Can I increase developing time to raise ISO speed in a ?

[trythis]

I am working on bulk roll of Eastman FGRP 5302.
I shot a roll starting on ISO 6 with a +5 exposure compensation going from:
ISO .1875, to
.375, to
.75 ISO etc up to 100.

.75 looks great developed with HC110 (dilution E, 1:47) for 8 minutes. It really is perfect but I would like to see if the film can be used faster. I am open to another developer, but it calls for D97 whatever that is.

This film has no base fog, it is clear as can be, but I want to know if I can increase developing time to get the speed up a bit. Does it work that way?

I only have one camera that can manage this: Canon EOS 630 which is fine, but I would like the option to shoot with my Nikon FE, F3 or N80, or Canon EF all limited to ASA 12 or 6.

Thanks!

 

[Bill Burk]

Can you measure the gradient? That's the ratio of the difference in density that you get for a certain difference in exposure.

If you aren't already at or above 0.6 gradient, then you can increase the effective film speed by developing more. If you are getting very flat negatives, then you aren't getting all the speed the film has to deliver.

You get the greatest speed when you get really high contrast negatives. Somewhere around 0.5 to 0.6 is a good place to be, where the normal range is, and you get full film speed.

That's the way it works.

 

[MattKing]

I am working on bulk roll of Eastman FGRP 5302.
I shot a roll starting on ISO 6 with a +5 exposure compensation going from:
ISO .1875, to
.375, to
.75 ISO etc up to 100.

.75 looks great developed with HC110 (dilution E, 1:47) for 8 minutes. It really is perfect but I would like to see if the film can be used faster. I am open to another developer, but it calls for D97 whatever that is.

This film has no base fog, it is clear as can be, but I want to know if I can increase developing time to get the speed up a bit. Does it work that way?

I only have one camera that can manage this: Canon EOS 630 which is fine, but I would like the option to shoot with my Nikon FE, F3 or N80, or Canon EF all limited to ASA 12 or 6.

Thanks!

A couple of points ....

Where you are using "ISO" you really should be using "EI" = Exposure Index. The ISO speed of a film is the result of a test in specific conditions, whereas EI or Exposure Index is what individual photographers use to set their meters, in order to get the results that meet their needs, with their equipment and process.

In most cases, evaluation of the appropriate EI is done by determining what exposure is necessary to obtain details in the darker parts of your subjects - the shadows.

The development time doesn't really change the response of films to low levels of light. It does tend to change how the film records the higher levels of light, and therefore the contrast that results. If you increase the development, it increases the contrast, which may make under-exposed mid-tones and highlights better, but won't make much of any improvement to under-exposed shadows. So just increasing the development time doesn't really increase the speed (sensitivity) of the film.

There are, however, some developers that will give you a slight bit more light sensitivity than HC-110 "E". T-Max would be an example, as would Microphen or X-Tol. But you aren't going to get two or three stops increase.

You can, however, use the meters in your other cameras manually at their lowest settings, and then add manually the necessary two or three stops.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

Normally, film speed is determined by the shadows. If you increase development, this will increase density in the highlight areas, not the shadows. Some photographers push film beyond the recommend film speed and shadow areas lack detail. Other APUG can corroborate or correct me. But if you like the look of empty shadows, go for it.

 

[MattKing]

Bill Burk and I posted at the same time. He is right in that if you are basing your EI determinations on negatives that are too low in contrast, then your choice will be of a speed that is too low. Once you achieve reas8nable contrast though, there isn't much you can do to boost it higher.

 

[trythis]

My problem with using EI is that my cameras don't tell me what actual speed they use at more than 30 seconds. Another test for another film in indoor, darkish conditions worked fine with my FE but the exposures at f1.8 were very long. I suppose bulb mode and a stop watch would be required. But with the eos 630 I can actually set the exposure comp to shoot at .75 and in daylight actually see the times. My gossen luna pro x meter stops at .8 which is close enough. However, at ev -4, .8 is pretty useless aside from still life work.

I haven't any way to evaluate gradiants.

I will have a look after scanning...sorry..but the negs look great at my iso 1 range.

Perhaps I should just shoot another test and double the dev time and see what I get.

 

[Xmas]

google

Eastman 5312

for Kodaks data sheet.

It is print film wide scale no red sensitivity and real slow very low fog even if you hammer it.
It won't speed up that much - tripod for static shots

A short end or recan of 5222 or Orwo movie camera film is more practical.

 

[trythis]

I have the original data sheet from the 100ft spool and the 100 foot spool. I will show both scans tonight and developing info for others wanting to try it out.

If I am going to hunt for a specific film to use, I might as well just buy Ilford stock...this is my entertainment.

Using what I have for gotten for almost free is the challenge.

sent from phone. excuse my typing.

 

[trythis]

Scans coming, but I can say that going from 8 minutes to 12:30 made zero difference in the under developed images.

 

[Xmas]

Hi

Well normally using a hot developer eg Microphen and soaking it will get you 2/3 of a stop over D76 but that is not a lot. And part of that is Microphen is a log fog developer for fast emulsions your emulsion is not going to fog.

2/3 of a stop is not a lot.

It is print film only good for prints or still life.

I use 5222 which is 250 ISO and Microphen allows 320 for normal negatives which print with shadow details that don't look like Citizen Kane stills.

Try one of the speed increasing developers.
Use a post Borax bath for three minutes
Dead Link Removed
Then try intensification

You won't get a lot... I need 800 ISO that is cheap Delta 3200 is too expensive for me.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

I use 5222 which is 250 ISO and Microphen allows 320 for normal negatives which print with shadow details that don't look like Citizen Kane stills.

Kodak rates this film as ISO 250 in daylight when developing it in D-96 a low contrast devekoper. However it is intended for printing on high contrast positive film hence it is developed to a lower CI than used for still films. When used as a still film and printed on normal papers the EI should be raised to 400 and the film developed in HC-110 or D-76. I have done this with numerous rolls of 5222 with excellent results.

 

[Xmas]

Kodak rates this film as ISO 250 in daylight when developing it in D-96 a low contrast devekoper. However it is intended for printing on high contrast positive film hence it is developed to a lower CI than used for still films. When used as a still film and printed on normal papers the EI should be raised to 400 and the film developed in HC-110 or D-76. I have done this with numerous rolls of 5222 with excellent results.

Id say D96 is a near clone of D76 but mixed as 1:1.
I always develop for a low CI.
Microphen is a PQ analogue of the MQ D76 and is 1/3 stop faster ISO on most films from a lower fog level and higher toe density for a similar CI.
I tend to use a lower EI than ISO I like my zone1 shadows printable, it is simpler using a wider aperture than split grading and burning.
Double-X subjectively is a lot finer grain than Tri-X given it is only a little slower though not as fine as Tmax.

 

[georgegrosu]

Disclaimer:
EASTMAN 5302 Positive Film is a film sensitive to blue light.
5302 has a high contrast factor (~ 2.5) in Kodak D 97 developer and a fine grain.
To get a usable photo image the contrast must drop 0.8- I do not say 0.6 like the usual negative.
The concept of sensitivity to material that is not panchromatic do not think that is pointless.
I made gussets exposure and exposure we set some values.
I've used it outside in full sun to 1/60 with 5.6.
Inside - 500 W bulb (2700 K) exposure 30 secwith 8.
So it is very important color temperature and change the calculations.
The grain is very fine image.

George

 

[trythis]

If anyone is interested in my amateurish 5302 results:

The first two shots from a roll developed with HC110 dilution E at 8 minutes:

1st shot:
ISO ~0.1 and it was over exposed with blown out highlights.​

​

2nd shot :
Jumping to ISO 6: Is useable, but slightly underexposed, and the negative does look slightly thin.​

​

Last 2 shots taken with another roll tested with HC110 dilution E at 12:30 minutes:

3rd shot was taken at ISO 6 and to my eyes the negative is slightly denser than shot #2.


4th Shot ISO 12 and might be better than shot #3

​

From my little tests I think I did get a little more speed from the longer dev time and feel like I can use the film at ISO 6 or ISO 12 with good results.

The best news is that I can use this film in almost all my cameras. Some are limited to ISO 25, like my XA, but that's OK, I am just happy it doesn't require an ISO with a decimal in front!

Disclaimer: This is not a scientific or perfect test and I am a novice with no access to denso-meter or fogometer or whatever.Yes, I know that scanned neatives tell you nothing, yes, I should build a darkroom and print for any real results. I know that light meters can be flawed. For what its worth, I am having fun and thought I would share this for those that might find it useful.

 

[pharmboycu]

A couple of points ....

Where you are using "ISO" you really should be using "EI" = Exposure Index. The ISO speed of a film is the result of a test in specific conditions, whereas EI or Exposure Index is what individual photographers use to set their meters, in order to get the results that meet their needs, with their equipment and process.

Slightly off topic, but I just wanted to say thank you for this post. I'm a novice compared to everyone here and this post really helped me understand the terminology and usage.

John

 

[MattKing]

John:
You are welcome. Don't ever hesitate to ask if there is something that you think we might clarify for you.

 

[georgegrosu]

I with the positive Kodak 5302 I make few test like negative for several years.
I not quickly managed to get to some good results for me.
Firstly as contrast. Your images do not seem bad at all.
You should have a scale of grays in image.
For to see the contrast where you are.
I started doing a prevoalare of the positive Kodak to earn sensitivity.
I have not yet found a way for fogging the Kodak positive.
I think more than a diaphragm can not win.
The min. density can be increased from 0.03 to 0.25 by a fogging.

Here are some pictures taken on Kodak 5302.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/21121448@N06/14021386065/in/photostream/

Here you have a comparison between positive Kodak 5302 (sensitive to blue light) and dup positive Orwo DP 3 (panchromatic).
https://www.flickr.com/photos/21121448@N06/14041421433/in/photostream/

Other images on Kodak 5302.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/21121448@N06/13998231736/in/photostream/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/21121448@N06/13998198786/in/photostream/

George

 

[trythis]

Throwing up a couple more results with FRGP 5302:

Both shot with Nikon F3 set to EI 12 - Series E 50 1.8 or Nikkor 28mm 3.5 lenses - developed in HC110 (US dilution H - 1:63) for 12 minutes with slight agitation for one minute and 10 secs for each minute after that.

I am going to say something about scanning, so hold your nose:
I noticed that one difference with this film and most of the others I have scanned is that the center slider on the histogram requires setting near 2 instead of 1, I believe this is gamma but I am not sure and have no idea how that translates to wet print development. Perhaps this is due to lack of fog.

I am quite impressed with the detail this film gives in the cat fur and the scrap pile.