Darkroom Fiasco Of The Year ! !

DF · Apr 22, 2021

reddesert said:
"Possible dilution error" is the part that strikes me.

That's avoidable and could be a bigger issue than the difference between Ilfosol-3 and Ilfosol-S.

If you develop film for 3 minutes longer than recommended at the correct dilution, the negatives shouldn't be all black. They will be overdeveloped and contrasty, but not all black. The shadows should still be pretty thin. If your negatives are really all black, then you should be looking at your exposure as well as your dilution procedure, plus the other obvious issues like improvising a developing time.

Film exposure and developing is chemistry. It requires process control. It's forgiving, in the sense that if you follow the manufacturer's recommendation you should get acceptable results (without needing test strips, density measurements, etc). But if you do it by the seat of your pants there will be regrets.

'Took a second (good) look at the roll tonight ,'been since Saturday,and, no, they're not all completely black, in fact, some are printable, but, I say "printable" at best. They won't look good at all - even with filtration. Still the entire roll is almost all too dark to make out 3/4's of the frames.

DF · Apr 22, 2021

Donald Qualls said:
That statement should be the motto of the Analog section of Photrio (if not the whole site).

I Second That ! !

DF · Apr 22, 2021

grat said:
As a server administrator, I frequently run into people who believe that their poor planning is my emergency, and so it's possible I'm somewhat overly sensitive. The use of the word "wrong" might have been a bit strong in this case-- It *is* unfortunate, and I genuinely sympathize with the OP-- and of course, I've never made mistakes (<-- A total lie).

But I still maintain the OP had multiple chances to decide "This isn't going to happen today". Trying to improvise is respectable, but not with chemical processes that require a certain amount of precision and care.

Bottom line, some great pictures were lost. Although, if the OP hasn't tossed the negatives, try to find someone with an Epson scanner-- I realize "over-developed" isn't the same as "over-exposed", but I was able to scan a couple of negatives that were horrifically over-exposed, and still produce a usable image.

Yes - a few of them can be made out - extremely contrasty though.

Donald Qualls · Apr 22, 2021

Technically, it's off topic for this section of Photrio, but digital post can save a lot of stuff you couldn't get even a decent print from. Otherwise, the question is how hard a cut you can get on a minus-blue filter to try for 00 or even 000 contrast level. A tri-color green filter should give the least contrast multigrade will give.

Of course, there is another, completely analog method: bleaching.

Two options here. Farmer's Reducer can be mixed in a way that bleaches proportionally (IIRC), so you could bleach by inspection with that, or you could use a rehalogenating bleach (C-41 bleach that doesn't include fixer will work for this) and redevelop for a shorter time. This can be redone, within limits, to adjust the final contrast. It won't do anything good for grain, but it might make printable out of unprintable...

Tim Stapp · Apr 26, 2021

grat said:
Actually, on my most recent roll of film, 3 shots that I was convinced were "meh" when I took them, turned out to be some of the best on the entire roll. One of them actually got a "wow".

So sometimes, the photo in the real world can surprise the one in your head.

While my photo in question is digital: I was going to broom it. It didn't fit with what I saw on site at the time. It didn't fit what I visualized. My wife saw it and said "I love that!!!" It's become my best seller.

BTW, it was with my first d*g*l image maker, over 10 years ago. As I recall, it was a P&S that I've since given to my grandson. He helped me shoot his mothers wedding with it. He has a good eye. After the wedding, I asked if he got any good shots. He responded with "I could have, but you kept getting in my way."

Saganich · Apr 27, 2021

ohhh, another fun exercise, farmers reducer, definitely worth a try. I shot a friend's wedding once and everything was about 3 or 4 stops overexposed so I reduced the entire roll and the results were passable to damn good.

pentaxuser · Apr 27, 2021

Bad luck, OP. I'd have thought that when a public darkroom that supplies the developer as part of its service and then changes the developer, it would also provide the service of (a) drawing customers' attention to this and (b) placing a chart on the wall giving the development times for at least as many films as are listed on the Ilford site.

pentaxuser

Darkroom Fiasco Of The Year ! !

DF

DF

DF

Donald Qualls

Tim Stapp

Saganich

pentaxuser

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency