film/developer for extreme contrast scene

[nc5p]

I went to Carlsbad Caverns last March. I shot TMX and TMY and didn't get a printable (optically) shot but was able to save the images by scanning and PS (shadow/highlight and curves). They were blown out in the highlights that were lit where the rest of the cave is rather dark. The detail elsewhere was pretty decent. What I'd like to do is go back before tourist season and do better. I was thinking of using a two-step developer, like Ansel Adams did in "The Negative". These exposures will also be long to get the shadows. For that I thought Fuji Acros 100 would be good (reciprocity), but will it do well with two-step development? Photographer's Formulary has a two-step kit, I'm not sure what else to try. Any suggestions on both film and developers? I want to make some good prints on my Ilford paper this time.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

If they are LF negs, try printing the TMY negs (TMX will work if it's old TMX, not the current version with the UV blocking layer) on Centennial POP. Printing-out papers are self-masking, so as they are exposed and density increases in the shadows development of the shadows slows down, while the highlights continue to develop at the same rate, so you can get a lot of detail everywhere in the image with a very contrasty neg.

 

[dancqu]

...Carlsbad Caverns last March.
For that I thought Fuji Acros 100
would be good (reciprocity),QUOTE]

The Acros, some little over exposure, and pull
processing may do it for you.

With the more usual films I believe the technique is
one of exposure with reciprocity in mind then give
minus perhaps 3, 4, or even 5 development. Dan

 

[avandesande]

PF also has a water bath kit using amidol that looks interesting.
I have been doing semi-stand development in rodinal, and where efke films respond well to this I haven't had as much luck with acros. Acros is a fairly unusual film in many respects.
I dont think that there is anything different about film caves and other night photography, maybe someone with night photography experience can chime int?

 

[Konical]

Good Evening,

I have extremely limited experience with Acros, but I agree that it has excellent reciprocity characteristics. If it were more readily available in standard sheets instead of Quickloads, I'd probably use it for night shots. Fortunately, T-100 is also very good, so I stick with that.

Try Technidol for your high-contrast work with either Acros or T-100. My own experience is that diluting the concentrate into a 10 oz. solution, instead of the 8 oz. called for by Kodak, works very well. Most of my night shots get 12-15 minutes in a rotating drum, depending on my seat-of-the-pants evaluation of the particular scene. Contrast is usually well-controlled. The only disadvantage I've found is the relatively high cost of Technidol.

Konical

 

[fhovie]

I have good luck sucking up 10 or more stops within a density range of 1.3 (grade 2 with condenser enlarger) by using:
TRI X at ASA 200 and
Pyrocat 1:1:100 9 minutes at 70F Recommend Pyrocat-P for that Rodinal look

TRI X is the best I have found for high contrast situations.
I have used split d-23 quite a bit and it will compensate but it will also cost you a little sharpness. Catechol (in pyrocat) is a tanning developer and will clamp the highlights during normal development as will most gallol or catechol based soups. I would not stand develop - It actually increases film speed and contracts the density range. For TRI-X 1:1:150 for 30 minutes with 4 aggitations at 70F in Pyrocat, I get a film speed of 320 and an SBR of 7 will fit in a DR of 1.3 or so. Works well for average scenes - for SBR of 5 it will be a bit flat on Grade 2. I think I would avoid stand development for compensation in normal circumstances.

 

[Marco Buonocore]

I do a fair bit of contracted development with Acros and Rodinal. I've been shooting urban scenes at night, and the contrast levels can be very high. From my experience, it doesn't pull extraordinarily well. Anything more than N-2, for me, has been a poor experience. My midtones start to bunch up, to the point where Zones IV & V are pretty close to one another.

It's not a deal breaker; I love many of the other qualities, and overall the prints are impressive enough, but I think you might want to consider alternatives. For the record, I rate the film at 64, develop in Rodinal 1:50 with very reduced agitation, and print on Galerie with a cold light head.

Diafine does do an amazing job of reigning in contrast. I normally use it for the speed improvements on tri-x, but have been trying it out at nights with FP4 (on a tripod, of course), and it's been a good combination for high contrast.

I'm not sure what format you shoot - but I've been considering using Dead Link Removed for these high contrast situations. If you've got time to plan the shots at Carlsbad, it may be something to consider. If I can get an n-4 or n-5 legitimate contraction, I'll go through the roof.

Good luck!

 

[Ole]

If the contrast is really extreme, you should consider the classic Windisch' Extreme Compensating Pyrocat developer. Use the original recipe, not the "modernised" version which just doesn't work as well. I've used this developer with APX100 when shooting a partial solar eclipse, and managed to get detain in the foreground as well as being able to distinguish sunspots on the non-eclipsed part of the sun. I doubt you'll ever find a more extreme contrast range than that!

