Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,554   Posts: 1,545,008   Online: 735
      
Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 67
  1. #11
    kchoquette's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Lee, MA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    38
    Interesting! I've been lead to believe that D76 yields the clearest negatives, which is pretty important to me. As for HC-110, from what I can see off of Flickr, people seem to be getting the clearest results with dilution B. Apart from the concentration amount, I can't figure out what it is that makes it so clear sometimes and then other times, it's grain all over the place! And don't even get me started on the Tri-X curl, it's almost cruel!

    As for this current roll of HP5+ I have, what would be the best way--using Rodinal in order to get a less grainy negative? Loss of contrast is fine, as that's nothing Photoshop can't fix up in half a second.

  2. #12
    Richard Sintchak (rich815)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    San Francisco area
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,986
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by kchoquette View Post
    Interesting! I've been lead to believe that D76 yields the clearest negatives, which is pretty important to me. As for HC-110, from what I can see off of Flickr, people seem to be getting the clearest results with dilution B. Apart from the concentration amount, I can't figure out what it is that makes it so clear sometimes and then other times, it's grain all over the place!
    Likely how the film was exposed, and also the time in developer.
    -----------------------

    "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

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Oklahoma, USA
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    680
    I was under the impression that stand developing might yield some better results in regards to tightening up some grain--which is actually my primary concern, moreso than contrast. Let me clarify by saying that there is MUCH more grain in my HP5+ negatives than my Tri-X.
    Mr. Koch is right about dilution and contrast. My experience is HP-5 initially looks sharper as the grain is more prominent than Tri-X. Even enlarging D-76 developed -135 negs to 8x enlargement factor HP-5 grain intrudes if using a condenser enlarger. So type film is a factor.

    But your question is how to reduce Rodinal enhanced HP-5 grain with the end use a scan. Avoid overdevelopment/overexposure. Develop at 1:50 ratio and shoot near the -135 film box speed. Use a tripod vs increasing the EI. If you want a Ralph Gibson look someone in APUG may post his technique and type materials.
    Last edited by Richard Jepsen; 02-24-2013 at 08:30 AM. Click to view previous post history.
    RJ

  4. #14
    kchoquette's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Lee, MA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    38
    Thanks so much, everyone. I really appreciate all the help. I would certainly lean towards developing in D76, if I shot often enough to make use of the solution--which is why I think one-shot and liquid type developers are best for my purposes.

    I've ordered some HC-110 as I've seen a lot of results on Flickr that I absolutely love using it. The below is a perfect example of the exact range and tone I would love to achieve from my Tri-X or any b/w shots.

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/carstenbeier/7434338396/

    Now all I have to do is figure out a way to get rid of the absolutely HORRIBLE curl I get from my Tri-X negatives! Maybe I'll check out Neopan 400 in the future.

  5. #15
    cliveh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    3,321
    Images
    343
    Quote Originally Posted by kchoquette View Post
    Thanks so much, everyone. I really appreciate all the help. I would certainly lean towards developing in D76, if I shot often enough to make use of the solution--which is why I think one-shot and liquid type developers are best for my purposes.

    I've ordered some HC-110 as I've seen a lot of results on Flickr that I absolutely love using it. The below is a perfect example of the exact range and tone I would love to achieve from my Tri-X or any b/w shots.

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/carstenbeier/7434338396/

    Now all I have to do is figure out a way to get rid of the absolutely HORRIBLE curl I get from my Tri-X negatives! Maybe I'll check out Neopan 400 in the future.
    Stick with D76, use 1:1 and discard, also forget stand development.

    “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”

    Francis Bacon

  6. #16
    Richard Sintchak (rich815)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    San Francisco area
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,986
    Images
    1

    Stand development times for HP5+ in Rodinal?

    Quote Originally Posted by kchoquette View Post
    Thanks so much, everyone. I really appreciate all the help. I would certainly lean towards developing in D76, if I shot often enough to make use of the solution--which is why I think one-shot and liquid type developers are best for my purposes.

    I've ordered some HC-110 as I've seen a lot of results on Flickr that I absolutely love using it. The below is a perfect example of the exact range and tone I would love to achieve from my Tri-X or any b/w shots.

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/carstenbeier/7434338396/
    Those are some seriously blow out highlights and blocked up shadows if you ask me...
    -----------------------

    "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

  7. #17
    kchoquette's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Lee, MA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    38
    Quote Originally Posted by rich815 View Post
    Those are some seriously blow out highlights and blocked up shadows if you ask me...
    I totally agree about the shadow detail being way too extreme. The contrast is definitely a little on the strong end, but I'd be damned if it wasn't achieved in post. I'm not going for as strong of a contrast but the lack of grain here is definitely something I've yet to get out of my own negatives.

  8. #18
    macandal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    150
    Quote Originally Posted by wilfbiffherb View Post
    just leave it for an hour and a half with 3 inversions halfway throughout the cycle. it wont get you the best negative you could get but it will give you workable results.
    I am thinking of doing this developing time for HP5 in Rodinal at the dilution 1:100. How important is it that I do the inversions? What happens if I simply pour the developer into my tank (I'm doing 4x5) and let it be for 90 minutes, no agitation at all? Would the lack of agitation--even if it's just one at the 45 minute mark--affect in any way the results?

    (Another way of asking this would be, what is that single agitation midway through the process doing to the developing of the film?)

    Thanks.
    --Mario

  9. #19
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,336
    Images
    225

    Stand development times for HP5+ in Rodinal?

    Quote Originally Posted by macandal View Post
    I am thinking of doing this developing time for HP5 in Rodinal at the dilution 1:100. How important is it that I do the inversions? What happens if I simply pour the developer into my tank (I'm doing 4x5) and let it be for 90 minutes, no agitation at all? Would the lack of agitation--even if it's just one at the 45 minute mark--affect in any way the results?

    (Another way of asking this would be, what is that single agitation midway through the process doing to the developing of the film?)

    Thanks.
    One minute initial agitation, then one full slow inversion every 20 minutes for 1 hour (so 3 inversions)...

    HP5+ in Rodinal 1:100

    This is what happens...

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	ImageUploadedByTapatalk1397784192.329344.jpg 
Views:	66 
Size:	149.4 KB 
ID:	86392

    90 minutes may be too long.

    I've heard of 1:200 for 2 hours with nothing after the initial agitation but have never tried it.
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Southern USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,840
    Kodak designed HC-110 to produce results as close to D-76 as possible. The following site quotes from a Kodak document describing the developer and lots of other information With HC-110 you have the convenience of a concentrate that lasts practically forever and a one-shot developer for consistent results. On the other hand D-76 lasts for only about six months and its action varies measurably with time.

    http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/hc110/
    A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral.

    ~Antoine de Saint-Exupery

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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