Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,223   Posts: 1,532,508   Online: 1107
      
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 23
  1. #1
    lft
    lft is offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    26

    Exposing B+W at half ASA

    I have been using hp4+ and delta 400, exposing them at 200 asa. Should I use the box speed still, or use times as listed on the massive dev chart. I am using HC 110.

  2. #2
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,232
    Images
    148
    Many of us use these films at half box speed, your a lucky person to have HP4 still

    Use Ilford's recommendations they are more accuarte than The Mssive Developer Chart. Ilford list HC110.

    Ian

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,054
    Didn't HP-4 disappear in the mid 70's?

  4. #4
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,232
    Images
    148
    I cut my teeth on cheap HP3 and HP4, while at school in the late 60's/early 70's. I think we can safely say HP4+ is a typo or mistake and should be HP5+

    HP5 was a big improvement over HP4.

    Ian
    Last edited by Ian Grant; 04-01-2009 at 11:12 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  5. #5
    DJGainer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    151
    Images
    25
    Shoot a couple frames at different EIs (e.g. 200, 320, 400), develop the times you find on the box or on digital truth, and decide which image renders the shadow detail you want. Then fine tune your development time to get the highlight detail you want.

    EIs are a personal preference choice, so try to figure out what you like best.

  6. #6
    Vaughn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Humboldt Co.
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    4,631
    Images
    40
    Judge by your negatives and ease of printing. Shadow detail is determined by exposure, so if you are happy with what you are getting and the over-all contrast is what you want, keep doing what you are doing. If your shadows are more dense than you need, increase your ASA rating. Over-exposing is better than under-exposing, but it does increase the grain a little.

    You might want to bracket a nice "average" shot (at the equivilent of 200 and 400 ASA) and print each neg the best you can -- then compare.

    Vaughn
    At least with LF landscape, a bad day of photography can still be a good day of exercise.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    North Yorkshire, England
    Posts
    292
    Halving film speed has nothing to do with shadow detail or highlight detail. In a high contrast situation you cut down development time to keep the highlights under control. This can have the adverse effect of lowering the mid-tone values in the final print. "Overexposing " the film by one stop pushes these mid-tone values back up to where you want them. This is the reason for halving the film speed. Ansel Adams explained all this a long time ago....

    Alan Clark

  8. #8
    Anscojohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,727
    Images
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by lft View Post
    I have been using hp4+ and delta 400, exposing them at 200 asa. Should I use the box speed still, or use times as listed on the massive dev chart. I am using HC 110.
    ******
    Keep it simple by doing what you have done. Just be sure you so not over develop. For myself, I routinely rate 1/2 box speed then soup in straight D23 which is pretty good at not blowing away the highlights.
    John, Mount Vernon, Virginia USA

  9. #9
    lft
    lft is offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    26
    oops, i meant hp5+. sorry guys. and thanks for the answers

  10. #10
    Vaughn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Humboldt Co.
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    4,631
    Images
    40
    Actually, Allen, cutting the ASA in half is more about estimating the true/working ASA of one's film...which is dependent on developer, developing method, and even on how accurate one's shutter is, how well the lens transmits light, the age of the film, its exposure to heat and how long one waits between exposing and developing.

    That is about as Ansel Adams as one can get...

    The box ASA of a film is determined by an industry standard test. Vary from the conditions of this test, and one's actual working ASA will change...and just about any normal use of a film will deviate from the test. Plus if a film company is going to fudge a little on the ASA of one of its films, you can bet on them fudging a little upward.

    While testing the working ASA of one's film is the safest route, cutting the box speed in half is a safe bet with B&W film. But as I mentioned, in lieu of actual testing, it is better to slightly over-expose than under expose...and the best recourse is to judge one's results by checking out one's shadow detail on one's negatives.

    Vaughn
    At least with LF landscape, a bad day of photography can still be a good day of exercise.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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