Best film/developer combo for high contrast daylight

NedL · Jun 25, 2019

mooseontheloose said:
Actually Ned, that would be helpful. I do plan on bringing lots of Acros this summer (need to burn through my stash to make room for the new emulsion, eventually). I normally soup it in Rodinal or Finol (both shot at 80), but I just recently bought some HC-110, something I've never used because 1) it was soooo pricey here in Japan ($80 for 1L!!!), and then 2) it was taken off the market entirely. But I've been wanting to add it to my arsenal of developers so Freestyle Photo recently came to the rescue for me.

I've been using 8m10s at 68°F (= 20°C) for 120 acros in HC-110E ( 10ml syrup + 470ml water ). I start the timer when I start pouring the developer into the tank, and I start pouring it out of the tank 10s before time is up. "Ilford-style" agitation, 4 gentle inversions to start and at the start of each additional minute. My enlarger has a diffusion source, and the negatives that print easily with it look a little more contrasty than other negatives I've seen for a condenser enlarger, but this would probably be a good starting point and you could adjust from there.

Edit: just looked at the acros data sheet. It says acros shot at EI 80 in dilution B at 20°C is 4.5 minutes. That would be close to 7 minutes in dilution E. I'm using 8 minutes and make somewhat contrasty negatives, so that all seems very consistent. I think if you start somewhere between 7 and 8 minutes you'll be in the right ballpark, the negatives will be printable, and you can make minor adjustments from there.

Edit2: A good resource for HC-110 is the covington HC110 page. I use the time adjustment formulas when it's not exactly 20°C ( but close, within 2 or 3 degrees! ) and they seem to work well:

To adjust the development time for a temperature other than the one specified, use these formulae:
New time = Old time × exp(-0.081 × (New temp °C - Old temp °C))
New time = Old time × exp(-0.045 × (New temp °F - Old temp °F))

jtk · Jun 25, 2019

I hate the inevitable results of sodium sulfite: unsharp grain, overall mush... would (do) use Rodinal 1+100 (to keep maximum shadow detail and highest possible detail resolution) . I address contrast with PS (or paper selection).

mooseontheloose · Jun 25, 2019

DREW WILEY said:
The best way to optimize high contrast scenes is to use a film with the longest straight line section of the curve before leveling off onto the toe. That allows you the most separation of shadow values without risk over overexposure which would blow out the highlights. At the present time, what best fits that category are TMax films, both 100 and 400 speed. Shoot them at full box speed. I most often use PMK pyro developer, but there are other good options. Even ordinary D76 will do the trick. But you do need to carefully meter for these films; they're not as forgiving in terms of latitude as other films, but that's directly related to why they can handle extreme contrast better. The only film currently on the market with an even longer straight line is Fomapan/Arista 200; but the quality control is dicey and its going to be too grainy for most people in small camera usage. My opinion is based on a LOT of experience shooting and printing high contrast scenes in various formats, all the way from 35mm to 8X10. ACROS won't dig down into the shadows quite as much as TMax, but I have successfully used it on many high altitude trips where gleaming snow or glacial polish on white granite had to be factored into the same image as deep forest shadows. I use PMK pyro for that too, but rate it at 50 to support the shadows better. It's a wonderful film in several respects.

Thanks Drew. I guess I'm reluctant to shoot TMAX due to the relatively recent backing paper/ink offset issues in 120; in fact, I haven't shot any Kodak film in that size since it happened (35mm is okay). I want to narrow down my film choices so I am not overburdened with too many options on my trip, hopefully I get some testing done this weekend, or next.

Raghu Kuvempunagar · Jun 26, 2019

Have you considered using David Kachel's SLIMT with your regular film+developer combination to deal with high contrast scenes? If you search for
"Selective Latent Image Manipulation Techniques"
using the search feature of this website, you should be able to find David's excellent tutorial on SLIMT. Several knowledgeable photographers on this forum, Doremus Scudder including, have posted their experiences with SLIMT which might also be useful to you. One advantage of SLIMT is you don't need to abandon your favourite film+developer combination.

David Allen · Jun 26, 2019

A thoroughly interesting read and very generous of David Kachel to make his research publicly available. However, it appears to me that his SLIMT system is best suited to sheet film or roll film that was all exposed in the same lighting conditions.