 

[Uncle Jim]

In the mid-sixties, I was shooting Baltimore cityhall at night. Extreem contrast as part was lighted. Used a technique found in the old U S Camera magazine called underwater development. Use D-72 diluted 2:1 as per paper. Develope one minute. Remove film from developer and apply to a sheet of glass. Pless down to remove excess developer. Place glass/film in a tray of water. Article called for 15 to 20 minutes in water bath, but believe I used a shorter time. You may ned to exparement. Oh yes, all of this is done in the dark. Worked really well for me. Had great pictures with plenty of shadow detail.
Uncle Jim

 

[michtothemax]

Rodinal at 1:125 would work, you could also try the Formulary's POTA.

Regards.

Mitch

 

[climbabout]

You might check out this thread - I hope I have copied it right. I have photographed with Steve Sherman or over 20 years and have been in some extraordinary lighting situations with him - Antelope Canyon from long ago when you could go there on your own - and Ruggles Mine in New Hampshire, as well as some old factory buildings with dark interiors and light streaming in through the windows. He has a couple of great methods for handling these scenes. If this thread does'nt work - I'm sure you can contact him through his website at steve-sherman.com

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Climbabout

 

[MVNelson]

If you want to get great negatives with TMX or acros without jumping through a lot of hoops simply order D#13 from photographers formularyand follow the directions. This developer was designed specifically for very high scene brightness ranges(SBR) with TMX and Acros. I don't believe itds recommended for too many other films. It was developed by Phil Davis (of BTZS) and my Canyon shots negatives were quite good. Good luck.

Miles

 

[Tom Hoskinson]

Pyrocatechol Compensating Developer (Windisch's formula)

Solution A

Distilled water 100ml
Pyrocatechol 8 grams
Sodium Sulfite (anhydrous) 1.25 grams

Store in a brown glass bottle filled to the top

Solution B

Distilled water 70ml
Sodium Hydroxide 10 grams

Dissolve the Sodium Hydroxide in the water
Add distilled water to make a total solution volume of 100ml

The B Solution will keep for about 2 months stored in a brown glass bottle filled to the top.

For use, take 500ml water and mix in 12ml Solution A plus 7ml Solution B.

Development time is 12 to 16 minutes.

From The Manual of Modern Photography by Hans Windisch, Second Revised Edition,1956

 

[Jed Freudenthal]

Pyrocatechol Compensating Developer (Windisch's formula)

Solution A

Distilled water 100ml
Pyrocatechol 8 grams
Sodium Sulfite (anhydrous) 1.25 grams

Store in a brown glass bottle filled to the top

Solution B

Distilled water 70ml
Sodium Hydroxide 10 grams

Dissolve the Sodium Hydroxide in the water
Add distilled water to make a total solution volume of 100ml

The B Solution will keep for about 2 months stored in a brown glass bottle filled to the top.

For use, take 500ml water and mix in 12ml Solution A plus 7ml Solution B.

Development time is 12 to 16 minutes.

From The Manual of Modern Photography by Hans Windisch, Second Revised Edition,1956

I have the 14 th German edition of the manual (1960) of Hans Windisch book. The formula looks different in this edition than in the 2nd english edition, and there are a range of practical hints given by Windisch. The difference might originate from the fact that it is a revised edition. But, this formula is certainly very very compensating. Be sure, it is not overcompensating. I, personally, consider the formula a little extreme.

Jed

 

[Tom Hoskinson]

Jed, What are the differences between the formula in the 1960 German edition and the 1956 version that I posted?

In his 1956 (English) book, Hans Windisch does list some alkali substitution options and some dilution and tray development options that I did not include in my post.

Jed, why do you consider the formula to be a little extreme?

 

[janjohansson]

In my swedish version of the book, printed 1957 (unknown revision),
the part A contains 2.5g sodium sulfite.

-j

 

[Tom Hoskinson]

In my swedish version of the book, printed 1957 (unknown revision),
the part A contains 2.5g sodium sulfite.

-j

Based on the following information from Neblette, anything less than 5g/L of sodium sulfite will most likely work ok in this tanning and staining compensating developer.


“The visual density of images developed in pyrogallol, pyrocatechin, ortho-phenylenediamine and para-phenylenediamine is lower than the photographic density; in other words, these images have greater printing density and contrast than is apparent to the eye.”
“The ratio of the visual and the photographic gamma is termed the color coefficient. The color coefficient depends upon the amount of preservative (sulfite) in the developer and the conditions of development as well as the developing agent used.”

The effect of variations in the amount of sulfite in pyrocatechol and pyrogallol developers is shown in the table below.

Sulfite in grams per liter Color Coefficient

50……………………………1.16
25…………………………….1.24
10…………………………….1.45
5………………………………1.80

Color Coefficient Table from Jones and Wilsey, J Franklin Inst. 185,231 (1918)

Thus, a low visual density negative that was developed in a low sulfite pyrocatechol or pyrogallol developer may exhibit acceptably high printing density and contrast.

Reference: Neblette C.B., 1961: Photography, Its Materials and Processes
Chapter 17, Developers and Development,
Page 237, Tanning Developers

 

[Tom Hoskinson]

In my swedish version of the book, printed 1957 (unknown revision),
the part A contains 2.5g sodium sulfite.

