Comparing contrast of b&w film stocks

[Alan Edward Klein]

I shoot Tmax 100 and 400. One commercial processor uses Clayton F76+ developer instead of D76 Kodak. IS there a difference?

Another firm I know uses Xtol? Will I be better off with them? Let's assume everything else is equal.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

F76+ is a Phenidone-based formula which, according to the manufacturer, is supposed to have working characteristics very similar to D-76.

If we assume that to be the case, all other things being equal, XTOL would be expected to give very slightly finer grain and very slightly higher sharpness. But these differences are very small. Depending on magnification, they might be negligible/invisible.

And we are assuming development to identical contrast etc., which probably isn’t a great assumption to make when comparing different labs.

Thanks for your input, Michael. So I should ignore the developers when making a decision as to which lab and use other criteria?

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

I wouldn’t necessarily say ignore developers in general (although most labs will use similar B&W developers). I’m saying in the two cases you mentioned, F76+ and XTOL are similar enough that I would focus first on other criteria.

Thanks. The ones I've used in the past use XTOL or D76 equivalent. So now I can use other criteria. One of them will switch to whatever developer I want to use. But there's a $50 setup charge. Not worth it to me. But it could be useful for others who need a special developer. All the ones I use dip and dunk and will push and pull if requested for a dollar or two more, another thing I'm not doing as I don't use the Zone System.

 

[Adrian Bacon]

Thanks. The ones I've used in the past use XTOL or D76 equivalent. So now I can use other criteria. One of them will switch to whatever developer I want to use. But there's a $50 setup charge. Not worth it to me. But it could be useful for others who need a special developer. All the ones I use dip and dunk and will push and pull if requested for a dollar or two more, another thing I'm not doing as I don't use the Zone System.

id be wary of push and pull processing unless the lab can tell you what contrast they develop your film to as a standard contrast to begin with. If they can’t tell you what developer they use and what their normal contrast is, then push and pull is meaningless. They’re just getting some time to run and going with it. This is especially true if they’re using a developer that doesn’t have a very comprehensive user manual with development times for a lot of films like Kodak’s j-109 for Xtol, or Ilford’s DD tech sheet. In that case, unless they actually went and worked out times for each film, it’s bunk.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Adrian, I don't know much about this because I don't have my own darkroom. I suppose they develop "normally" for everyone, using the standard recommendation of the manufacturer. Otherwise, they would be leaning one way or the other depending on the photographer who submits their negatives to them. So they would want to avoid that situation. Should I ask them?

Also, I don't give them any special instructions. I shoot to my exposure meter and assume they develop "normally".

 

[Xiong Chiamiov]

I believe that is what the OP wants to know.

Yep, exactly.

The OP may be conflating contrast with a characteristic curve that favours lots of shadow separation over midtone and highlight rendition.
I see a lot of examples of people describing an image as "contrasty" when it is essentially just dark.

Honestly, I'm not sure I could reliably identify the shape of a contrast curve by looking at an image. I need to spend more time playing with curves in Lightroom to really get an internalized sense of how they look.

In this case I wasn't talking about specific photos or films as much as a general categorization, but you're right that it's a bit difficult to talk about without being more precise about the subject.

 

[MattKing]

Honestly, I'm not sure I could reliably identify the shape of a contrast curve by looking at an image. I need to spend more time playing with curves in Lightroom to really get an internalized sense of how they look.

Contrast really refers to how similar but adjacent tones render. A contrasty image looks like there are big steps between the tones, while an image that is low in contrast has tones that are close to each other.
Unfortunately, there is a tendency for a lot of people to pay more attention to the darkest shadows, and the brightest highlights, and to ignore what happens in between. You can have a low contrast image with dark shadows and bright highlights.

 

[Adrian Bacon]

Adrian, I don't know much about this because I don't have my own darkroom. I suppose they develop "normally" for everyone, using the standard recommendation of the manufacturer. Otherwise, they would be leaning one way or the other depending on the photographer who submits their negatives to them. So they would want to avoid that situation. Should I ask them?

Also, I don't give them any special instructions. I shoot to my exposure meter and assume they develop "normally".

