Blacks not black

muzzatron · Apr 22, 2015

Hello,
Today I developed some HP5 in Ilfosol S and it went OK. But the negs looked bit too grey, infact the blacks are not black even on the numbers, they are a very dark grey.

I am just wondering if I over developed the film - maybe?

David Allen · Apr 22, 2015

The numbers on the rebates should be with black or very dark grey.

If this is not the case and you feel that the negatives lack contrast this indicates underdevelopment of the films.

Bests,

David.
www.dsallen.de

pdeeh · Apr 22, 2015

The only way you are going to get a considered judgment on this is to take a photograph on a lightbox of the negatives you think might have a problem, and then post that for people to look at.

If you don't own a lightbox, a laptop or tablet screen showing a white page work, as will taping a negative to a sheet of white paper and holding up to a window.

muzzatron · Apr 22, 2015

OK - will give that idea a go pdeeh. Otherwise could be under dev. Can I also ask what happens if I dev too long? Cheers.

muzzatron · Apr 22, 2015

I should also note, a lot less grainy than previous HP5.

bdial · Apr 22, 2015

More development will increase contrast. That is, it will have the greatest effect on the highlight areas of the negative, with decreasing effect down the scale. Increased development has little effect on the shadow (lightest) areas of the negative.

If your negatives have thin highlights and then edge numbers then it's and indication that the development time was too short, or the developer is weak or has been contaminated. If your development time for this roll is similar to what you've used before with good results, then the problem is probably the developer itself rather than the timing.

John Bragg · Apr 22, 2015

Is it Ilfosol S or Ilfosol 3 ? Ilfosol S is obsolete and old dev. It had poor keeping qualities and even in sealed full bottles would go bad without warning. It was however a very sharp developer and I liked it.

muzzatron · Apr 22, 2015

My mistake is Ilfosol 3. sorry John. I bought it in Feb this year. So should be good.

The only other thing I can think of that is unusual is that it has been colder here. I tried to keep it at 20'.

muzzatron · Apr 22, 2015

OK. I may have found my problem, which was kind of obvious when I got Ilfosol S and Ilfosol 3 mixed up previously. I was processing today for Ilfosol S at 7ms for 20'c. This is probably the issue. I've just checked and Ilfosol 3 would be 6:30 at 20'c.

Does sound like what has gone wrong? :-/

jeffreyg · Apr 22, 2015

I don't use that developer but I don't think 30 seconds + or - would make much of a difference.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

zanxion72 · Apr 22, 2015

That must be because of exposure. If you want blacks to be really black, meter for the blacks (or shadows that you would like to have as black) and underexpose by 2 stops. This way normal development will give you black blacks (transparent or almost transparent areas on the negative).
Increase of the development will not make the blacks darker. On the contrary you will get more detail in them and get the highlights burned out with bulletproof areas on the negative. 30 seconds overdevelopment as said won't make any difference (especially with Ilfosol).

John Bragg · Apr 22, 2015

Temperature control is vital, but a simple water bath works well. Also, 30 seconds wont make a huge difference. Check that you had dilution correct. I think Ilfosol is 1+9. Consider using another developer next time. Ilfotec HC is Ilford's version of Kodak HC-110 and has a good reputation for keeping a long long time as the formulation is in Glycol, not water and it doesnt go bad easily. It will be more economical as 1+31 is the standard dilution. It also works well at 1+63 with double the time. Ilfotec LC is the same formulation, but more dilute form and without the longevity since it contains water. Hope this helps... ?

Axle · Apr 22, 2015

What are you using for Fixer?

ParkerSmithPhoto · Apr 22, 2015

The only way to judge a negative is to make a contact print, exposing just until the clear film base becomes as black as the paper.

This is what Fred Picker termed "the proper proof" and if you G**gle that you will find out the what and why. Don't try to scan them or judge them on a light box. Many people look at baked out, underexposed and overdeveloped negs and think that's what a good negative should look like.

If on the proper proof your shadows are too dark, increase your exposure, which will also make the whites brighter. So if the highlights also look a little too gray, you may only need to boost the exposure to get everything in order. If your shadows are too dark and the highlights too light, you need to increase exposure but decrease development.

I'm a big fan of two-bath developers. My negs improved greatly when I changed over about six years ago.

cliveh · Apr 22, 2015

David Allen said:
The numbers on the rebates should be with black or very dark grey.

If this is not the case and you feel that the negatives lack contrast this indicates underdevelopment of the films.

Bests,

David.
www.dsallen.de

Spot on.

piu58 · Apr 23, 2015

> infact the blacks are not black even on the numbers

It is not necessary and not even desirable to have a "real black" at the negative. Such dark black areas lead to unchanged white in the highlights. If you can have a look a a step wedge: The darkest "thing" on the negative should have not more than an densitiy of aroud 1.5 (some say even 1.3 ist sufficient),

It doesn't count how dark the numbers are.

Blacks not black

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency