Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,808   Posts: 1,581,511   Online: 1046
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 29
  1. #11
    RoBBo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    255
    Images
    8
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/falcon_awesome/535695259/
    Across in one of the most ridiculous high contrast scenes I've ever shot (the men playing chess are under an overhang and in a deep shadow.), you can see the full tonal range and nice separation.
    There's no way you're having it blow out on you in a 3 stop range unless you're simply messing up your development.

  2. #12
    gainer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    3,726
    Images
    2

    Acros range.

    I live in an area of woods and hills. My hill qualifies to be a mountain in some countries, and I live halfway up it. The brightness range of such scenes is considerably greater than most meter readings would lead one to believe. There are very small areas where the sunlight manages to sneak through. If you get close enough to measure them accurately, your meter's shadow may cause an error. I can understand, if your woods are like mine, how you might think you have a small scene brightness range. Perhaps it would be good to bracket the exposures and try different development times. If I am right, you will find what must be done. If I am wrong...well, there's a first time for everything. At any rate, I am quite sure that a photograph of a step density card will show that the range of your film is much greater than 3 steps.
    Gadget Gainer

  3. #13

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Daventry, Northamptonshire, England
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    7,147
    Please take this in the spirit of trying to help all of us to help you get to the bottom of your problem. However there has to be something contradictory in your description. You seem to be saying that the Acros neg and Tri-X neg look the same, carry the same level of detail but the print from Acros loses shadow detail and consists of too much black and white rather than a similar range of greys contained in the Tri-X print.

    All of this is happening in a scene with a subject brightness range(SBR) of only 4-5 stops? I think we can take it that Acros has the ability to handle such a small SBR so essentially we can rule out Acros film per se being the problem

    If you are also saying that you print on the same grade of identical paper with the same developer etc and arrive at an over contrasty print from the Acros neg then logically the Acros neg itself has to be more contrasty than the Tri-X. The two negs cannot be the same, surely, even if they look similar.

    Normally a test print can determine what the correct grade is or a B&W analyser. I'd be surprised if an analyser tells you that the grade of each is identical, resulting in one print losing shadow detail but the other retaining it. Such analysers would be useless. RH Designs would certainly be out of business!

    Have you tried reducing the grade from the Acros print? If not I'd try this. If the detail is there in the Acros neg then a softer grade should reveal this detail.

    As I have said, I am not trying to be rude but I think that there must be a flaw in your description of the facts.

    A densitometer should reveal whether the two negs are different but given your problem, I would have thought that one neg should look more contrasty to the eye to produce such a difference in the print.

    I hope we help you get to the bottom of your problem

    pentaxuser

    pentaxuser

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,879
    Images
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by Willie Jan View Post
    The highlights are to light. besides that the total impression of the photo is to dark as what we have seen on the spot.

    development in rodinal or pyro has the same problem where using tri-x shows a much lighter scene on paper (more realistic) than across. We are trying to get the same result as what we get with tri-x. But until now without result.

    we know what we are doing with development. change (+) exposure and shorter development also does not do the trick. The overall image stays to dark where tri-x shows a bright scene...

    Across is indeed a nice film (i use it allready for 5 years), but with nature scenes we want to show the reality....

    One solution would be to use tri-x, but we want to get the across right for this kind of job....
    You said - The highlights are to light.

    It sounds to me that you are probably overexposing the highlights (assuming that the higlights are too light in a print from the negative.)

    Also, what dilution of pyrocat are you using and what is your agitation procedure?
    Last edited by Tom Hoskinson; 07-06-2007 at 04:36 PM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: typos
    Tom Hoskinson
    ______________________________

    Everything is analog - even digital :D

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    205
    I've used acros with pyrocat and managed to record a huge brightness ranges with detail maintained all the way to the edge of the sun in the frame while keeping the foreground exposed correctly.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    839

    ACROS Developing

    My favorite developer for ACROS is Fuji Microfine, full strength. You can get it from the Megaperls webshop in Japan (www.unicircuits.com). It works fine with the film rated at 100. Another nice developer for ACROS is Ilford Microphen. It also gives a speed of at least 100. Shooting in shaded areas with b&w film and shooting various shades of green is tricky. If I had a choice I might prefer to use Tri-X in the 6X7 format rather than ACROS in 35mm. ACROS has very fine grain and extremely high sharpness but is tricky if your scene has too much or too little contrast. If you can't get Microfine try Microphen, bracket your exposures in 1/2 stop increments and makes notes on each exposure.

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,879
    Images
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by m_liddell View Post
    I've used acros with pyrocat and managed to record a huge brightness ranges with detail maintained all the way to the edge of the sun in the frame while keeping the foreground exposed correctly.
    I also obtain excellent results with Acros exposed in high SBR situations and developed in Pyrocat.
    Tom Hoskinson
    ______________________________

    Everything is analog - even digital :D

  8. #18

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Saskatoon, Sask, Canada
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    36
    I shoot a great deal in treed areas (primarily light-toned aspens), with light and shadow. I've used Acros, developed in Rodinal (Photographer's Formulary version, 1:100 or 1:125, minimal agitation method, 19 or more minutes) or Prescycol EF, and excepting exposure screw-ups on my part, had excellent tonal rendering and range. Mind you I don't print, but (sacre bleu!) scan with a Nikon 8000 and then use a digital darkroom. Therefore, I can't offer advice on printing, but can't believe that Acros is at fault.

  9. #19
    Willie Jan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Best/The Netherlands
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,911
    Images
    49
    Quote Originally Posted by RoBBo View Post
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/falcon_awesome/535695259/
    Across in one of the most ridiculous high contrast scenes I've ever shot (the men playing chess are under an overhang and in a deep shadow.), you can see the full tonal range and nice separation.
    There's no way you're having it blow out on you in a 3 stop range unless you're simply messing up your development.
    it could be my monitor, but when i adjust your photo (curve) so that the colors are more accurate (i find it to soft) the back also starts to disappear.
    This is no problem if you photo covers over 4 stops of light, but if not this is what i mean....
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails test.jpg  

  10. #20
    Willie Jan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Best/The Netherlands
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,911
    Images
    49
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Hoskinson View Post
    You said - The highlights are to light.

    It sounds to me that you are probably overexposing the highlights (assuming that the higlights are too light in a print from the negative.)

    Also, what dilution of pyrocat are you using and what is your agitation procedure?
    I use pyrocat HD at 1:1:100, 20 degrees C 19 minutes when exposed as 100, 15.5 minutes when exposed as 50asa.
    agitation first minute, after that 10 seconds each minute.

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