Well, if you expose at box speed and you're happy with their results, that's all that really matters. At that point, what developer they use is a bit of a moot point. If you're not happy with their results, then identify exactly what you're not happy with and see if it's something that they can address with either a different developer, or a different processing time, or maybe even you exposing the film differently. What you're not happy with will guide that course of action.

While I do offer the ability to ask for a specific developer with my lab, I've found that the vast majority of people who send film in just don't care what developer I use. They just want usable pictures, and trust that I'll do the right thing to produce that. The ones that do ask usually are just asking out of curiosity. The ones that really care about developers tend to process their own film. Every once in a while I'll get somebody who sends film in and is absolutely anal retentive about the developer and development process. While I'm happy to have their business because money is money, at the same time, I'm not going to lose any sleep over not having them as a customer, as it's not uncommon for those types of customers to chew up a huge amount of your time just dealing with them in general.

 

[ic-racer]

They just want usable pictures, ....

I'm amazed at your low prices, if I'm reading it right you supply 5x7" enlargements for less than a dollar a print. Are those hand made or do you have a minilab that prints that big?

 

[Adrian Bacon]

I'm amazed at your low prices, if I'm reading it right you supply 5x7" enlargements for less than a dollar a print. Are those hand made or do you have a minilab that prints that big?

The proof prints are digital. They're produced in-house with a Canon Pro-1000 pigment printer on RC paper with a luster finish. If you want darkroom prints, that's billed per hour plus the cost of materials.

 

[ic-racer]

In film, 'contrast' is the first derivative of any point on the H&D curve. Traditionally, 'contrast index' was obtained with a transparent overlay and is somewhat difficult to calculate with math; it was not intended to be calculated.

 

[ic-racer]

The proof prints are digital. They're produced in-house with a Canon Pro-1000 pigment printer on RC paper with a luster finish. If you want darkroom prints, that's billed per hour plus the cost of materials.

Oh, I see. How about scanning, is that somehow automated, or do you have to do each frame at a time? Either way, it seems like you are offering valuable services at very reasonable prices for film users.

 

[Adrian Bacon]

Oh, I see. How about scanning, is that somehow automated, or do you have to do each frame at a time? Either way, it seems like you are offering valuable services at very reasonable prices for film users.

Scans typically are less than 15 minutes per roll for a straight scan. I've not yet changed prices for 2021, however, postage, the rent on my lab, the cost of materials, and the cost of chemistry has changed since I last modified prices, so I'll be going through that exercise in the not too distant future. I really hate increasing prices and try to provide good value for dollar, but at the same time, I have to charge enough to stay in business and make it worth my while, otherwise, I might as well close up shop and do something else right now.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Well, if you expose at box speed and you're happy with their results, that's all that really matters. At that point, what developer they use is a bit of a moot point. If you're not happy with their results, then identify exactly what you're not happy with and see if it's something that they can address with either a different developer, or a different processing time, or maybe even you exposing the film differently. What you're not happy with will guide that course of action.

While I do offer the ability to ask for a specific developer with my lab, I've found that the vast majority of people who send film in just don't care what developer I use. They just want usable pictures, and trust that I'll do the right thing to produce that. The ones that do ask usually are just asking out of curiosity. The ones that really care about developers tend to process their own film. Every once in a while I'll get somebody who sends film in and is absolutely anal retentive about the developer and development process. While I'm happy to have their business because money is money, at the same time, I'm not going to lose any sleep over not having them as a customer, as it's not uncommon for those types of customers to chew up a huge amount of your time just dealing with them in general.

If I get a negative that when I scan its histogram is in the middle, I'm happy. That gives me the flexibility to do pretty much what I want with it in Lightroom.

 

[foc]

I really hate increasing prices and try to provide good value for dollar, but at the same time, I have to charge enough to stay in business and make it worth my while, otherwise, I might as well close up shop and do something else right now.

I understand that totally. It can be a fine line between profitability and pricing strategy.
When I had my lab I was often told by some customers that they could get the same service somewhere else cheaper.
In my head I would reply "off you go".

