Film rating dilemma

[modafoto]

Hi

I have a roll of APX400 in my Olympus OM1, and have rated it @ 400. But some days ago I shot some interesting shots in poor light and I had to underexpose by one stop (= @ 800) to get shots without blur.

Now I have the choice of getting a film with 10 frames that are 1 stop underexposed and the rest correctly exposed (developed to ISO 400) or having 10 shots correctly exposed and the rest 1 stop overexposed (developed to ISO 800)...

I think of going with the last option as 1 stop overexposed is better than 1 stop underexposed. The B/W negative film is, after all, a forgiving one.

What would you do?

Morten

 

[Nicole]

I'd remove the film in the dark, cut roughly where you think the photos/settings change and load onto seperate reels and into seperate tanks. Just what I'd do. That way you can salvage most of each.

 

[modafoto]

I'd remove the film in the dark, cut roughly where you think the photos/settings change and load onto seperate reels and into seperate tanks. Just what I'd do. That way you can salvage most of each.

Hmmm...Didn't think of that...I might try that. Thanks for the advice, Nicole.

 

[David H. Bebbington]

Really depends if the normally-exposed shots are high or normal contrast. If they're high contrast and then you push-process, the negs could be unprintable - if they're low or medium contrast, they'll probably survive. Conversely, if you process the film normally, the shots at EI 800 will probably be printable on hard paper even if they are 1 stop underexposed.

 

[Keith Tapscott.]

Hi

I have a roll of APX400 in my Olympus OM1, and have rated it @ 400. But some days ago I shot some interesting shots in poor light and I had to underexpose by one stop (= @ 800) to get shots without blur.

Now I have the choice of getting a film with 10 frames that are 1 stop underexposed and the rest correctly exposed (developed to ISO 400) or having 10 shots correctly exposed and the rest 1 stop overexposed (developed to ISO 800)...

I think of going with the last option as 1 stop overexposed is better than 1 stop underexposed. The B/W negative film is, after all, a forgiving one.

What would you do?

Morten

One stop either side of the optimum exposure is well within the latitude of B&W negative films, so I wouldn`t bother altering the developing time. The negatives that are under exposed, will be a little bit thinner than the normal ones, so you will probably need to print onto a harder grade of paper.
The effects of so called push processing is very limited any way and at the very most, you will only gain about an increase of around half a stop.
The speed yield of films are set by the manufacturer and can not be altered to any significant degree.
Increasing the developing times increases contrast and grain and may make the negatives harder to print.
Personally, I don`t like printing under exposed and over developed negatives.
Go to the Kodak website and download Publication O-3 for a further explanation.

 

[df cardwell]

Morten

How do you normally process APX 400 in Rodinal ?

 

[modafoto]

Morten

How do you normally process APX 400 in Rodinal ?

I rarely use APX400, but when I do it is 1+25 for 10 minutes.

 

[André E.C.]

There`s more than enough latitude available!
I wouldn`t bother and will give N development.

Cheers

André

 

[GeorgesGiralt]

I'd remove the film in the dark, cut roughly where you think the photos/settings change and load onto seperate reels and into seperate tanks. Just what I'd do. That way you can salvage most of each.

Eight holes make an image on 135/36 film.... So if you can count well in the dark, you will not loose anything.

 

[john_s]

Eight holes make an image on 135/36 film.... So if you can count well in the dark, you will not loose anything.

....as long as you know the exact starting sprocket hole of frame 1. I don't know how you would do that.

 

[modafoto]

....as long as you know the exact starting sprocket hole of frame 1. I don't know how you would do that.

My thought, too. But for future reference I could count the holes from start to the first frame on this film after I develop it (@ 400) and use that number for future counts.

 

[gnashings]

The way I see it is this:
You have 36 shots - 10 and 26. First I'd decide which shots were more important to me (or in which I had bigger hopes vested). Then I would pick the development time accordingly and not worry about a 1 stop mistake on the other. Unless you have to have some absolutely perfect prints, one stop either way will not be anywhere close to unprintable - I would venture to say not even very difficult to print.

As far as cutting the film - its the perfect solution... except with my luck... I'd have two half frame negatives of the best image on the roll

 

[Ronald Moravec]

I have a stick calibrated by exposures. I use it to pull off x number of frames in the dark if I need to develope a partial roll.

Next time leave 3 blanks between frames needing different development.

 

[df cardwell]

Morten

Is this NEW APX 400 ( post 2003 ) ?

 

[Scott Edwards]

Develop the entire roll for EI 800. I wouldn't do 'N' development because you can't get the thin areas to look normal when printed. They end up as overly grainy and lack dimensionality. Better too much density in a negative, than not enough. I have printed negatives that were two stops overexposed and while the enlarger exposure times were longish, the resulting prints looked just fine. The other option, of course, is to interpolate the development halfway between 400 and 800.

 

[modafoto]

Morten

Is this NEW APX 400 ( post 2003 ) ?

Yes

 

[engbobs]

Hello You might find my comments in Film Speed Rating Dilema helpful.

 

[engbobs]

Sorry meant to refer you to Film Speed/Develpoing confusion hope it is helpful.