Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,011   Posts: 1,524,660   Online: 866
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 27
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    The End of the World
    Shooter
    Sub 35mm
    Posts
    242
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Athiril View Post
    I've gotten great results from HC-110 and @ EI 3200, at high temp processing with some thiocyanate added to the mix.
    3200ASA in HC-110? Now that's something I'd like to see! Have you got any to show, please?

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    The End of the World
    Shooter
    Sub 35mm
    Posts
    242
    Images
    1
    flatbed scan of tri-x slide. black level set using the black of the film edge. this is the Ilford PQ Universal version. Any comments, ideas for improvement, please?

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	tri-x reversal single frame PQ small.jpg 
Views:	36 
Size:	435.8 KB 
ID:	63626

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Paris
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    70
    Looks better! How come, I tried PQ once, with Ilford FP4+, the Ilford method actually, and the slides were muddy and grey...You diluted 1:5 or 1+5 ? Ilford says 1+5 if I remember well.
    So the best frame was shot at what ASA, 200?

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    The End of the World
    Shooter
    Sub 35mm
    Posts
    242
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Tofek View Post
    Looks better! How come, I tried PQ once, with Ilford FP4+, the Ilford method actually, and the slides were muddy and grey...You diluted 1:5 or 1+5 ? Ilford says 1+5 if I remember well.
    So the best frame was shot at what ASA, 200?
    Tofek, yes I meant 1+5. Strange FP4+ was grey, you'd think it might have more punch than pulled TriX. What ASA did you use?

    As far as my results, they all look useable but I think 200ASA seems to have best overall balance. Of course this is still 35mm and the true test will be on Super 8.

    I think I should verify this test once more to see if I'm getting consistent results.

    I do remember getting more contrast and very crisp grain on Super 8 Tri-X when i tried this years ago with a Tetenal kit. The grain on these seems quite gentle.

    Tofek – are you going to try Adox Pan-X Reverso?

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	tri-x reversal strip001small.jpg 
Views:	19 
Size:	150.5 KB 
ID:	63630
    Last edited by mr.datsun; 02-04-2013 at 12:07 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Paris
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    70
    That's weird, I always thought the contrary : TriX as a contrasty film and FP4+ as a soft film, nevermind. I shot it as 100ASA, but I don't have the time I used with me now...I also use dichromate bleach so maybe this is why our results are different ?
    In super 8 I'm using reloadable cartridges "kaccema" so I only buy film in bulk. It's much cheaper than commercial cartridges, here in Europe. So Adox maybe some day...Up to now I was using Orwo UN54, and think about trying the Fomapan. But I didn't really succeed at getting good contrast (that Rodinal must be the reason!) so I might be buying another roll of the Orwo to fix it up, don't know yet
    Oh and btw, the TriX super 8 stock changed some years ago (5 maybe?) so perhaps that's why your results are different

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    The End of the World
    Shooter
    Sub 35mm
    Posts
    242
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Tofek View Post
    That's weird, I always thought the contrary : TriX as a contrasty film and FP4+ as a soft film, nevermind. I shot it as 100ASA, but I don't have the time I used with me now...I also use dichromate bleach so maybe this is why our results are different ?
    In super 8 I'm using reloadable cartridges "kaccema" so I only buy film in bulk. It's much cheaper than commercial cartridges, here in Europe. So Adox maybe some day...Up to now I was using Orwo UN54, and think about trying the Fomapan. But I didn't really succeed at getting good contrast (that Rodinal must be the reason!) so I might be buying another roll of the Orwo to fix it up, don't know yet
    Oh and btw, the TriX super 8 stock changed some years ago (5 maybe?) so perhaps that's why your results are different
    Tofek, I'm a bit confused on the contrast issue as I always thought fast films to be high contrast. But I spoke to someone at Silverprint who recommended paper developer as with faster films I'm going to lose contrast. At least this was in the context of our discussion on reversal. But I checked Tri-X and found it to be described as a medium contrast film. That along with losing contrast through lowering it's IE made me guess I needed the aggressiveness of the PQ. Hope to get my understanding of the issues cleared up one day.

    Another thing, though is that I always used Rodinal with HP5 35mm because I liked the flat grainy grey look it gave me.

    Yes, your experiences reversal processing have been quite different to mine so I don't know what that is down to. I don't know about the effect of the kind of bleach but one thing is niggling me about the bleach in my process. I forgot to lower the potassium permanganate percentage on the second test. I don't know if that affected the image quality.

    Reloadable carts. Sounds good. I wondered how you were doing test strips before you dev'd the whole film.

    Tri-X. Yes. I wish they'd go back to the old one. The new one is too forgiving, too smooth. i did everything I could to get it to go grainy with Rodinal and then with PQ – and failed.
    Last edited by mr.datsun; 02-04-2013 at 04:16 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Paris
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    70
    Yes I see your point now about pulling the TriX, thank you for the explanation.
    I guess I will have to give up on Rodinal, at least with the Orwo film...A shame since it's my only film developer and lasts for decades. But seeing your results makes me want to retry the PQ !

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    The End of the World
    Shooter
    Sub 35mm
    Posts
    242
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by mr.datsun View Post
    That along with losing contrast through lowering it's IE made me guess I needed the aggressiveness of the PQ. Hope to get my understanding of the issues cleared up one day.
    Of course I meant lowering its exposure - as it's being set at 200 ASA.

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    The End of the World
    Shooter
    Sub 35mm
    Posts
    242
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Tofek View Post
    In super 8 I'm using reloadable cartridges "kaccema" so I only buy film in bulk. It's much cheaper than commercial cartridges, here in Europe.
    Tofek,
    which film(s) are you getting in bulk? Are the kaccema hard to get hold of?

    Sodium Thiosulphate. I found this note on page about reversal processing:

    http://members.iinet.net.au/~forbes/reversal.html

    Basically the developers used in reversal processing are print developers with the addition of hypo (sodium thiosulphate), the amount of which should be varied to suit the film. I've read two accounts of what is accomplished by adding and varying the thiosulphate. One school of thought is that it increases the contrast of the developer, the other is that it reduces the density of the resultant image. It may be that both are true and that the density loss occurs more extensively in the highlights
    I'm confused about the idea that it might reduce density, as that would make a darker positive. But I wonder whether it be used to get a touch of contrast increase by clearing the hilights?
    Last edited by mr.datsun; 02-05-2013 at 05:15 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Paris
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    70
    By reducing density of the negative, the solvent will reduce the density of the positive, since it affects non reduced Ag+ : if I understood well, with potassium thiocyanate, SCN- reacts with the silver halides complex Ag(X) and forms Ag(SCN) + X-, thus making less silver prone to reduction available, which means less density, whether it's on the negative or positive. And since the amount added to the developer is around 2-5g, it's easy to put too much of it and spoil the density. That's what happened to me...but I guess if you add just the right amount it should clear highlights without spoiling the darks, increasing contrast. There's also the sodium thiosulphate which reacts the same, but one is stronger than the other, and I don't remember whether it's KSCN or Na2S2O3.
    Another variant I read about is using the solvent as a separate bath after bleach and clearing, what would this change? Maybe more control, since you can work in daylight at this stage?
    As for the film in bulk, I buy it from Wittner Cinetec, Germany. They have Orwo UN54, Fomapan and Agfa Scala 200X.

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