 

[Adrian Bacon]

I understand that totally. It can be a fine line between profitability and pricing strategy.
When I had my lab I was often told by some customers that they could get the same service somewhere else cheaper.
In my head I would reply "off you go".

Yep. I run into that quite a bit with my film prices. Customers don’t hesitate to tell me where they can buy the same roll of film online cheaper. Usually from B&H or eBay. My usual response is, “Well, if you can wait for it to show up in the mail, then by all means go ahead, however if you need it right now, that’s the price”. Many of them don’t realize that B&H is literally giving their film away with a mark up of only 2 or 3 percent, which easily gets eaten up by credit card processing fees and their free shipping. They can afford to do that because they sell lots of other stuff that has a much higher markup. If you’re a small shop dedicated to film photography, you can’t charge B&H prices and still stay in business.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

The thing I noticed the last time I visited B&H years ago was that they longer refrigerate the film as far as I could see. Is that normal?

 

[Adrian Bacon]

The thing I noticed the last time I visited B&H years ago was that they longer refrigerate the film as far as I could see. Is that normal?

Id say it matters if it’s stock they’ll have for a long time, but for stock that moves and is replaced in less than 30 days, as long as it’s kept indoors at reasonably cool temperatures ( ~68f) it will make very little difference as it’ll be in customers hands before any temperature changes will realistically do anything. The key is that the temperature is reasonably cool, and doesn’t cycle up and down much.

 

[grat]

Living in Florida, I've often wondered how much abuse film gets as it ships across the country in un-refrigerated shipping trucks in the middle of summer. I'd cheerfully buy from a local shop, but I'm in a rural enough area the nearest "local" shop is about 100 miles away. So far, the film has worked well, but I always ensure it has a few days to reacclimate to room temperature. Since my intention is to use the film reasonably quickly, I tend to keep it in a "cool, dry place".

 

[Adrian Bacon]

Living in Florida, I've often wondered how much abuse film gets as it ships across the country in un-refrigerated shipping trucks in the middle of summer. I'd cheerfully buy from a local shop, but I'm in a rural enough area the nearest "local" shop is about 100 miles away. So far, the film has worked well, but I always ensure it has a few days to reacclimate to room temperature. Since my intention is to use the film reasonably quickly, I tend to keep it in a "cool, dry place".

a lot of the storage guidance from the manufacturer is if you’re going to be storing film for a relatively long time, meaning more than a month or two. In those scenarios, it does matter quite a bit, but for a retailer, or distributor, unless they buy 6+ months worth of stock at a time, it gets sold and replaced with fresh stock way before any reasonable environmental conditions are going to do anything to it. Given the cost and volatility of the film market nowadays, almost nobody has enough capital to buy 6-12 months of supply. They might have that for the slower selling stock, but for popular emulsions, it’s just not feasible to carry that much. You want to buy enough to get a good per unit shipping price to you, but even with that there’s a point of diminishing returns where buying more isn’t going to get a better price and you’re just sucking up capital at that point that you could be using to carry more variety.

 

[MattKing]

Even back in the day (1970s to 1980s), stock turnover was the key to profit, because margins on film were narrow.
I had a manager who was constantly having his performance compared to a manager in another store, because that manager had an uncanny ability to arrange to have the next shipment appear just as the last bits of the last shipment were leaving the shelves into the hands of customers.
If the product could be sold before payment needed to be made to the supplier, that turned a low margin product (which senior management despised) into something at least acceptable.

 

[Adrian Bacon]

Even back in the day (1970s to 1980s), stock turnover was the key to profit, because margins on film were narrow.
I had a manager who was constantly having his performance compared to a manager in another store, because that manager had an uncanny ability to arrange to have the next shipment appear just as the last bits of the last shipment were leaving the shelves into the hands of customers.
If the product could be sold before payment needed to be made to the supplier, that turned a low margin product (which senior management despised) into something at least acceptable.

Yep. There’s very little value to a retailer to have huge amounts of film sitting on the shelf. It looks impressive, but at the end of the day, it’s money that you can’t use for anything else until it gets sold.