My subject matter always involves a very high contrast range.
What works very well for me is Delta 400 developed in Barry Thornton's Two-Bath developer. This enables you to expose for the shadow detail that you want with absolutely no chance of the highlights blowing out.
Have a great trip.
Bests,
David.
www.dsallen.de
Diafine comes to mind - with something like Tri-X or (in the past) Plus-X.
The problem with sunny conditions is that Diafine also gives a speed boost.
What’s your iso for the Delta? Is there a reason you prefer the 400 over the 100? I currently shoot a lot with the 400, but I’ve never used BT’s two-bath developer.
Irrespective of choice, do a test before you leave.
My limited experience with Diafine resulted in what I can only describe as "dull" rendering.
I use Adox atomal 49 in these situations with a combo of 100iso film. I find that I keeps the highlights in control very well. Downside is that used stock there is some loss of sharpness, which I like, but for others it can be a no-go
Having tested my EI for Delta with BTTB developer, I use iso 200. This is using a Mamiya 7 with 65mm lens. I meter the shadows that are important for my images close up with a Weston V selenium meter and then process for 5.5 minutes in both Bath A and Bath B. BTTB developer completely controls the highlights. It is easy to mix up, cheap and very reliable. The reason I prefer 400 is that many of my subjects often will include dark walls in shadow plus white highlights in full sun. The shadow areas need generous exposure and, to achieve the level of sharpness that I want in my images, a 100 film would require the use of a tripod. As my working method is to walk around for 3 - 6 hours to find my subject matter, I do not want to lug around a sturdy tripod (used to do this when I was younger and did landscape photography but, for the urban realm and my age, it is not something that suits me anymore). I make prints at size 30 x 40cm and with 400 the grain is fine enough for my taste. Also, generally 400 film is inherently lower contrast than 100 film.
Bests,
David.
www.dsallen.de
Lots of good advice here, probably better than mine. I like tri-x in diafine, but it definitely has a distinct look to it ( it makes me think of photos from the 1950's for some reason ) and I wouldn't use it for travel unless I needed extra speed. If it were me, I'd use acros and develop it normally ( I use HC-110 dilution E ). The highlights on acros seem to go on forever and it's not hard to print through them if you need to. I think it was you in another thread that mentioned still having a lot of it. That's what I'll be taking on vacation this summer, also in high contrast situations.
Edit: caveat.. I usually give acros about 1/2 to 2/3 stop extra exposure in bright daylight, and "normal" development is the time I've come to shooting it that way. I'm not sure how my development times compare to published times for acros in HC-110, but probably a bit longer. I'll look in my notes if you want it.
I have had success with RO80s and stand development using 1ml Rodinal and 1ml HC-110 in 250ml for 45m. I use box speed but derate to ISO 50 if you find that better, before you leave.
Bon voyage.
What's your agitation scheme for this combo? For Rollei 80/400s I do a semi-stand development with D-76 over 24 minutes (one agitation every 5 minutes). I like the look but I'm looking for other options to try.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?