Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,646   Posts: 1,481,275   Online: 856
      
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 45
  1. #11
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,983
    Images
    281
    It depends on the developer, and it will say on the chemistry package.

    I use Ethol LPD replenished, and I have to replenish with about 300ml of replenisher (which is stock solution diluted at 2parts stock to 1part water) every 30 8x10 prints.

    It is awesome developer that really gives a lot of capacity per liter of solution.
    "Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank

    "Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman

    "...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh

  2. #12
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    15,933
    Images
    148
    Quote Originally Posted by bsdunek View Post
    Well, it they are still developing then they aren't fully developed. I always learned to leave them in the developer until all action is complete. Now it could be that they will slowly gain density for a long time after I can't see any change. Maybe just a definition.
    With some papers this will be less critical, and with bromide papers you might well get away with working like that. However with Warm-tone papers the length of development has a very significant effect on image colour and tone, the shorter the dev time the warmer the image, extend the dev time and it gets colder, it also effects the contrast too.

    For critical work it's best to use a timer. But the important part is developing consistently and I guess your technique works for you.

    Ian

  3. #13
    wogster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Bruce Peninsula, ON, Canada
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,266
    Quote Originally Posted by bsdunek View Post
    Well, it they are still developing then they aren't fully developed. I always learned to leave them in the developer until all action is complete. Now it could be that they will slowly gain density for a long time after I can't see any change. Maybe just a definition.
    The problem with this is that you end up using development to compensate for poor exposures. There reallly is no difference between developing film to inspection and paper to inspection, in both cases, if your exposure is slightly under your effectively pushing the print, if your exposure is slightly under your effectively pulling the print. Where this gets to be a real problem is that when you make a series of prints, you see they are all different contrast and density. If you use time and temperature, then you are forced to get the exposure right and your prints will come out more uniform..
    Paul Schmidt
    See my Blog at http://clickandspin.blogspot.com

    The greatest advance in photography in the last 100 years is not digital, it's odourless stop bath....

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by wogster View Post
    The problem with this is that you end up using development to compensate for poor exposures. There reallly is no difference between developing film to inspection and paper to inspection, in both cases, if your exposure is slightly under your effectively pushing the print, if your exposure is slightly under your effectively pulling the print. Where this gets to be a real problem is that when you make a series of prints, you see they are all different contrast and density. If you use time and temperature, then you are forced to get the exposure right and your prints will come out more uniform..
    I could definitely see where this 'guess and check' method could get you in trouble when printing a series of the same print in order to keep consistency on par throughout the series.

  5. #15
    c6h6o3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    3,136
    Images
    6
    Amidol will never exhaust in the tray. It will be gone from carryover loss before that happens.

  6. #16
    wogster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Bruce Peninsula, ON, Canada
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,266
    Quote Originally Posted by brianmichel View Post
    I could definitely see where this 'guess and check' method could get you in trouble when printing a series of the same print in order to keep consistency on par throughout the series.
    Well, say you have 10 photographs from your series on collapsing barns, you want a certain level of consistency there as well, and as soon as you start pushing and pulling paper you will lose that. I think that was one of the motivators behind the zone system, if all of the negatives are a uniform density and contrast, then the prints will be easier to make, because the same exposure can be used and development time can be used.
    Paul Schmidt
    See my Blog at http://clickandspin.blogspot.com

    The greatest advance in photography in the last 100 years is not digital, it's odourless stop bath....

  7. #17
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,983
    Images
    281
    I believe both Kodak and Ilford publish how many prints a certain amount of developer can handle before you lose quality.
    With my developer I always use the same time, 2 minutes. I never change either that, or the temperature, and I religiously replenish it according to Ethol's instructions. I just have to make sure that my film exposure, film processing, and paper exposure is good enough. There are so many variables taking place during the paper exposure with contrast adjustments, dodging, burning, preflashing, cropping, lens settings, column height, etc, that changing development time would make all the work you do prior to souping the paper confusing. Keep that a constant (unless you use something like Amidol and Azo, where water bath is used to control contrast, or some glycin developers, where up to six minutes development time can and will drastically change how your print looks, and is a powerful tool).

    Keep the developer fresh. Use it according to the manufacturer's recommendations, and you should be trouble free.
    "Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank

    "Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman

    "...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh

  8. #18
    RalphLambrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    the villages .centralflorida,USA and Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,134
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by bsdunek View Post
    Well, it they are still developing then they aren't fully developed. I always learned to leave them in the developer until all action is complete. Now it could be that they will slowly gain density for a long time after I can't see any change. Maybe just a definition.
    Ian is correct. RC and FB-papers will continue to increase density in the developer way beyond their optimal development times. There really is no such thing as 'fully developed'. Paper continues to develop even after it has already started to fog. For FB paper, factorial development is the best approach to get to the optimal development time. RC development should be stopped after 90 to 120 seconds.
    Regards

    Ralph W. Lambrecht
    www.darkroomagic.comrorrlambrec@ymail.com[/URL]
    www.waybeyondmonochrome.com

  9. #19
    Martin Reed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    North London
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    325
    .....if there is a rule of thumb when processing exposed paper in chemicals and about how many pieces I can develop with the same tray of developer......

    When I was at college, which is going back a bit, I did an assignment to evaluate this. Using Ilfobrom paper (long discontinued) used an 'average' subject (ie not high or low key), & included a step wedge. Then exposed a good number of identical 8x10" prints & ploughed them through 1 litre of Ilford Bromophen at recommended dilution 1 + 3, completely processing one before the next & using normal dev. time, finished them & plotted the density of the wedges. It was actually almost exactly 40 8x10"s before the developer was truly finished, but the fall-off when it happened was quite abrupt over only a few prints, loss of density & increase in warmth.

    So 20 prints through a litre should be quite safe, there was no significant difference with the above test until maybe print 35.
    Last edited by Martin Reed; 07-11-2009 at 10:30 AM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: Added quote from post no. 1

  10. #20
    RalphLambrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    the villages .centralflorida,USA and Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,134
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Martin Reed View Post
    When I was at college, which is going back a bit, I did an assignment to evaluate this. Using Ilfobrom paper (long discontinued) used an 'average' subject (ie not high or low key), & included a step wedge. Then exposed a good number of identical 8x10" prints & ploughed them through 1 litre of Ilford Bromophen at recommended dilution 1 + 3, completely processing one before the next & using normal dev. time, finished them & plotted the density of the wedges. It was actually almost exactly 40 8x10"s before the developer was truly finished, but the fall-off when it happened was quite abrupt over only a few prints, loss of density & increase in warmth.

    So 20 prints through a litre should be quite safe, there was no significant difference with the above test until maybe print 35.
    I made the same experience with modern papers. That's why I use factorial development. It will compensate for the gradual loss developer intensity at the beginning. However, once the developer fails to produce Dmax, it's time for fresh developer.
    Regards

    Ralph W. Lambrecht
    www.darkroomagic.comrorrlambrec@ymail.com[/URL]
    www.waybeyondmonochrome.com

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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