The advantage of a Two-Bath developer is that it will work with rolls taken under varying lighting conditions (well average to high subject brightness ranges - it is not much use in flat lighting conditions but, in reality, this would be a situation where you would want to increase contrast through development / choice of film).

Before I standardised on Barry Thornton’s Two-Bath developer (because I moved to photographing scenes with high subject brightness ranges) I would control a high contrast scene that was on a roll of film with a variety of scenes by pre-flashing the frame of film. This works very effectively and is very easy to do (as long as your camera allows double exposures - not available on my current Mamiya 7). I used to carry a thin piece of frosted perspex and followed the following procedure: hold perspex in front of the meter, point at the sky and note the suggested exposure; adjust the exposure by closing down 4 stops; place the frosted perspex in front of the lens, point lens covered by the frosted perspex up to the sky and expose for the calculated exposure; wind the shutter on (no movement of film), meter the scene, compose and make image; process as normal to ensure that the mixture of scenes/ frames receive sufficient development.

Bests,

David.
www.dsallen.de

mooseontheloose · Jun 26, 2019

Raghu Kuvempunagar said:
Have you considered using David Kachel's SLIMT with your regular film+developer combination to deal with high contrast scenes? If you search for
"Selective Latent Image Manipulation Techniques"
using the search feature of this website, you should be able to find David's excellent tutorial on SLIMT. Several knowledgeable photographers on this forum, Doremus Scudder including, have posted their experiences with SLIMT which might also be useful to you. One advantage of SLIMT is you don't need to abandon your favourite film+developer combination.

Thanks for the heads up - this is something I remember reading but totally forgot about. I just went through David's tutorial and now it feels like something I should try. Hopefully I'll have a free weekend to do it soonish.

Raghu Kuvempunagar · Jun 26, 2019

David Allen said:
A thoroughly interesting read and very generous of David Kachel to make his research publicly available. However, it appears to me that his SLIMT system is best suited to sheet film or roll film that was all exposed in the same lighting conditions.

For roll film one can try something like this. If I know a priori that I am going to find mostly N-3 scenes and some N-2, N-1, N and N-4 scenes, I can use SLIMT bath tuned for N-3 at development time but give progressively additional exposure for N-2, N-1, and N and slight underexposure for N-4. One might or might not like the results for scenes that don't have the expected SBR, but that's probably going to be the case with any method for roll film.

Ste_S · Jun 26, 2019

David Allen said:
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

Seconded with Delta 400, shot it in Barcelona in narrow alleys with deep shadows and bright skies . Metered for the shadows and the highlights didn't blow out. Lab dev with dip 'n' dunk in Xtol.

DREW WILEY · Jun 26, 2019

I haven't done any minus developing of film in the last ten or fifteen years, and I shoot high contrast scenes all the time. Won't go into details here, since I've brought them up many times elsewhere, but it basically involves choosing the correct film to begin with, capable of a long contrast range.

Sirius Glass · Jun 26, 2019

I like the results that I am getting for Pyrocat HD in Glycol for both flat lighting and large SBR. Greater sharpness and increased contrast.

DREW WILEY · Jun 27, 2019

Pyrocat HD and PMK have similar results, but a bit different final stain color, and slightly different grain rendering. There are a number of pyro formulas, though we shouldn't confuse pyrogallol with pyrocatechol.

TonyB65 · Jun 27, 2019

Ilford Pan F at box speed and DD-X is a killer combination, in fact DD-X with any film I've ever tried gives balanced contrast for nice printable negs, not really a surprise, that's what it's made for.

David Allen · Jun 27, 2019

TonyB65 said:
DD-X

It would be very useful to see some examples of how well this combination works with high contrast daylight scenes. It would appear to be counter-intuitive for such a contrasty film as Pan F to be suitable for these situations and very limiting if depth of field is important to your image making.

"For roll film one can try something like this. If I know a priori that I am going to find mostly N-3 scenes and some N-2, N-1, N and N-4 scenes, I can use SLIMT bath tuned for N-3 at development time but give progressively additional exposure for N-2, N-1, and N and slight underexposure for N-4. One might or might not like the results for scenes that don't have the expected SBR, but that's probably going to be the case with any method for roll film".

Unless you can explain further with examples, this seems like a recipe for having the whole film too flat for wet printing.

"I hate the inevitable results of sodium sulfite: unsharp grain, overall mush... would (do) use Rodinal 1+100 (to keep maximum shadow detail and highest possible detail resolution)".

