Challenge, don't know if it's the camera or the film/developer combo

Discussion in 'B&W: Film, Paper, Chemistry' started by Uncle Bill, Feb 22, 2009.

  1. Uncle Bill

    Uncle Bill Member

    Messages:
    1,380
    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2005
    Location:
    Oakville and
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I have been using Xtol and Tri-x at box speed a lot with no issues. Said rolls of Tri-x were run through my Nikon FM, no challenges in terms of exposures.

    Now here is my problem, the last two rolls of Plus-x 125 I ran through the same Nikon FM came out over exposed save for a few frames. I rated the film at box speed and processed in Xtol 1+1 at 8.25 min.

    I have used Fomapan 200 rated at 125 ISO and processed in Rodinal with no problems with the same said FM and I have made some great prints from that roll.

    So is it a combo of Plus X and Xtol 1+1 not playing well together, should I just go with D-76 or HC110?
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 22, 2009
  2. david b

    david b Member

    Messages:
    4,026
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Location:
    None of your
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Please confirm your last sentence.
     
  3. MattKing

    MattKing Subscriber

    Messages:
    21,092
    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2005
    Location:
    Delta, BC, Canada
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Was it Plus-X, or Tri-X? Your initial post is confusing.

    At which "box" speed did you rate it?

    Matt
     
  4. OP
    OP
    Uncle Bill

    Uncle Bill Member

    Messages:
    1,380
    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2005
    Location:
    Oakville and
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    It's Plus X that's giving me grief and I shot it at 125 ISO.

    Sorry being a little convoluted, combination of round three of the never ending cold and fatigue has caused me to be a little scattered.
     
  5. trexx

    trexx Member

    Messages:
    299
    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2004
    Location:
    Tucson
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    If a few frames are over exposed and the rest are normal and consistent then the developer is OK. Developers do not selectively over expose a frame or two, cameras do.
     
  6. OP
    OP
    Uncle Bill

    Uncle Bill Member

    Messages:
    1,380
    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2005
    Location:
    Oakville and
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I am thinking the FM might be the culprit. Thing is I am only getting this with plus X, I don't have the same problem with Tri-x and Fomapan 200.
     
  7. Anscojohn

    Anscojohn Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,723
    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2006
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Are you setting your exposure manually? Upon reflection, if you are sure the exposure settings are correct, and it is just the last two rolls with this problem--and they just happened to be Plus-X-- then it probably is not film related. I would suspect an intermittent shutter or aperture problem.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 22, 2009
  8. drazak

    drazak Member

    Messages:
    67
    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2008
    Location:
    Buffalo, NY
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Maybe your cameras iso dial is a little "sticky" around 125, although you said you shot some foma 200 at 125 and that was fine, that seems a little strange.

    Ben
     
  9. CPorter

    CPorter Member

    Messages:
    1,662
    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2004
    Location:
    West KY
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    I'm kinda thinking like Anscojohn, can you safely eliminate yourself from this problem? Kodak Pub F-4018 recommends a development time of 6 1/4 minutes with X-tol 1:1 for Plus-X. According to that, you have overdeveloped by 2 min.
     
  10. edtbjon

    edtbjon Member

    Messages:
    396
    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2004
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    As others have noted, the developer doesn't cause the film to be overexposed. So if your negatives are good in contrast but just a little dense, they are indeed overexposed. But on the other hand, if they are high in contrast you have developed the film for too long.

    Now, is the film speed affected by developing time? Yes, but very little. There are lots of people on this forum who have made careful calibrations involving their whole chain of equipment/film/developer etc. A made up example would be something like:
    Normal time (for normal contrast): 8 minutes and EI 100.
    Shorter time (for high contrast scenes): 6½ min and EI 80.
    Longer time (for low contrast scenes): 11 min and EI 125.
    Which gives that increasing the development to almost double the time increases the film speed by only 2/3 of a stop.

    //Björn
     
  11. Anscojohn

    Anscojohn Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,723
    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2006
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Let's review the bidding. What you are actually saying is that in your last two rolls of film there were some frames that over exposed. Correct?
     
  12. OP
    OP
    Uncle Bill

    Uncle Bill Member

    Messages:
    1,380
    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2005
    Location:
    Oakville and
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I had a look at Pub F-4018 and in in the small tank chart at 20c it says 8 min 15 secs for Xtol 1:1.

    I doubt my cameras have an exposure shutter challenge as I have shot Adox 100 in the FM with no issues with the negs.

    What I might do is run another roll of Plus X through my FM but process in D76 and see what I get.
     
