- Joined
- Dec 10, 2009
- Messages
- 6,297
- Format
- Multi Format
even in the 1960's Kodak recommended Green only for Infrared material (per Kodak Master Darkroom Dataguide v. 1964!
Old habits very slow to change. Consider the fact that back in 1964 the safelight bulb for B&W enlarging was amber, yet even today (60 years later) here are lots and lots of folks using red safelights.Interesting info! I assume Garry Winogrand (who processed his Tri-x and HP3 films by inspection) wasn't doing things the right way.
It’s like baking a cake. An experienced baker has a general idea on how long it might take to bake a cake, but some check on the doneness by checking the cake early with a toothpick. When the cake isn’t done, the batter sticks on the toothpick. The baker will take the cake out of the oven when the cake is baked long enough when the toothpick comes out clean.I think people always overthink these simple processes
I know from using my baseline with fp4 that my development time is going to be between 11 and 14 minutes. I start looking at about 9 minutes and go from there. For me it's just an easier way and I can do up to 12 or 13 negatives at one shot
Wow! This is cool. The green safelight method allows the safe light behind the light to see the density. But this method I'll try. I ordered a pair of night vision goggles. How did the negative turn out? You got the highlight density you wanted?I've tried it but inspecting is really hard without experience; you need to know what to look and how it should look.
Here is my video of the process:
Personally this made my eyes open how fast the film actually develops in the begining and how development slows down radically after certain period.
And also that you can really fix in visible light
Wow! This is cool. The green safelight method allows the safe light behind the light to see the density. But this method I'll try. I ordered a pair of night vision goggles. How did the negative turn out? You got the highlight density you wanted?
For me, the time and temperature method was hit and miss some of the time even if I expose and develop properly. I'm going to get my goggles in a week. I can't wait to try your method. I'll fumble less in the darkroom too.Yes, the negative was good. Not actual surprise when developing 2-3 times longer than it should be developed
Or, one could expose precisely using a spot meter, pick up a Zone VI Compensating Development Timer and employ variable contrast paper to achieve the same result....If you know a good working range of development time from cool to warm developer, it should be pretty easy to pick a time to start looking. Would you be able to tell the difference of a Zone VIII density at 12 mins vs 13 mins under that dim green light? I couldn't. But, it probably doesn't really matter. If it's off by a bit, the careful darkroom worker should be able to rectify it through paper grade selection and/or development techniques...
Or, one could expose precisely using a spot meter, pick up a Zone VI Compensating Development Timer and employ variable contrast paper to achieve the same result.
I first heard of the technique back in the 80's when I first studied photography. My photo professor in college didn't teach us how to develop under a safelight. for me, it was a revelation. My feeling is that it's mostly forgotten and not done today because it's obsolete. Also, most people today don't have darkrooms to process film under a safelight also. I think a hundred years ago, my guess that photographers didn't have the luxury of light meters and had to use their instincts when they exposed their film. Processing under a safelight helps with slight variations in exposure.As I believe someone has said or hinted at elsewhere in this thread, this was/is an obsolete technique used mostly by amateurs of that era with little or no regard to quality results. This I reckon sums it up.
a lot of people developed film via safelight. Does anyone do that anymore
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?