The inevitable results of Sodium Sulfite are absolutely NOT unsharp grain and overall mush - where the hell did you get this idea? After all Rodinal's production formulae from 1891 includes Sodium Sulfite.

Bests,

David.
www.dsallen.de

DREW WILEY · Jun 27, 2019

Pan F has the shortest straight line section of any popular modern film; it's characteristic curve really is all curve, basically an "S". It's the worst popular film I can think of for high-contrast scenes. But it can produce stunning images in modest contrast situations like beach fog or falling snow. A simple rule of thumb is to use Pan F within the same lighting ratio parameters where you might comfortably use a color slide film. Otherwise, you're going to get bland undifferentiated shadows and blown out highlights, guaranteed. Also note what David just stated.

takilmaboxer · Jun 27, 2019

I'm enjoying the debate here! But realistically you have two (not incompatible) choices: Use a film that offers a very long straight line section, or carefully control the development. Here in New Mexico, six stop range in landscapes, between shadow and highlight, is common, and I have seen eight stops.
Looking at published film data curves, Tri-X or Tmax 100 or 400 will fill the bill. Take care with developing the T grain films or you could end up with an up-swept curve and highlights that you can see in the negative but will need to burn in forever. Do it right and these films will record ten stops! Then all you have to do is print it .

DREW WILEY · Jun 28, 2019

Six stops of range is nothing. I've been shooting in gleaming high altitude glaciers, brilliant deserts, and deep forests for decades, where handling 12 stop ranges can be routine. Carefully controlling development is even more important with T-Max films than with more forgiving films.

Chris Coppola · Jun 29, 2019

I had this same dilemma last year while on vacation in Cape Cod. I ended up using HP5 with Barry Thornton 2 bath and it worked very well. Another thing I did was meter @160 or 200 in harsh sun, and for the days of overcast I kept it to 400. Another option I tried before discovering Thornton that worked well was a method I read in Barnbaums book that was essentially HC110 in 2 different dilutions. I didn't feel that I held shadows as well as the Thornton 2 bath, but it absolutely kept highlights under control. I also like Thornton because it is essentially a D23 variation. If I recall, the sodium sulfite is reduced by about 20%, metol increased to 8g.
You could also try Pyrocat-hd in semi stand. The stain maintains highlights and hides some grain as well.

Overall I find the Thornton to work best of the 3 though

Andrew O'Neill · Jun 29, 2019

HP5 has been my main film for decades. It's wonderful for taming contrast, yet maintaining excellent Shadow contrasts. Pyrocat-HD, EI 250, Xtol 1+1, EI 250, 1+3. EI 200

juan · Jun 29, 2019

I regularly shoot in SBR 10 situations and used various 100-125 speed films with Pyrocat HD. I learned BTZS and that helped greatly.

mooseontheloose · Jun 29, 2019

Andrew O'Neill said:
HP5 has been my main film for decades. It's wonderful for taming contrast, yet maintaining excellent Shadow contrasts. Pyrocat-HD, EI 250, Xtol 1+1, EI 250, 1+3. EI 200

Mine too, until I added Delta 400 into the mix. I normally shoot HP5+ at 200/250 on bright days, but have never really experimented with seeing how the developer can help tame contrast in certain situations. Once the rain stops (seems like rainy season started this week) I'll go out and shoot some identical rolls and see what I can do with them.

GLS · Jun 29, 2019

Acros + Pyrocat-HD is a fantastic combination for these situations.

Tom Kershaw · Jun 29, 2019

I have used Pan F Plus with Tetenal Ultrafin 1+29 recently with good results. Although I was working at E.I 50, I'm sure exposing for '25' and developing for less time would give manageable contrast. I've actually managed to get Pan F Plus to produce too little contrast, although this was on the east coast of England, not New Mexico.

DREW WILEY · Jun 29, 2019

I also routinely rate Pan F @ 25, but develop it in a modified pyro formula that makes its highlights more cooperative when printing. And here on our own coast it can be a lovely film when the fog is in and there are natural softbox conditions. It's a miserable film for the desert or high mountain work - just can't handle the contrast in open sun. But I have still brought Pan F along for some mountain projects because it can really do its thing "Singing in the Rain" or falling snow or subdued light. It's a nice addition to our film arsenal; but I can't imagine using it exclusively.

Best film/developer combo for high contrast daylight

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency