Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,827   Posts: 1,582,072   Online: 842
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 20 of 20
  1. #11
    jd callow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Milan
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,002
    Images
    117
    I'm wrestling with my POS scanner as I type this...

    *

  2. #12
    jd callow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Milan
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,002
    Images
    117
    here are two. I'll have more later...


    Father Daughter thing...


    Cute little girl thing...
    Last edited by jd callow; 06-22-2008 at 07:35 PM. Click to view previous post history.

    *

  3. #13
    Rolleiflexible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York City
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,274
    Images
    31
    JD, do you also use HC-110 at more conventional
    dilutions and processing methods? If so, what
    differences do you see between these negatives
    and the ones processed conventionally with this
    developer? I process all my 400TX roll film with
    HC-110 (5/8 oz syrup into 900 ml water @68F,
    for six minutes, agitating every 30 seconds,
    for 400TX exposed at EI 200) and am curious
    how your new approach might affect the
    negatives.

    Sanders

  4. #14
    Lee L's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,244
    Sanders,

    Not to be glib, but since you have experience and certain expectations with your combo, why not take the hour or two to test a roll of 400TX with John's methods and let us know what differences you see? I'd be interested in your observations as well, and 400TX and TXP are different films anyway, so the additional info would be nice to have. (Now I gotta go figure out the dilution ratio of 5/8 oz in 900 ml.) ... about 1:50 for US fluid ounces, so close to dilution E.

    Lee
    Last edited by Lee L; 06-22-2008 at 11:21 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  5. #15
    Rolleiflexible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York City
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,274
    Images
    31
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee L View Post

    Not to be glib, but ...
    Lee, yeah, I had the same thought
    after posting the comment. :-)

    I'm about to go away on holidays
    for a couple of weeks so I won't
    have an opportunity to process
    film again for awhile.

    Sanders

  6. #16
    Lee L's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,244
    Quote Originally Posted by Rolleiflexible View Post
    I'm about to go away on holidays
    for a couple of weeks so I won't
    have an opportunity to process
    film again for awhile.

    Sanders
    Same here. I haven't done much HC-110 in years, so I wouldn't be much help on the comparison bit anyway unless I ran both the A and B versions of the tests. I also have more faith in judging results when there's long experience involved with at least one set of conditions.

    Nice to see you back and posting occasionally.

    Lee

  7. #17
    jd callow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Milan
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,002
    Images
    117
    D76 1:3 has always been my dev for txp. I'm one of those folks who tended to learn just enough about film/dev combo's to get printable negs. I also never could get box film speed from my b/w film. D F Cardwell explained the differences of D76, xtol and HC-110 and that I should be able to get box speed via semi-stand. So my first of a couple experiments are finding these things out for myself.
    Last edited by jd callow; 06-22-2008 at 07:36 PM. Click to view previous post history.

    *

  8. #18
    df cardwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Dearborn,Michigan & Cape Breton Island
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,342
    Images
    8
    My ears were buzzing.

    HC-110 is a perfect developer to show the effects of minimal agitation,
    and to me, the greatest value of it is NOT acutance FX (HC110 is pretty immune from FX)
    but to change the shape of the tone curve.

    You can make these assumptions about the process:

    1. Dilution has no effect on the curve shape OR the contrast.
    If you increase the dilution, and increase the development time,
    and use the same proportion of the time agitating the film,
    you'll get the same CI at any dilution.

    2. To increase the relative shadow density,
    maintain the same midtone density, and reduce the highlight density,
    increase the development time BUT reduce the agitation.

    3. The practical limit for 120 film is a 5 minute rest cycle (this varies with developers,
    but HC110, Rodinal, and most other common developers, seem to be good for this.
    This assumes steel reels. My tests long ago showed that 10 to 20 minute cycles produced
    graduated densities WITH 120 but never at 5 minutes. Sandy King uses 3 minute cycles, which is safer still.
    There doesn't seem to be much difference with 5 or 10 seconds of agitation, just be consistent.

    4. There is little difference between a negative made with 5 minute cycles and 10 minute cycles.
    The difference between 5 minutes and 1 minute is great.

    Here, then, are your constants:
    -ISO speed for your EI (determined at mid tone densities)
    -5 minute rest cycles, with 10 seconds of agitation to begin, and at each cycle.
    Assume either the dilution or the time you want, and testing will quickly determine the final value.

    If you have a syringe and plug, you can easily measure out 10ml of HC-110. 1+50 measures up easily.
    If I remember, Adams used 1+63. Dilution F shouldn't make much difference, just take longer.

    Using minimal agitation with TXP, with its 'portrait curve', that ski jump curve that compresses the shadows and expands the highlights, softens the abrupt and sometimes harsh effect TXP has. It will never drop to a straight line, but it gives another tool to get the most from a remarkable film.

    This is fun, John

    d
    "One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid,
    and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision"

    -Bertrand Russell

  9. #19
    Lee L's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,244
    And for further info along the same lines Don mentions here see:
    http://www.apug.org/forums/forum37/1...-dilution.html
    http://www.apug.org/forums/forum37/2...-dilution.html
    Arnold Gassan worked out a way of controlling contrast with HC-110 by dilution, with processing times held constant.

    I had heard that HC-110 didn't give the acutance effects of other developers, but haven't tested it for myself with semi-stand.

    One other thing that I've meant to test, but never have taken the time for, is agitation differences with a full or partially full roll film tank. It seems logical to me that inverting a full tank is significantly less agitation than inverting a 1/2 or 2/3 full tank.

    Lee

  10. #20
    df cardwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Dearborn,Michigan & Cape Breton Island
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,342
    Images
    8
    I think Gassan's method works because the relationship of agitation to time diminishes as the dilution increases, at least that's how Rodinal does. Gassan was a wizard.
    "One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid,
    and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision"

    -Bertrand Russell

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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