-j

Jan, Does the Swedish edition call out 2.5g Crystal Sodium Sulfite?

1.25g Anhydrous Sodium Sulfite = 2.5g Crystal Sodium Sulfite

 

[janjohansson]

Jan, Does the Swedish edition call out 2.5g Crystal Sodium Sulfite?

1.25g Anhydrous Sodium Sulfite = 2.5g Crystal Sodium Sulfite

Ay, it was in fact crystal sudium sulfite in the swedish book.
So i guess that makes the furmulas equal.

btw, there is also a note that it is the low content of sodium sulfite that makes
for the compensating effect of this developer. Which goes well along with the
info from the other book you "cited".

cheers,

-j

 

[philsweeney]

You might check out this thread - I hope I have copied it right. I have photographed with Steve Sherman or over 20 years and have been in some extraordinary lighting situations with him - Antelope Canyon from long ago when you could go there on your own - and Ruggles Mine in New Hampshire, as well as some old factory buildings with dark interiors and light streaming in through the windows. He has a couple of great methods for handling these scenes. If this thread does'nt work - I'm sure you can contact him through his website at steve-sherman.com

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Climbabout

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

 

[Steve Sherman]

I went to Carlsbad Caverns last March. I shot TMX and TMY and didn't get a printable (optically) shot but was able to save the images by scanning and PS (shadow/highlight and curves). They were blown out in the highlights that were lit where the rest of the cave is rather dark. The detail elsewhere was pretty decent. What I'd like to do is go back before tourist season and do better. I was thinking of using a two-step developer, like Ansel Adams did in "The Negative". These exposures will also be long to get the shadows. For that I thought Fuji Acros 100 would be good (reciprocity), but will it do well with two-step development? Photographer's Formulary has a two-step kit, I'm not sure what else to try. Any suggestions on both film and developers? I want to make some good prints on my Ilford paper this time.

The method you process your film is far more important than the chemistry.

Here is how I have handled extreme contrast in the past, i.e. 15 zones / stops of contrast. Ilford FP4 and Pyrocat HD using a Semi-Stand method of processing the film.

What happens is highly dilute developer comes in contact with entire negative, more sensitized areas of negative exhaust the developer almost immediately (highlights) while less sensitizes areas (shadows) continue to develop thereby compressing contrast.

Agitation is minimal but still necessary to preserve uniform development. Length of time in chemistry will govern overall contrast.

BTW, I used FP4 to compress and preserve detail in a 15 zone range, (see Prison Cell Block) on my web site for this image.

Had I used HP5 ( a film with a noticeably lower straight slope than FP4) it would have increased shadow detail and likely been able to handle even more contrast.

Throw into the mix negative pre-exposure and even more contrast can be controlled.

The process more than the chemistry to be sure!

 

[philsweeney]

I cannot say enough for the method, particularly using pyrocat. My recent use of the semi-stand method for extreme SBRs still amazes me. I think a good note is that one can use manufacturers speed. By comparison I went back to an article on Mark Citret in View Camera (sept/oct 1999). As I understand the article Mark had to give 2-3 stops more exposure to achieve similiar result. My last efforts with pyrocat and HP5 aimed towards printing on to AZO g2 resulted in a negative having to be printed onto g3, i.e. I achieved about N-8. I like Steve Sherman's advice to expose two negatives and adjust development on the second after printing the first (if needed).

I consider the method a new weapon in my darkroom!

 

[sanking]

I cannot say enough for the method, particularly using pyrocat. My recent use of the semi-stand method for extreme SBRs still amazes me. I think a good note is that one can use manufacturers speed. By comparison I went back to an article on Mark Citret in View Camera (sept/oct 1999). As I understand the article Mark had to give 2-3 stops more exposure to achieve similiar result. My last efforts with pyrocat and HP5 aimed towards printing on to AZO g2 resulted in a negative having to be printed onto g3, i.e. I achieved about N-8. I like Steve Sherman's advice to expose two negatives and adjust development on the second after printing the first (if needed).

I consider the method a new weapon in my darkroom!

I am personally convinced that the Steve Sherman approach, using dilute devleoper solutions and reduced agitation, is much more effective in terms of *useful* compensation than other popular methods. I mean useful in the sense that it gives compensation that does not leave the shadows and lower mid-tones washed out. You can get compensation simply by reducing time of development, but the results are very poor compared to what is possible with dilute solutins and reduced agitaiton.

And you don't have to go into this blind. If you use BTZS you can run standard BZS type testing with stand and sem-stand development just as you do with regular testing. I did this a couple of years ago with TMY film and I have now a good set of data for this film for SBR conditions ranging from 13 to 5. My data is based on a type of agitation I call extreme minimal, which is 1.5 minutes of agitaiton (vigorous) at the beginning, and then 10-15 seconds of agitation at the 1/4, 1/2 and 3/4 points of development. This method does not produce quite as much compensation as stand or semi-stand, but is almost fool-proof in terms of even development. And the results are very consistent over a wide range of SBR values.

Sandy King