(accidentaly) underdeveloped film.....

Mirko Lazzarin · Oct 23, 2009

Hi all,
Like a dumb....:confused:......I have underdeveloped an HP5, by almost two minutes less than normal development time (11 mins in Rodinal 1+50)..Being quite new at this, could you please tell me if there is any way to recover the negative???
The details in the shadows are fairly defined, the lights do not look bad too (this is me judgement in in my poor experience)..but there is total lack of contrast of course..On top of that this negativce was surely in need of a little dev time more!

Thanks!

ps: I will come back to this post at night, I will not mean to be rude if I cannot reply straigth away!!

Thomas Bertilsson · Oct 23, 2009

The only thing I know is to intensify the negative using selenium toner.

ozphoto · Oct 23, 2009

Unfortunately, not a lot you can do with an underdeveloped negative; although you have said there is detail in the shadows and the highlights are ok as well. You may be able to print it up quite satisfactorily with a harder grade of paper as this will increase the contrast for you.

Don't worry - we have all made mistakes a t some stage; you learn from them really quickly too!
There's a thread here that lets you know all the stupid ones we've been able to accomplish - lots of red faces here on APUG.
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Enjoy!

Joe Lipka · Oct 23, 2009

If you can go out and re-do the photographs, that would be the best thing. If you try to intensify the negative, you will build up the density of the entire negative. You will just make the entire negative a little bit denser.

If you want to do it right, go back and re-shoot the session and pay attention to the development time and temperature. It will probably take you less time and money to do it right than to try and patch things up. Another side benefit of reshooting: I bet if you critically look at your compositions, you will be able to go back and improve on what you originally did. Better composition, better quality negatives - sounds like the right thing to do.

Robert Hall · Oct 23, 2009

There are several ways to intensify negatives. Bleach and redevelop is one of the ways I use with success. It can be as easy as using the bleach and redevelop with Kodak's Sepia Toner. Both selenium and sepia increase density but are a one shot deal with Sepia toner giving a larger boost to density than selenium. Both, by the way, act on the negatives as a preservative as they do for prints.

My most used method is to bleach and redevelop in pyro, or PMK. This can be done multiple times to build density in the negatives and has worked well for me in the past when doing my own or helping someone else.

Let me know if you want more info on any of these processes.

One can intensify with Mercury as well but I have not been a huge fan of playing with Mercury for obvious reasons. I believe that Mercury is also a reversible process on the negatives as well. Tim Rudman has used this process and is familiar with each of these as well.

Let me know if you would like more information on any of these processes.

jfish · Oct 23, 2009

Using Sepia as an intensifier mostly works on the areas that will be the highlights in the print, and can take away some of the shadow detail since it bleaches (and the toner never puts back all the density that the bleach takes away...that is why you make prints to be sepia'ed darker) where as selenium is across the board booster. I'd use 1:3 ratio for about 15 minutes. It's not like it will do any damage that long but couldn't hurt.

clayne · Oct 23, 2009

Joe Lipka said:
If you can go out and re-do the photographs, that would be the best thing. If you try to intensify the negative, you will build up the density of the entire negative. You will just make the entire negative a little bit denser.

If you want to do it right, go back and re-shoot the session and pay attention to the development time and temperature. It will probably take you less time and money to do it right than to try and patch things up. Another side benefit of reshooting: I bet if you critically look at your compositions, you will be able to go back and improve on what you originally did. Better composition, better quality negatives - sounds like the right thing to do.

Selenium won't build up density of the entire negative - it will build up density for areas where density is highest. If there is no shadow detail in a given area (translucent/base-only), Se will not help with that.

Ronald Moravec · Oct 24, 2009

There are different intensifiers made for working on dense and thin proportions of the neg. They are called proportional and super proportional.

Victors Intensifier will work well for you. Art Craft will sell the chems you need. It is toxic so be fareful. Mix outside and keep bare skin out of it.

Kodak has a whole range of formulas that build shadows, highlight or both.

Neal · Oct 24, 2009

Dear Mirko,

Follow the advice from Nanette and simply try printing on a harder grade before fooling with the negatives. You might be very pleased with the results.

Neal Wydra

k_jupiter · Oct 24, 2009

How do you know it's underdeveloped? Most beginners develop for way tro high a contrast. If you have image in the shadows... the highlights have tobe pretty thin to not be able to make a good print.
Move on.

