Developing

[joeyk49]

I have no idea what I'm doing...so don't go by what I do...I'm just feeling my way in the dark. (And having a blast doing it!)

BUT, I do LOVE what you do, keep it up!

 

[Jim Chinn]

I gather from your original post that you are trying to decide on various combinations of film and developer to try. You really can't get an answer from polling others as to their preferences. You really need to start out with one film and one developer and use them for at least 6 months. You also need to determine your own exposure index rating for the film and its ability to have contrast fine tuned through developing.

If you play around with several films and developers at the same time you will never learn how to get the most out of any single film or developer. By working with one and learning all of its traits, you will establish a baseline of knowledge that can be used for comparison with the next film or developer you try. I would consider at least 50 rolls a minimum to shoot and develop after you get your exposure index down. There are two excellent books to help you decide this. Les Mclean's book is one, the other is by Carson Graves, "Zone System for 35mm Photography". It also covers working with sheet film for testing.

If you look at the careers of many famous photographers, they worked pretty much with one film and developer combo for long periods of time.

I would recommend the following two combinations (pick one) to start out with:
TriX/Rodinal
Delta 100 and XTOL 1-1 or 1-2

The other advantage to working with one combination exclusively for period of time is that when you move on to try something new, even subtle differences will be readily apparent. Work with the second combination along with the first for a good period of time. Then with two films and developers under your belt, you can experiment with the knowledge that you always have two combinations dialed in for any subject.

 

[Loose Gravel]

1. Mini landscapes, abstracts, pix of my kids.
2. HP5+ because I can get it in 57 and I use faster films in LF because the wind is always blowing and I use it in small format so that I can work as fast as possible.
3. One film so that I really understand it.
4. PMK pyro because it seems like good stuff, it works for HP5+, and it keeps forever in A/B form.
5. One film/dev because I've come to understand it and I don't want to waste time in the dark when I could be shooting.
6. NO

 

[gchpaco]

I'm still trying to get my head around why I would use various developing agents and for what purposes. So if you can help me by answering some questions (and maybe adding a couple of your own) I'd really appreciate it.

What subjects to you normally shoot?

What film do you use and why?

Do you generally stick to the same film or vary according to subject/conditions?

What developing agents do you use and why?

Do you generally stick to the same developing agents or vary accordingly to film/subject?

Does various types of developing affect the archivability of the negatives? If so, how?

Thanks everyone.
Cheers
Nicole

I shoot landscapes and people, by and large. In 35mm, I use FP4+, Neopan 400 and 1600, and of late Delta 400. In 120 I use APX 100, FP4+ and Neopan 400. In 4x5 I've been shooting mostly TMX, but have a box of FP4+ that I'm going to move to shortly.

I like FP4+ a lot, as you can probably tell. It's less unforgiving than Acros and TMX, and has finer grain IMHO than Plus-X. Neopan 400 is a nice 400 speed film, less grainy than Tri-X; I've only been using Delta 400 because my usual supplier was out of the Neopan 400. The Delta is nice in its own way, and has suited me well in the past. I don't like TMX all that much although I've gotten some good results with it. APX 100 is the odd man in the group; I only shoot it in 120 and it seems redundant given my FP4+ attraction. I haven't rationalized why I shoot it and FP4+ yet; need to make more prints. By and large, I shoot 100 speed film if I can get away with it in 120 and 35mm, and faster film if I can't.

I used to develop everything in XTOL, most of it in 1:1 but the 1600 in 1:3. I've been experimenting with Rodinal for some of the slower films; I've confined my experiments at present to the APX 100, but will be seeing what it does to TMX and FP4+ in short order. I like XTOL even though it's sometimes a pain to mix because it's very well behaved, in my experience. I've been using the Rodinal for its acutance properties, and haven't printed enough to get a real feel for whether it's my cup of tea or not. Of late I've been developing some landscapes in Rodinal and all the rest of my photography in XTOL 1:1. I mostly use 1:3 for Neopan 1600.

As far as I know all developers should have the same archival properties; they're washed out of the emulsion. It's possible something really bizarre might do something weird, but I've never heard of any archival problems associated with any of the standard developers--poor washing or poor fixing is much more common.

As for what you should do, I second the call for you to find one film and one developer and just stick with it for a while.

 

[Nicole]

This is a fantastic response, thanks to everyone for your input! Yes, it certainly does become a little confusing with everyone doing it 'their way' but that's what art is all about. "Finding my own way with the mediums I feel most comfortable with'. But if I can learn something from others experience, it might save me heartache and money, and then again maybe not. I'm really not too fussed. But gee, what an amazing knowledge we have here at APUG. I have met some amazing and inspiring people who at first I want to know all about and learn 'how did they do that?" "How can I do that?" "Can I do that?" But when I'm out there and it's just me and my little (or big) camera, I forget everything around me and disappear into another world and how and what others do is not even an issue.

But when I'm in the darkroom, that's another matter. All previous experience and advice, whether good or bad, is always most welcome. If I put so much effort into get 'the shot' I don't want to waste a whole roll on bad developing.

I have been self-teaching photography now for 2 years and only this year began at the local college studying photography for 3 years full time. I still have a long way to go yet and feel like I have it all back-to-front. At the moment college is very basic and I am finding the course very stifled, structured and limiting, but I'm sure the it will become much more interesting as I become more challenged. In the meantime, APUG is my choice of 'universal learning' which pushes me further along all the time.

So, Sean and all at APUG, here's to you!

Kind regards, Nicole

 

[fhovie]

A really important question to ask is what do I want from the print?

Perfection is an 8x10 contact print. - IF I can get the camera to capture the moment - likely not for shooting kids at play or sporting events - no backpacking or international travel. I have settled on TRI-X and Pyrocat because of the robust nature of the film, the speed, the shape of the grain - and pyrocat for the compensating and sharpening effects.

Large prints (16x20 or larger) is 4x5. I have settled on the same as above (tri-x pyrocat) for the same reasons. I get grainless enlargements from the above and have the same benefits although I use a different time and strength for the developer to get a different density range knowing it will go into an enlarger.

Large prints (11x14 or larger) - faster portable camera needed - MF - TRI-X or HP5 in either XTOL or Pyrocat depending on the subject. If it is low light and I need a large print - I will shoot HP5 or TMAX400 with XTOL - the grain is less pronounced in the HP5 and the XTOL will give me 2 stops of push without any regrets. For portraits, I might use TRI-X and pyro for added highlight clamping and sharpness (how I like them) - If I am using a very old camera and my exposures are all over the place, I will use split d-23 - it will preserve a very large range of exposures. I have also used Pan F or FP4 or TMAX400 in XTOL for bigger enlargements - for smoother grain.

Prints to 8x10 - very portable and very low light - 35mm - FP4, APX100 to HP5 TMAX400!!! . (likely not tri-x for 35mm unless grain is desired) - XTOL my expectations of 35mm are that I will get ok 8x10 and stunning 5x7 prints. I RARELY use 35mm. Color family pics for this format or even APS is fine. I DON'T have darkroom time for 35mm.
Generally I will pull out the 35mm for super wide angle shots and shots requiring f1.4 lenses. Things I just can't get otherwise. My better choice is a 6x9 folding camera that is smaller and easier to carry that gives me a huge 6x9 nagative and then I use TRI-X and XTOL

 

[c6h6o3]

You really need to start out with one film and one developer and use them for at least 6 months.

Amen. I would add to that 'one paper'. Don't change anything without a reason and only change one thing at a time.