Thanks to all of you for your time and help in this matter. By some chance I have found a film processing company that will do a transmission densitometer test on my negatives.
Here is what I’ve done and I am posting this before processing my film. I set up a gray card in deep shade, I set my 50mm lens to infinity and made sure that the card filled the view finder.
My reading was a hair under 125 at f 2.8. I set my shutter speed at a hair under 125 and since this “f” stop would give me a z5 I cranked my aperture down to f 16 (one under z1). Estimated ½ stops between marked f stops coming all the way back up to 125 at f 2.8 or 11 exposures all together. Then I did it again but only going from one ‘click’ f stop to the other for 7 exposures. I also put the lens cap on for four exposures to give me clear film base. Now I will process my film if that all sounds right to you folks and then I will have my film checked tomorrow morning and see what’s what.
After the densitometer reading I will adjust the ASA on my camera to reflect as close as possible the true film speed.
I will then tomorrow shoot a roll at z 8 and process my film for different times (checking with a densitometer or through contact prints?) and finally arrive at an optimum development time for FP4.
Whew! Could I have all this right? I’ll have to admit that pretty shortly into this exchange I was feeling in very deep water.
Ed, thank you and of course you’re right about calibration. I miss spoke in that I was not under the impression that my meter was “calibrated” any further than in a gross way. But at the present that’s all I want.
I have The Film Developing Cookbook by Anchell and Troop but what is disconcerting is that it seems what ever book I read or knowledgeable person I speak with I am given a different way to do things e.g. times, type and amount of agitation. For now I only want the simplest way to give me a ‘normal’ negative most of the time.
If I can get my meter, film and development somewhat synchronized then I feel I will have a firm base to work from for quite a while making modifications from a position of some understanding rather than a series of guesses.
Thanks again and how does that film exposure series that I described above sound as far as my going ahead and processing the film and taking it in to be analyzed?
Hmm, it appears at this point that I'm not posting my replys correctly am I?