First LF Photos, What is Wrong?

I took out the cardboard and loaded from the top of the stack. So the first one or two could have some problem. The rest should be ok. Also, I underexposed by 2 whole stops since I set the meter at 200. I was going to set the meter at 50. Not sure if more exposure would have impact with the bad film.

If the rabates are foggy you need to expose to get zone1 shadows more than the fog.

KBr will slow ID11 effective speed as well.

You are testing until you get a good negative.

Marks from insufficient agitation including too gentle, leaking film holders, leaking camera bellows, fog from darkroom light, age, old film.

Try developing one brand new sheet never been in a holder. If ok, put one in a holder, then develop. Shine a light around camera bellows and around where holder is seated.

RedSun said:

Also, I underexposed by 2 whole stops since I set the meter at 200. I was going to set the meter at 50. Not sure if more exposure would have impact with the bad film.

Click to expand...

i think you mean you over exposed ...
the box speed is 400 ( the 1983 tri x i used the other day was at least )
under exposure would have been metering at 800 ( 2x the number is 1/2 the light ) ...
over exposing 2 stops would have been setting your meter at 100 ( or 80 if you native speeded it at 320 ) .


over exposure has great impact on all films, old or new, good or bad ...
i pretty much only shoot outdated film, most of the time i expose it 4-5 stops over exposed, its happy.
as i mentioned in the other thread, you might get very good results using your dektol instead of d76.
and seeing you believe your film is "bad" you really have nothing to lose

have fun
john

The film was originally rated at 320. But I would treat it as 50. But I exposed as 200 film. So I underexposed. The negative itself is light.

RedSun said:

The film was originally rated at 320. But I would treat it as 50. But I exposed as 200 film. So I underexposed. The negative itself is light.

Click to expand...

the smaller the asa / iso # you let in MORE light so you OVER expose, your negatives were still UNDEREXPOSED even though you gave them more light (you didn't give them enough),
you should probably over expose them even more, maybe rate the film at 10. you could always do a "test strip" for a ball park iso, ... do this by using your filmholder to shield the light ...
rate yoru "test sheet" at "x" set your shutter, and cover some of the lens + expose, cover less of the lens + expose, cover evenless of the lens + expose and don't block any of the lens and expose again.
develop the film in whatever you want and look to see what exposure gave you the best negative, and rate your film at that ( knowing that all your film might not be at the same iso
seeing it is old and unreliable ). don't forget that ortho film is reliant on BLUE LIGHT so it is dependent on the time of+ type of day like a paper negative.

good luck!
john

If you look at the 2nd photo, you'll see that ASA 50 is just perfect for this film in open field lighting. I would not want to add more exposure.

Actually I'm pleasantly surprised to see that the 2nd photo still looks good. This is my first time with sheet film. Even the D-76 comes from a half opened bag of unknown quality.

If I can get more of the photo quality like my 2nd photo, I would not want to ask for more. It is hard to tell that this is a 30+ year old film. There are still some details...

There is a slightly over exposed strip at the side of the insertion into the camera. I suspect you tilted the dark slide and back outwards a bit as you pulled the dark slide.

cowanw said:

There is a slightly over exposed strip at the side of the insertion into the camera. I suspect you tilted the dark slide and back outwards a bit as you pulled the dark slide.

Click to expand...

Where is the strip? Top or lower? I did not see it. The left side is darker than normal, so it did not get much light.

RedSun said:

Where is the strip? Top or lower? I did not see it. The left side is darker than normal, so it did not get much light.

Click to expand...

You are right and smarter than I am

Nope, I'm still learning so many things.

File the two you got.

Write up the notes in your hard backed note book.

Shoot another pair maybe one at 50 one at 25.

Same soup time and temp may be with KBr...

look at negs long time resist scanner may be try contact frame...

Xmas said:

File the two you got.

Write up the notes in your hard backed note book.

Shoot another pair maybe one at 50 one at 25.

Same soup time and temp may be with KBr...

look at negs long time resist scanner may be try contact frame...

Click to expand...

i agree with xmas ...

if your only plan is to scan the film than yes it is an OK exposure ( i guess if that is your taste and what you are looking for ) ..
but if you plan on enlarging it or contact printing it, then you probably will need more exposure / development, scanners like thin other forms of reproduction like density.

how much more, i am not sure i don't have the film infront of me ... but it seems a bit thin

as far as i know ( maybe PE, ian or gerry can correct me if i am wrong )
ortho film is like photo paper, blue sensitive, so depending on the time of day, kind of light &c
you will get different negatives ... so in one situation it might be fast, and in another it might be exceptionally slow.
and if it is indeed like photo paper, you can process the film and inspect it with a safelight so you can develop for the highlights
and get things "just right" ...

according to the good folks at rockland colloid they recommend dektol for their emulsions because it keeps fog levels down in their emulsion
if your negatives are foggy, you might consider it for your film too, 100cc/900cc water ( and if it doesn't work to your liking it was just 100cc which is like a thimble full, not much of a waste )

i wish i still had the apug member's link to his dektol-film, it was fine grained and beautiful contrast ...

I go with dampness, possibly condensation. That old, things can happen, especially taking in in and out of refrigerated storage.