  13. Anscojohn

    Anscojohn Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,723
    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2006
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    *******
    First of all, Unca Bill, tell me if I have it right. The LAST two rolls of film you shot--which just HAPPENED to be Plux-X--had frames that were over exposed.
     
  14. Sponsored Ad
  15. archphoto

    archphoto Member

    Messages:
    966
    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2008
    Location:
    Holland and
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    Am I thinking the way you are, Anscojohn ?
    Uncle Bill: did you change your metersetting from Tri-X 400 ASA to Plus X 125 ASA ???????

    Peter
     
  16. CPorter

    CPorter Member

    Messages:
    1,662
    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2004
    Location:
    West KY
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    The small tank 135, 120, and 220 chart says 6.25 min for Xtol 1:1, perhaps we have different F-4018 pubs, mine may be outdated, it's Feb 2002. The D-76 1:1 (20c) time states 8.25 min.
     
  17. MattKing

    MattKing Subscriber

    Messages:
    21,092
    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2005
    Location:
    Delta, BC, Canada
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    The May 2007 F-4018 says 8.25 minutes @ 68F for Xtol 1:1

    How is the shadow detail - i.e. is it over-exposed, over-developed, or a bit of both?

    Matt
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 22, 2009
  18. gainer

    gainer Subscriber

    Messages:
    3,725
    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2002
    If other slow films were to show similar behavior I would say the slow shutter speeds are too slow.
     
  19. CPorter

    CPorter Member

    Messages:
    1,662
    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2004
    Location:
    West KY
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    Thank you Matt. I had a feeling that was the problem.
     
  20. Anscojohn

    Anscojohn Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,723
    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2006
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    *******
    If Unca Bill would just tell us WHEN these two rolls of Plux-X had the exposure problem it would be an help. If it be ONLY the last two rolls, the type of film, the development, etc. etc. may be irrelevant.
     
  21. OP
    OP
    Uncle Bill

    Uncle Bill Member

    Messages:
    1,380
    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2005
    Location:
    Oakville and
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    With the FM, I had one good roll of Plus X back in January, the two dud rolls were taken this month, different times of the day,in clear conditions, overcast sky and at the beginnings of a snow storm (basically Canadian winter). I am metering for the shadows when I am shooting.

    I ran both a roll of Fomapan 200(rated at 125 and processed in Rodinal 1+50) and Adox 100 (box speed and processed in Rodinal 1+50) through the FM in similar conditions to what was mentioned above with no problems at all. I am stumped.
     
  22. fschifano

    fschifano Member

    Messages:
    3,216
    Joined:
    May 12, 2003
    Location:
    Valley Strea
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    If you have an incident light meter, use that instead of the in-camera meter. Incident metering is far more accurate than any sort of reflective metering. Doing so will confirm or eliminate any doubts about the camera's shutter. It will also show the differences between what your in-camera meter is telling you and what the true lighting conditions are.
     
  23. Nicholas Lindan

    Nicholas Lindan Advertiser Advertiser

    Messages:
    2,384
    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2006
    Location:
    Cleveland, O
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Second the recomendation to check the camera's metering Vs a different meter. Meter a blank wall or the sky - otherwise the metering patterns of the two meters may be at slight odds.

    The ISO setting in most cameras is a variable carbon film resistor - like the volume control in a transistor radio it gets noisy over time. I don't know about the FM, and you take responsibility for the unindented consequences, but you can sometimes get access to the variable resistor with minor camera disassembly and apply a drop of contact cleaner with a toothpick.
     
  24. Anscojohn

    Anscojohn Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,723
    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2006
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    *******
    I am trying to establish chronology, first of all in an attempt to help. Rather than continue to try to pull teeth getting what I consider needed information, I will just join the others who have insufficient information from you and tell you what I think it is. I think it is an intermittent shutter problem (running slow sometimes) or an aperture that is not stopping down properly. Cold weather can affect this; usage can affect this.
     
  25. OP
    OP
    Uncle Bill

    Uncle Bill Member

    Messages:
    1,380
    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2005
    Location:
    Oakville and
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    John,

    I have been using the Nikon FM pretty much the bulk of this winter in temperatures as cold as +5 f in a variety of lighting conditions (clear skies to in the middle of a snow fall) with the following film with no problems what so ever: Tri-x, Fomapan 200 and Adox CHS 100. The only time I'm getting grief, is with the two rolls of Plus X I shot recently.

    What I am going to do is pack a Gossen Profisix meter with me next weekend.
     
  26. wogster

    wogster Member

    Messages:
    1,284
    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2008
    Location:
    Bruce Penins
    Shooter:
    35mm
    If the camera is old enough that the ISO setting resistor is noisy, then the camera probably could use a CLA.....