Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,572   Posts: 1,545,660   Online: 944
      
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 29
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    9

    Pulling Ilford HP5 Plus 400 ISO film to 12 ISO. Possible?

    Hi
    By mistake I exposed Ilford HP5 Plus 400 as ISO 12 :-(

    Do you have any idea how to rescue that film? It means how develop it.

    greetings

    JW
    Last edited by Niebylsamwlesie; 12-13-2012 at 04:35 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  2. #2

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Daventry, Northamptonshire, England
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    6,972
    You might try Perceptol stock. The time for EI 200 is 11 mins. You've managed 4 stops less than 200 so you might try, say 30% less than 11 mins

    I'd cut off the first few negs and develop them as above and then go from there.

    Just curiosity on my part but how did you manage to dial in 5 stops less than the box speed?

    pentaxuser

  3. #3
    Athiril's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Melbourne, Vic, Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,535
    Images
    28
    Yeah I've pulled film more than that, you just need to settle on a time and dilution, which means a test roll.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    548
    If it's critical stuff, shoot a different roll at that rate, test on that.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    719
    Why not go Rodinal or HC110 at a 1:100 dilution and let it stand for 30 minutes? IMO, this is a minimum risk dilution/time.

  6. #6
    BetterSense's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    North Carolina
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,867
    Just develop it about 30%-50% less than you usually do and get ready for a dense negative. You will have some grain but with multicontrast paper it should print fine.

    I have overexposed Tri-X by 9 stops (f/2 @ 1/30th in broad daylight) and still got pretty crunchy, but still recognizable, negative.
    f/22 and be there.

  7. #7
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,225
    As you know you can't alter the exposure already given to the negatives during the development stage. You will find when you print these negatives it will be similar to printing very underexposed negatives. The typical under exposed negative, when printed so the middle values are correct, will have no blacks. Likewise when printing your overexposed negatives for a correct middle value there will be no whites. The whites will be gray. Similarly if you print the whites as white, they middle values will be way too light.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,758
    The same way you can't really push film to any great degree, you can't pull it to any great degree. If you simply underdevelop a lot you will lose too much contrast. A speed decreasing developer might give you about a stop less speed, but I would not use Perceptol to do this because you're going to have a grainy negative in any case, and Perceptol will just make it mushy grain.

    Whatever developer you use, you might try reversing the procedures we normally when we try to maximize speed and reduce contrast. Dilution of the developer and intermittent agitation with a longer development time helps maximize speed for a given contrast level. So reversing this logic, you might consider a more concentrated dilution, with a shorter development time and continuous agitation. Testing would be required to find the right time so if this roll is really important do some testing on spare rolls first.

    In any case you'll still end up with a dense negative. The goal here is to try to get fairly normal contrast, and hopefully highlight detail assuming the highlights were not exposed beyond the scale of the film.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    164
    A couple of years ago i exposed a couple of sheets of HP5+, while my meter was still set to the 25 iso needed for the P55n in used in the previous shoot. After considering the alternatives - the drop in contrast because of a reduced development or a dense negative - i decided on a 10% shorter development time and accept the dense negative. It took some effort to print them, but i was still able to get decent results, with very good shadow detail indeed.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    9
    I forgot to mention that it was film Ilford film 13x18cm in my LF camera. I just swapped cassettes by mistake. That's all

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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