Darkroom Fiasco Of The Year ! !

[DF]

So, the day for shooting couldn't have been better - up early, clouds in unusually strange but great formations, even better W/Polarizer. These shots some of my best.
Finish the roll and hit the darkroom (shared community darkroom). But wait - there's no D-76. It's now Ilford Ilfosol-3, and I'm the only one there. O.K. so grab my phone to quick search this "Ilfosol" stuff not familiar with, and, and bingo - I left my phone at home.
Allright, lets not get in to panic mode. I'll just "consult" the Ilford film brochures (FP4) that have been lying around here for ages and I see in the development chart Ilford Ifosol-S - but no Ifosol "3" . Hhmmm - I guess they're the same (I hope they're the same) - maybe 3 is newer & improved version of S.
But no, it isn't - by as much as 3 MINUTES I learn later , not to mention possible dilution error ! ! Neg's almost black. Everything all gone !!
I hate this.

 

[lecarp]

And did you learn anything from this?

 

[grat]

There are so many things wrong with what the OP did, it's hard to know where to start.

It's a lousy way to learn, though.

 

[DF]

There are so many things wrong with what the OP did, it's hard to know where to start.

It's a lousy way to learn, though.

So Many things went wrong? What things? I did ONE thing wrong - and that was assuming Ilfosol S wasn't much different than Ilfosol 3 in terms of development times because of the available outdated information. Kindly re-read my post.

 

[DF]

And did you learn anything from this?

Yes. When new & unfamiliar chemicals/developers are introduced in a public darkroom, DON'T do anything untill you've got COMPLETE information.
Also, remind the supervisors to discard ALL old old/outdated Ilford brochures.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

What about getting yourself a changing bag, tank, and your own chemicals to store under your bathroom sink? You'd never have to worry about outside persons interrupting your techniques and processes.

 

[ParkerSmithPhoto]

What about getting yourself a changing bag, tank, and your own chemicals to store under your bathroom sink? You'd never have to worry about outside persons interrupting your techniques and processes.

What CC said.

Get some stainless tanks and your own chemistry. Write down EVERYTHING you do: developer, dilution, agitation, temp, etc. After you have your negs, go to the darkroom and print them. Are they Grade 2 or Grade 4? What did you expect to happen, and what actually happened? Adjust exposure and development accordingly.

Any new developer changes many variables. There isn't enough difference between them to really worry about which one is "best." Just pick one, stick with it, make notes, check results, adjust and repeat. Even if you don't want to work at home, it's worth mixing your own developer and using only that.

 

[grat]

So Many things went wrong? What things? I did ONE thing wrong - and that was assuming Ilfosol S wasn't much different than Ilfosol 3 in terms of development times because of the available outdated information. Kindly re-read my post.

In my personal opinion, if you want to single out one failure, it was that you undervalued your negatives-- you said they were some of the best you'd taken.

But when you realize there was no D76, you started improvising. You didn't have documentation-- yet you kept going. You assumed that because the name was similar, "Ilfosol S" and "Ilfosol 3" would be similar chemicals with similar performance.

Finally, you gambled on this approach, with some of "the best photos you've taken".

You might as well have wandered into the darkroom, grabbed a random bottle of developer off the shelf, and developed your film by rolling dice.

Your whole approach was imprecise, poorly planned, and mostly improvised. I'm reminded of this old Dilbert strip: https://dilbert.com/strip/1997-12-28

Now-- this is my opinion. I'm sure others will have different opinions. When I go to develop film, I have a spreadsheet that's customized for the film, the developer, and the developing tank I'm using. It's got the dilution amounts, the mixing instructions, the times for each step, including agitations, and a written summary of steps. I also have the sequence programmed into an android app that I run on a tablet.

Is it overkill? Yes. Have I had a fiasco developing film? No.

 

[Don_ih]

I'll be the one to offer sympathies. I can completely understand why you'd think the new dev was similar to the old dev. After all, they've got the same name. It sounds like a bad day.

 

[wiltw]

Never ASS-U-me

 

[relistan]

Bummer, that’s no fun at all. I can sympathize with the situation. You’ve reserved the darkroom, you have a limited time window. Maybe it’s not even near home. Maybe it’s expensive for you, or it takes another week to reserve a new spot. You don’t have your phone, there is info that looks pretty good. Everyone seems so sure what they would do in your shoes. The point is, I sympathize with losing your negatives. No fun at all and a bad ending to a nice day.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

I think the word "wrong" in this conversation needs to be replaced with the word "unfortunate". The word "wrong" insinuates fault, and there really was none. It's happened to everyone.

 

[reddesert]

"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.

 

[relistan]

I think the word "wrong" in this conversation needs to be replaced with the word "unfortunate". The word "wrong" insinuates fault, and there really was none. It's happened to everyone.

Exactly.

 

[mshchem]

Maybe the best advice, not judgmental, not being a dick or no it all, is. Develop your film at home. When I was a kid, I had to have a real darkroom. My Dad framed in a corner of the basement, where the coal was stored way back.
Now my Dad. He just waited until it was dark. Found a dark spot and loaded his Elkay bakelite tank. 1 qt brown bottle for developer, used homemade stop, bought Kodak powder fixer.

All you need is a Paterson Universal Tank, a thermometer and a timer. Nothing else.

 

[mshchem]

Spell check Know it all

 

[mshchem]

Exactly.

When I was a kid I was probably 9 or 10. Decided to show my friend how to print.

It ended when I started to pour glacial acetic acid into an Ace hard rubber tray. Luckily I didn't get far. That was a great lesson .

Shit! It happens.

 

[grat]

I think the word "wrong" in this conversation needs to be replaced with the word "unfortunate". The word "wrong" insinuates fault, and there really was none. It's happened to everyone.

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.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

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).

Yes, and I wasn't insinuating that you were "wrong" either. Just wanted to make that clear.

 

[ParkerSmithPhoto]

So, the day for shooting couldn't have been better - up early, clouds in unusually strange but great formations, even better W/Polarizer. These shots some of my best.

BTW, not to risk a call to the Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Dead Horses, but you will ALWAYS think that the roll you just shot contains some of your most indispensable photographs, until you actually develop it and say "Well... I guess not..."

Been at it over 30 years. The pictures in your head are always 10x better than the ones in the real world.

 

[Donald Qualls]

The pictures in your head are always 10x better than the ones in the real world.

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

 

[MattKing]

The pictures in your head are always 10x better than the ones in the real world.

I am going to parse this, by saying that instead of "always 10X better" I prefer "very frequently significantly better".
There is some hope you know!

 

[grat]

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.

 

[Nige]

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.

and pre developing fogging possibilities

 

[ParkerSmithPhoto]

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

Agreed. Sometimes you fall in love with a picture before you've even seen the negative, and then six months later you look back at a roll and find something much better.