Sure, but Ilford arrived at the ISO of 1000 using ID-11 and not Rodinal. I simply gave this suggestion, because the OP was interested in a way to arrive at EI 800. HP5 is also great at 800 in Microphen 1+1, but these days I tend to prefer the former.
I always thought pushing/pulling depended on what sort of range you wanted to acheive. I don't remember where I read it (maybe Adams?), but the author characterized pushing and pulling as expansion and compression.
OK, i am gonna give that a test sooner or later, i hope this week, i will choose one film but i have to see which developer i have will use for this purpose.
Now how i should do it, using 400ASA film and exposed it for 800, then develop as it is 400 or 800? I think there are EI datasheet for each film or each developer i can follow, is this the way to do it?
Checking up my films, i chose 4 films to vote for which one to use for push procoess: TMAX400, Tri-X400, HP5 and Delta400.
Originally Posted by martinez
Low contrast - you expand the contrast by either just developing longer, or a combination of less exposure and longer developing time.
High contrast - you contract the contrast range by over-exposing (to capture shadows), and less developing time, possibly with longer agitation intervals.
That is the way to achieve normal contrast from all kinds of lighting conditions, and is one use of expansion and contraction.
The other use is that you wish to achieve something different than normal negatives. You could want more contrast even from a normally lit scene, in which case you could either develop more, or combine lower exposure with more developing time, which stretches the contrast range out far enough that you exceed the limits of your printing paper/developer combination, for some pure paper white highlights, and some pure black low values - both without detail. In some instances this could be desirable and preferred to a normal contrast negative.
Now we've moved away from the realm of technically correct, and into an area of visual preference. Both are equally valid in my opinion, and a question of what we like or don't like. It's so important to wander into the unknown sometimes, and try to push our materials to the limit and beyond, so that we can find out for ourselves what we like and don't.
"...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera".
- Yousuf Karsh
"We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit".
Originally Posted by TareqPhoto
“The contemplation of things as they are, without error or confusion, without substitution or imposture, is in itself a nobler thing than a whole harvest of invention”
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
if you expose tmy or trix at 800 chances are you won't even notice the difference.
kodak used to suggest processing them for the same time ...
( if you search ' i exposed my film at 800 by mistake, instead of 400 ' you will see
all sorts of responses that say ' process normally don't worry about it ' )
just shoot a test roll and see what you like ..
OK, because HP5 is one of my favorite films over Tri-X i decided to use it for this test, now how can i compensate or shoot HP5+ for ASA 800 or 1000? Later i will decide which developer i will use.
Set your meter at 800, shoot the roll. Unless you use a developer like Acufine, once you select a developer add 50% to the base time for each push. So if you are using D76, ID11 at 7.5 add 3.75 for a toatal of 11.25. If you want to push 2 stops to 1600 you add another 50% or 5.6 to the 11.25 for a total of 16.85 or just round up to 17.
I did shoot HP5 for 800, i am not sure if the metering was fine, so later i will decide which developer i will use, Ilfosol 3 is open and ready but i feel it is not so great, i have ID-11 which i feel i want to start this one, Diafine i will keep it for something else even it is one of great for push.
I am thinking to shoot another film now, Tri-X, but i am planning to push that to 1000 or 1600 instead of 800.
You might consider Txi X in Dinafine, I also had good results in HC 110.