rodinal 1+100 for 15 mins, agitation/inversion @ every 5th minute.

    1000ml water + 10ml Rodinal concentration.

    Start = 3 inversion
    5th Minute = 3 inversion
    10th Minute = 3 inversion
    15th Minute - pour out.

    Stop bath 20 seconds
    One quick water wash
    Fixer 5 mins
    5 Minute Wash - agitation constant for 1 minute cycles renewing water after every minute (Photo Flo added to last minute wash cycle).
    http://www.apug.org/forums/forum216/...-negative.html

    Above agitation scheme is indeed very good to get the shadow detail.

    Please note: The development time and agitation was given only for the dilution 1+50(my personal case, 300ml + 6ml) only.
    OM-1n: Do I need to own a Leica?
    Rolleicord Va: Humble.
    Holga 120GFN: Amazingly simple yet it produces outstanding negatives to print.

  2. #22
    thefizz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Trim, Ireland.
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,050
    Images
    37
    EI40, Rodinal 1:50, 15 minutes, lovely
    www.thephotoshop.ie
    www.monochromemeath.com

    "you get your mouth off of my finger" Les McLean

  3. #23
    thenikonknight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Sothern IL (for now) - It's still too dang cold here!
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    20
    Some other questions I had:

    - Should I start the timer while I am pouring in the developer solution - or wait until I have all of the solution in the tank?
    - I am using Clayton oderless fixer - does that make a difference?
    - How much total developer solution should I be pouring into the Patterson (2 reel) tank for processing - 600mL?

    ~ Thank you

  4. #24
    Zvonimir Ervacic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Croatia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    39
    Digital Truth site is a good starting point but I prefer to use Ed Buffaloe recommended developing times and developing procedure (explained on pages) for PMK and Rodinal developers. He use diffuse head enlarger, I use condenser head enlarger so I reduce developing time by 10%. If the shooting situation were not difficult regarding contrast I usually get negatives that are printable on Fotokemika Emaks paper, Normal gradation. If not Soft or Hard graded paper help. :-) At least excellent starting point that in my experience rarely need small tuning for printing on Normal graded paper.
    Here is recommended time for Rodinal:
    http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/De...s_rodinal.html

  5. #25
    baachitraka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Bremen, Germany.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,431
    Quote Originally Posted by thenikonknight View Post
    Some other questions I had:

    - Should I start the timer while I am pouring in the developer solution - or wait until I have all of the solution in the tank?
    - I am using Clayton oderless fixer - does that make a difference?
    - How much total developer solution should I be pouring into the Patterson (2 reel) tank for processing - 600mL?

    ~ Thank you
    Start the timer and pour the developer.

    For fixer, follow the recommendation from the the manufacturer.

    If you are developing two rolls then 600ml of water + 12ml of developer, otherwise 300ml + 6ml for a roll. Before that make sure that your 'reels' are submerged completely with given amount of water.
    OM-1n: Do I need to own a Leica?
    Rolleicord Va: Humble.
    Holga 120GFN: Amazingly simple yet it produces outstanding negatives to print.

  6. #26
    thenikonknight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Sothern IL (for now) - It's still too dang cold here!
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    20
    Here's the results of developing Pan F+ using the Massive Development chart. Although the negatives are somewhat improved, it seems there is a cast on the negative.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	pan F + using MDC times.JPG 
Views:	68 
Size:	43.8 KB 
ID:	48817

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,855
    What time, temp did you use? What agitation (I'm afraid to ask since there's been some bad advice here). This negative is muddy and very low in contrast.

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Bothell, WA
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    527
    Images
    1
    Are these scans of the negative or of a print? Either way, these scans seem off (or the print if the print looks the same way). It looks like you have a fair amount of detail here but the contrast is way off.

  9. #29
    Mark Fisher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Chicago
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,631
    Images
    152
    Quote Originally Posted by thenikonknight View Post
    Here's the results of developing Pan F+ using the Massive Development chart. Although the negatives are somewhat improved, it seems there is a cast on the negative.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	pan F + using MDC times.JPG 
Views:	68 
Size:	43.8 KB 
ID:	48817
    I agree with Brian. There is detail everywhere so the film exposure is adequate, but the contrast is pretty low. What grade paper did you end up printing on? If it is higher than grade 3, then try developing about 10-20% more and that will increase the contrast. If it is a neg sacn, you have all the information there so you should be able to make the proper adjustments in Photoshop. Back when I used to scan negs, I found that the images out of the scanner were pretty much always flat, the they printed nicely.

    I use Rodinal for everything I do now. I find that Digital Truth numbers for 1:50 are pretty much spot on to get grade 2 (condenser) or 3 (diffusion) for the way I print.

  10. #30
    thenikonknight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Sothern IL (for now) - It's still too dang cold here!
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    20
    Like I stated before, for this batch of negatives, I used the Massive Dev. chart for times and temps. I have not printed any images out yet. These are scans of the negative. I am wondering if my scanner may be an issue. I am using an older Epson perfection 2400 photo. I don't have the funds to justify a film scanner. I was able to clean this image up, as I was with the others from these 2 rolls. Here are the results. I will continue with Pan F+ and Rodinal combination until I am finished with this batch and maybe experiment with another film. BTW - my negatives for these 2 rolls do not look muddy but rather have a nice amount of detail vs. my last 2 rolls processed. My personal favorite was Kodak Tech Pan with Technidol (I still have a roll of 100' in the freezer that I am saving for the right time). I have not seen another 35mm format film come close.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	pan F + using MDC times edited.JPG 
Views:	33 
Size:	69.6 KB 
ID:	48916
    Last edited by thenikonknight; 04-03-2012 at 08:34 PM. Click to view previous post history.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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