Go shoot the scene again, learn.
Good light.
tim in san jose

Steve Smith · Oct 24, 2009

Once you start printing, you may be surprised at how much detail you get from what appears to be a thin negative. I always am.

Steve

ic-racer · Oct 24, 2009

If grade 5 doesn't work go to lith materials. I don't think it should be an issue unless the image is very faint. Now, if it is underexposed, then you are hosed.

k_jupiter · Oct 24, 2009

ic-racer said:
If grade 5 doesn't work go to lith materials. I don't think it should be an issue unless the image is very faint. Now, if it is underexposed, then you are hosed.

If it be underexposed, there is no image in the shadows.

tim in sanjose

clayne · Oct 24, 2009

k_jupiter said:
If it be underexposed, there is no image in the shadows.

tim in sanjose

Which, while they may contain no detail, may possibly be inferred if there is adequate contrast between the highlights and shadows.

patrickjames · Oct 24, 2009

You have underdeveloped which is the easiest to fix. Mercury is the best but you may not want to mess with it. I have had very good results redeveloping in Pyro so you may want to try that. Selenium would be my third choice, but it is the easiest. I would start with the Pyro then go to the Selnium if the Pyro is not enough. One thing to keep in mind while you do this is cleanliness. If you do not keep the negative clean you will get stains.

Patrick

AFlood · Oct 25, 2009

I find a thin negative is easier to print anyway. There are many ways to boost contrast a lot when you're printing: Harder paper, agitation, increased dev temp. If the highlight and shadow detail is there on the neg, there should not be a problem.

kodacolor · Jan 18, 2011

Robert Hall said:
There are several ways to intensify negatives. Bleach and redevelop is one of the ways I use with success. It can be as easy as using the bleach and redevelop with Kodak's Sepia Toner. Both selenium and sepia increase density but are a one shot deal with Sepia toner giving a larger boost to density than selenium. Both, by the way, act on the negatives as a preservative as they do for prints.

My most used method is to bleach and redevelop in pyro, or PMK. This can be done multiple times to build density in the negatives and has worked well for me in the past when doing my own or helping someone else.

Let me know if you want more info on any of these processes.

One can intensify with Mercury as well but I have not been a huge fan of playing with Mercury for obvious reasons. I believe that Mercury is also a reversible process on the negatives as well. Tim Rudman has used this process and is familiar with each of these as well.

Let me know if you would like more information on any of these processes.

I have the same problem,
I developed asa125 in the same way as i'd do with 400 and my negatives are looking very dark.
No labs will in my city will do any kind of redeveloping, so i'd love to get as much info as possible before trying it myself.
The photo's are from my trip to india, and it would really be a shame if i couldn't fix the negatives.
Thanks.

Thomas Bertilsson · Jan 18, 2011

kodacolor said:
I have the same problem,
I developed asa125 in the same way as i'd do with 400 and my negatives are looking very dark.
No labs will in my city will do any kind of redeveloping, so i'd love to get as much info as possible before trying it myself.
The photo's are from my trip to india, and it would really be a shame if i couldn't fix the negatives.
Thanks.

If your negatives look too dark, then you don't need to re-develop your negatives. You just need to bleach them back a little bit and fix them to REDUCE the density to normal levels.

kodacolor · Jan 19, 2011

Thomas Bertilsson said:
If your negatives look too dark, then you don't need to re-develop your negatives. You just need to bleach them back a little bit and fix them to REDUCE the density to normal levels.

And how exactly is that done?
Do you think you could give me some somewhat detailed instructions? since this is my first time doing this type of thing,
thanks a lot

hpulley · Jan 19, 2011

Hold the phone...

Before you start bleaching things have you tried to print them yourself? Or scan them? You should work with as they are first in my opinion in case your first ever bleaching attempt yields blank negatives...

Thomas Bertilsson · Jan 19, 2011

hpulley said:
Hold the phone...

Before you start bleaching things have you tried to print them yourself? Or scan them? You should work with as they are first in my opinion in case your first ever bleaching attempt yields blank negatives...

Absolutely agreed. Negs that seem unprintable can yield beautiful prints with a little work.

jeffreyg · Jan 19, 2011

Ditto. I am in the print first camp. If the detail is in the negative it is probably just the print contrast you would would have to determine. If the exposure was off that is another issue.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

(accidentaly) underdeveloped film.....

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency