Can someone suggest a developing time? I screwed up...

Kirks518 · Sep 18, 2015

I loaded a roll of Delta 400 Pro in my C220 a couple of weeks ago, and shot it tonight to run some tests (focus). I was incident metering, but I had it in my head that the roll was Arista EDU 100, and shot the 400 at EI 100.

So I need to pull 2 stops in D-76 (only option). Ilford's site and Mass Dev only has recommended times for a 1 stop pull to 200.

For straight processing, recommended time is 9.5 mins
For 1 stop pull (200), time is cut to 7 mins.

What would your guess be for a decent developing time? Luckily, this roll was strictly a focus test roll, so nothing important at all on it, but I'd still like decent results so I can figure out if there is a focus issue with the camera, lens(es), or user (aka me).

Thanks....

Bill Burk · Sep 18, 2015

This is the easiest of problems.

Overexposure of black and white negative film typically places your densities higher on a straight line, so you don't need to push or pull. Just develop the film normally and then make up the difference in density by exposing the print a little longer in the printing stage.

It's when you want relatively low contrast to achieve the highest possible definition... That's when you use pull developing. In that scenario you are planning to print on relatively high grade of paper. Looking for super high quality.

For your purpose, just pretend nothing went wrong and develop normally.

Alan9940 · Sep 18, 2015

The 1 stop pull is about a 25% decrease in development time. Would another 25% make sense from the 7 mins? About 5.25 mins? Hopefully, someone who has done a 2 stop pull with this film will chime in.

Good luck!

Kirks518 · Sep 18, 2015

Bill - unfortunately, I don't have a darkroom, or an enlarger. I do 'forbidden things' with my negatives.

Alan, that's what I was thinking as well, but was going to go to 5:30.

As soon as the dev temp gets up to 68°F, I think I'll just give it a go at 5:30.

I'll post my results when I'm done.

Bill Burk · Sep 18, 2015

Are you developing in D-76 stock or 1:1?

I don't see any reason to develop less than 8 minutes, considering most scanners are designed to scan slides which go above 2.0 and black and white film, even two stops overexposed, won't exceed that.

Kirks518 · Sep 18, 2015

Bill Burk said:
Are you developing in D-76 stock or 1:1?

I don't see any reason to develop less than 8 minutes, considering most scanners are designed to scan slides which go above 2.0 and black and white film, even two stops overexposed, won't exceed that.

Stock D-76.

summicron1 · Sep 18, 2015

Bill Burk said:
This is the easiest of problems.

Overexposure of black and white negative film typically places your densities higher on a straight line, so you don't need to push or pull. Just develop the film normally and then make up the difference in density by exposing the print a little longer in the printing stage.

It's when you want relatively low contrast to achieve the highest possible definition... That's when you use pull developing. In that scenario you are planning to print on relatively high grade of paper. Looking for super high quality.

For your purpose, just pretend nothing went wrong and develop normally.

what this guy said -- normal development will give you perfectly nice negatives. You can cut the time back a titch if you want, but normal takes no risks at all.

Bill Burk · Sep 18, 2015

I'm sure you already finished. Don't worry - it'll all work out.

I'm getting my D-76 1:1 up to temp to develop some TMAX-400 (and a bit of APX-25). I'll be developing for 13 minutes - because that's calculated time for APX-25 and it's about my usual time for TMAX-400 to reach relatively high contrast (relative to what everybody else seems to aim for these days).

Kirks518 · Sep 18, 2015

Bill is correct, I'm finished, and it's drying now.

I ran 7 minutes. So far looks great. I'll post a lightbox photo of the negs either later or tomorrow.

Bill Burk · Sep 18, 2015

Mine are in the wash now...

Kirks518 · Sep 19, 2015

as promised:

Doremus Scudder · Sep 20, 2015

Kirk,

Your negatives look just great. I wouldn't even call them overexposed (but then again, I like dense negs). They should print just fine.

Best,

Doremus

RalphLambrecht · Sep 20, 2015

Doremus Scudder said:
Kirk,

Your negatives look just great. I wouldn't even call them overexposed (but then again, I like dense negs). They should print just fine.

Best,

Doremus

I do too for good reason;the detail in dense highlights can easily be recovered by burnin-in during printing.

Can someone suggest a developing time? I screwed up...

Attachments

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency