Developing film question

[Citizen_Erased]

Hello everyone. My semester has started and with it my foray into 4x5 photography. So far after shooting a few sheets of film and developing them myself I must say that I am truly in love with this camera. It trumps everything I've done up until now and it's so much more versatile then a dslr, I can't help but grin while i'm under the darkcloth setting up my shot.

Yet I digress.

I came here to ask a question. I'm currently using 400 TMAX and I've been getting a lot of thin negatives. Could it be something wrong with my processing times? I shot some HP5 last week and used the same times. I didn't have any problems with those negatives.

Here are the times I'm using:

5 1/2 minutes HC-110
1 min stop bath
7 min fixer
10 min wash
1 min photoflo

Thanks,

-Tom-

 

[pgomena]

It's really hard to say from the information you have given just what the "problem" might be. Without knowing how you meter a scene or subject, the lighting conditions, and a whole bunch of developing information (i.e. developer dilution, agitation, temperature) it's almost impossible to answer your question.

Comparing the results of two different films is meaningless unless you test them side-by-side in identical situations. There are too many variables involved. For starters, the films you used have completely different characteristics.

Both of the films you mention are excellent products capable of producing outstanding results. Learn to test your materials methodically in controlled situations and branch out from there.

I would suggest you pick one film and developer and stick with it until you know how that particular combination performs in various conditions.

Peter Gomena

 

[jeffreyg]

Your developing time seems to be correct. I don't think you need a full one minute stop bath (acid or water?) but doubt that is the problem. have you used the same dilution and temperature for both? Did you expose both correctly? It's possible you had your light meter film speed set differently and didn't notice. Why not take some test negatives of the same set-up and settings with both films at the same time and develop them together to see what happens. If the results are better than the original you'll know something was off the first time -- probably the exposure.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

 

[Citizen_Erased]

After reading this, I checked my light meter and it looks like my partner had set the ISO to 200. So that could be a problem. My instructor had mentioned setting the ISO to 200 for a reason, like a stop difference, it didn't make much sense to me when he said it. If anyone can shed some light on that please feel free to.

In regards to scene metering, I just walk up to my subject and meter it. The developer is a stock solution mixed at a 1:7 ratio and it's room temperature. I'm not sure, the chemistry is left in drums for us to use. What would the optimum temperature be for HC-110?

I'm not aggressively agitating the tray, just a gentle rocking motion every two seconds.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Setting the meter on ISO 200 would make the negatives denser.

I strongly recomment that meter readings be taken either minimizing the sky or avoiding the sky in the measurement. The sky is a 10K to 14K black body and it can throw off reflectance light reading. On the other hand when using an incidence meter, sky light is part of the illumination and should be included.

Please give us feedback on how our advice works for you and feel free to ask any questions.

Steve

 

[jeffreyg]

Room temperature can vary. Most developing charts will give a time/temperature. Generally best used at 68F or 70F but the warmer the shorter the time and very short times are not recommended. I would stick to 68F. Perhaps your instructor had tested the equipment and found that 200 was the correct ISO. There are some tests you can do to establish your personal film speeds depending on your equipment, the film used, etc. Metering off a subject can give misleading info. The meter basically sees everything as about 18% reflective. So a brighter or a less reflective subject will still be seen as reflecting 18%. Search previous APUG forums for a wealth of info.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

 

[Ian C]

Kodak’s recommendations for T-Max 400 sheet film in HC-110 is here on page 3.

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/j24/j24.pdf

Assuming dilution B, the times range from 6 to 9 minutes for tray development, depending upon the developing temperature.

Post #1 says 5 ½ minutes. Could be a recipe for underdevelopment.

 

[Grainy]

do you use the bellow factor to calculate the correct exposure when needed? I haven't used a 4x5 yet, so I don't know if this could have anything to do with thin negatives.

 

[jeffreyg]

Good point bellows extension does count. Check http://www.digitaltruth.com for developing times. I'm not sure of their accuracy but they list most B&W films and developer combos.

 

[Citizen_Erased]

I do not use the bellows factor to calculate exposure. My instructor never mentioned that. I'm using a Calumet Cadet, so I just extend the front and rear standards a few inches out from the middle. Then I use the rear standard to focus.

 

[chassis]

My experience with thin negatives has to do with underexposure. I shot a fair amount of 6x6 and 6x7 film with no light meter, and was always wishing for more exposure.

I have recently acquired a 4x5 camera setup, and treated myself to a Sekonic L-758 light meter. I am committing to my self to "expose for the shadows and develop for the highlights". lol

So my point is check your exposure.

 

[Joe O'Brien]

I shoot mostly 6x6, but since I started spot metering and doing like Chassis already said "exposing for the shadows and developing for the highlights" I have had far fewer instances of thin negatives. I can say that the Mas Dev has never failed me though. I tend to trust the chart after reading that Ilford suggests 11 minutes for a film/ISO/developer/temperature combination that I've found actually needs 17 minutes, which is in accordance with Mas Dev.

 

[Rick A]

When shooting LF at closer than infinity, you will have to add more light than the meter shows for bellows factor. There is also reciprosity factor for longer than normal exposures. I always shoot T max 400 at half speed (200) for better results, also develope in Rodinal(1+50). I had problems with thin negs when I first started shooting LF, I got the bellows factoor but would forget reciprosity. Also, I found that shooting under tungsten light I needed to shoot all my films at half speed for better results.

 

[Sim2]

Frustrating when film development doesn't go as intended however, this may get howls of derisive laughter from 5x4 users as I haven't dev'd it for ages but...

Is there product identification info printed on the edge of the sheet similar to 35mm and 120 roll film? e.g. Kodak TMY-2 or Ilford HP5 in tiny writing? If so and the film is underdeveloped (by a serious amount) then the writing will be fainter than on a "correctly" developed (or over developed roll/sheet). If the little ident writing is similar to a "correct" sheet and the image is faint, then the scene was likely to be underexposed.

May not be much help,

Sim2.

 

[jeffreyg]

The exposure factor = bellows length squared divided by the focal length of the lens squared. So if it came out 4 increase exposure 2 stops. Another way can be for every 50% increase from infinity increase 1 stop. I found the best way not to have to do math while photographing is to do the math first: get a small retractable tape and do the math for each focal length lens you have backwards. Meaning take exposure factors in halves and knowing the focal lengths figure out the bellows length then mark the tape with a permanent marker (a different color for each lens) mark the factors at the indicated spot on the tape. Measure from the film plane to the lens boar and you should be okay. i keep my tape attached to my light meter.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

 

[Citizen_Erased]

Alrighty guys,

I processed a few sheets of film yesterday, and before I started I took the temperature of the water I was using. It was about 70 degrees, and that's after I let it run for a few minutes. So at a temperature of 70 degrees, according to Kodak's HC-110 information page that should take about seven minutes with continuous agitation. However, the negative turned out extremely thin.

So I tried using a shorter developer time. To experiment I used a development time of four minutes at the same temperature, because this stuff seems to develop my TMAX rather quickly. The negative has some density now, sooo yeah. I'm thinking that this is all because of the temperature of the chemistry. I'm also upset that there are light leaks in my holders.

I scanned them for you to see. Top one was developed for four minutes and the bottom one was seven minutes.

 

[Ian C]

Close focusing requires additional exposure to compensate for the fact that the lens is further from the film (its intensity falls off in accordance with the Inverse Square Law).

Here’s how to figure it out for a standard symmetric lens. Let

E = distance from film to the front of the lensboard (measured with a millimeter scale).

f = focal length of the lens.

Δf = additional exposure in stops needed due to the bellows extension.

Δf = 2*ln(E/f)/ln(2)

Example: f = 150mm, E = 300mm

Δf = 2*ln(300/150)/ln(2) = 2*ln(2)/ln(2) = 2 stops

So, if the meter reading was 1/30 second at f/22 you need to increase the time 2 stops to 1/8 second for correct exposure at f/22.

 

[John Koehrer]

I can be pretty simple as evidenced by some of my posts. So!
IF I'm using a 150mm lens and have the bellow extended to 225mm, I add one stop. if the bellows is racked out to 300mm it's two stops.
It's a rule of thumb and works for any lens 200 racked to 300=1 stop racked to 400=2 stops
that's it for me. Between 150&225etc.=1/2-3/4 stop. I fudge it.

 

[Bill Burk]

To start, you are loading the film into the film holders incorrectly..

What Greg points out makes sense. The top shot, which is denser, has the words 400 TMY-2 mirror-image but the thin negative has it "right-reading". Meanwhile the shadows from the film holder look about the same. This implies your thinner negative was put into the film holder with the back facing frontwards.

Use the notches as your guide when you are feeling your way in the dark. Make sure the emulsion faces the front of the camera when you load it!

 

[MattKing]

I agree with all the above.

I have one further question though. You say the first result was too thin, so you developed the next one for a shorter time?

That is backwards - if you want a "thicker" negative, you need to 1) increase exposure and/or 2) develop longer.

Increasing exposure works better for increasing the density of shadows. Increasing the development doesn't do much for the shadows, but does increase the density of the highlights (and thus the contrast of the negative).

Are you sure that you haven't mistakenly switched the scans - on my screen the top one looks to have been developed more.

 

[Citizen_Erased]

It doesn't make much sense either. I've been thinking about that all day and to MattKing I did not switch the scans. I'll talk to my instructor in regards to the bellows factor and try to clear that up. In the meantime I'm going to avoid photographing flowers and try something else.

I've been loading the film with the notch in the bottom left corner, as seen if it were portrait orientation. So the reason why the film info is backwards is due to my scanning it. It's nothing fancy, just a flatbed Epson scanner that was merely to show illustrate my concerns.

 

[Bill Burk]

OK so flopped in scanning, we all do that...

Is there is any way to verify the developer concentration/freshness? Two weekends ago I learned how many ounces of D-76 stock solution (2 oz per sheet of 4x5) it takes to develop a sheet of film.

Exceeding the capacity (or the fact developer had already been used) caused me some thin negatives.

 

[jeffreyg]

I don't know of your prior experience exposing and processing B&W film or the level of the course you are taking but it seems to me that you are just trying different times etc without first learning the basics and standardizing a system to get consistent results. Starting with a view camera is probably not the way to go. Exposure factors based on the focal length of the lens and bellows extension do count. There have been several threads here including one of mine describing how to determine it. Also I would be more careful with technique "about 70 degrees" could be 75 to some. If you are going to use the view camera to learn why not start with images that are focused so the bellows extension equals the focal length of the lens. That way for your tests bellows factors won't be an issue. Meter off an 18% gray card and don't use any filters. Use the box speed of the film and develop according to mfg's recommendations. Accurately measure the time, temperature and agitation. You should also record what you do. That should produce an average negative with reasonable contrast. Once you have that down and are confident you can go from there. It might be easier to stat with a smaller format and roll film. There are many entries on APUG that describe all of the above. It's best to be organized and learn the right way from the beginning than to become frustrated and miss out on what photography has to offer. This is not intended as a criticism but hopefully as some advice.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

 

[Bill Burk]

If learning about the different variables is an important part of your class, you are getting good experience.

...Accurately measure the time, temperature and agitation. You should also record what you do.

Writing things down never hurts.

For example, that's how I determined I was using my developer beyond its capacity. I did 24 sheets of 4x5 in three runs of 8 sheets. I did this in one trayfull of 16oz stock developer (which has a capacity for 8 sheets) + 16oz water.

 

[djacobox372]

This makes no sense, developing longer will not create thinner negatives. Impossible!