Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,693   Posts: 1,548,958   Online: 773
      
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Miami, Florida
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    162

    Tonight I blew it using D:76

    After almost a year with no drastic mistakes, tonight I blew it. I forgot to dilute D-76 and ended up using it at full strength. To make matters worse I was looking to boost contrast so I processed at N+1 (not realizing) Boy I never seen a negative so contrasty like the one I ended up with. I completely blew the sky up If printed I have absolute white space where sky/clouds should be. I'm thinking of printing the clouds and sky from another negative. What do you think ?
    I learned one thing from this. Full strength D:76 give much higher contrast at normal or N+ processing. Maybe prints will be dramatic if I find a sky equally strong. ?

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Warsaw. Poland
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    3
    Try Farmer's Reducer.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    North Yorkshire, England
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    721
    Try first printing the negative and 'burning' in the sky. By that I mean holding something over the remainder of the negative about 6" above and giving the sky extra exposure. It is quite a simple technique and to get the best out of a negative I have to do it most of the time. If the horizon is uneven, i.e. not a straight line mark out the horizon on a piece of paper and cut around the mark and hold this over the section where you don't want to increase the exposure. The line you mark out should be about half size of the intended print to allow for the card not to block everything out when it is above the image when being printed.. It doesn't have to be exact, a little unevenness will help to avoid a marked line. Make sure you move the card around during this extra exposure to avoid this hard line.

    The times I have tried Farmers Reducer on a negative (Very few) I have always finished up with a more grainy negative and you will have plenty of that anyway, and if you over do the Farmers there is no going back and the negative is more or less toast.

  4. #4
    Helinophoto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Norway
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    563
    Images
    20
    perfect negative for lith printing then.

    Try 4-5 rounds of 1 minute exposures in the darkroom with a proper lith-paper and see what you can get ^^
    -
    "Nice picture, you must have an amazing camera."
    Visit my photography blog at: http://helino-photo.blogspot.com

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Miami, Florida
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    162
    I don't think burning in the sky would work as the negative (upon inspection on light table) is absolute pitch black with no trace of details whatsoever... and farmer reducer which I never used but common sense tells me that it would not bring detail back where it doesnt exist in the first place... but since I never used it, is it possible that I might start seeing detail where I could not see it now ? just wondering.
    Now, I dont know what lith-paper is and what it does, so I will research this to find out what is it about.

  6. #6
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,236
    If there is very little detail in the sky, then the increased development will enhance it. Perhaps the sky was overexposed on to the shoulder. I'd print it and see before drawing conclusions.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Lower Earth
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,018
    Your idea of using another neg w/ a good sky to go w/ your current neg is an old established idea. Sounds good to me. Years ago I read about a photographer from 100 years ago or so that did the same thing religiously, and several of his really good prints all have the same skies. I always use D76 full strength. It's confusing looking at the directions for developing on the box because they list 4 different types of Tri-X on there! At any rate, I normally go w/ 7 minutes at 70 degrees w/ full strength in D76. Don't use this as your development times though, as I am sure your agitation scheme and local water is totally different than mine, but it's as good a place as any to start. I'm not getting much extra contrast on my negs, assuming the times I have standardized are kept consistent and assuming I exposed it properly. This is all for 35mm. For 120 I tend to give it a little extra time in the developer to punch up the contrast a little. You can get away w/ that w/ 120 because t looks so smooth anyway, compared to 35mm.

    One issue I have w/ D76 is that after a few weeks at room temp I start to get problems. Sometimes it's weaker, other times it seems to cycle up and give more contrast. So if it's anything important I mix up a fresh batch, let it set overnight, and get perfect negs every time.
    Last edited by momus; 09-02-2013 at 01:44 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Miami, Florida
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    162
    Since I thought I had diluted but didn't, I processed at standard time 9:45 but then I also raised a zone using N+1 my final time was 12:40. When I metered the brightest part of the sky was in zone 7 I was ok raising to zone 8. But the wrong development I believe increased it beyond detail.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    North Yorkshire, England
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    721
    Quote Originally Posted by lhalcong View Post
    I don't think burning in the sky would work as the negative (upon inspection on light table) is absolute pitch black with no trace of details whatsoever... and farmer reducer which I never used but common sense tells me that it would not bring detail back where it doesnt exist in the first place... but since I never used it, is it possible that I might start seeing detail where I could not see it now ? just wondering.
    Now, I dont know what lith-paper is and what it does, so I will research this to find out what is it about.
    Believe me there will be detail there, but if the negative is so very dense the burning in will take a long time. Years ago (1964) I was using a 4x5 Micropress as part of my work and the film was Tri X. I had set the film speed at 100 but used one of the old PF60 flash bulbs when shooting at close distance. The resulting negative was so dense the exposure for 10x12 print even with a 4 x 5 negative was in minutes rather than seconds. There will be detail, you just have to work at it to get it out.

  10. #10
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,925
    There may or may not be detail. What's the film? With t-grain films they have such a long straight line there is likely to be detail available, albeit quite grainy. Even they do reach a shoulder though and some films still have a pretty dramatic shoulder.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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