Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,291   Posts: 1,535,438   Online: 830
      
Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1
    OMU
    OMU is offline

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Norway
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    744
    Images
    67

    Same developement time for 35 mm and 120 mm?

    I have been testing my E.I for FP4+, HP5+, Delta 100 and Delta 400 with my Leica and Hasselblad. (Using HC 110 in Jobo)

    FP4+ has an E.I at 80 both with my Leica (35mm) and my Hasselblad (120 mm). I have tested and found development time for N, N+1 and N-1 for the film exposed with the Leica. (35 mm)

    I suppose I don’t have to test the development times for the 120 mm?
    Thanks.

  2. #2
    Christopher Walrath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Milton, DE, USA
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    6,980
    Blog Entries
    29
    Images
    19
    Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry9000/4.6.0.167 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/102 UP.Link/6.3.0.0.0)

    For TMax films, 135 and 120 have identical developing times. You could consult Ilford publications o even the massive dev(elopment) chart to be sure.
    Last edited by Christopher Walrath; 04-09-2009 at 12:08 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    Thank you.
    CWalrath
    APUG BLIND PRINT EXCHANGE
    DE Darkroom

    "Wubba, wubba, wubba. Bing, bang, bong. Yuck, yuck, yuck and a fiddle-dee-dee." - The Yeti

  3. #3
    rossawilson1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    salisbury, UK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    154
    Just make sure you use more juice to cover the film, but same times.. indeed they are!

  4. #4
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,182
    I agree with the others that I have found contrast index to be very similar between film sizes. I have ascribed the small differences may arise from different technique. For example, if you only process a single 120 roll in a tank in which you process two 35mm rolls, the 120 may have a greater CI.

  5. #5
    OMU
    OMU is offline

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Norway
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    744
    Images
    67
    Thanks! As I thought.
    Would it be the same for my 4" x 5"?

  6. #6
    Christopher Walrath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Milton, DE, USA
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    6,980
    Blog Entries
    29
    Images
    19
    Generally 4x5 films require slightly more development than their smaller format counterparts. The most reliable source for info is still going to be your film manufacturer's literature. After that one's own experiences can personalize it somewhat.
    Thank you.
    CWalrath
    APUG BLIND PRINT EXCHANGE
    DE Darkroom

    "Wubba, wubba, wubba. Bing, bang, bong. Yuck, yuck, yuck and a fiddle-dee-dee." - The Yeti

  7. #7
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,182
    Maybe PE knows more, but the 4x5 Kodak film is thicker then the rollfilm. So, its not all cut from the same sheets or batches. Also, 4x5 is usually processed with a different method than rollfilm. Having said all that, my 4x5 T-max in an Expert Drum gives me about the same contrast index as T-max rollfilm in the 1500 drums, when using identical development times.

  8. #8
    OMU
    OMU is offline

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Norway
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    744
    Images
    67
    OK, I'll start with finding the development times for 35 mm and 120 mm and then do some testing for my 4" x 5" later. But from what you tell me, il expect times not far from what I’ve got from the smaller formats.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Woonsocket, RI USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,725
    Incidentally (and in an admittedly nit-picky way), the film format you're calling "120 mm" is just "120" (or "120 format"). There's nothing about it that measures 120mm, unless perhaps you measure two 6x6 frames. It's actually 60mm across. The "mm" designation does belong with 35mm film; or it can be referred to as 135 film (but not 135mm).

    Weird and inconsistent, I know -- but hey, this is a field in which 4x5 format is bigger than 6x6 format!

  10. #10
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,182
    Quote Originally Posted by srs5694 View Post
    -- but hey, this is a field in which 4x5 format is bigger than 6x6 format!
    ...and 6x6 is way bigger than 8 x 11 !



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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