Title says most of it, but I exposed 2 different ways, as metered and auto flash, and both gave similarly thin results.
I just a Canon Demi EE17 and wanted to test it with some B&W. I first checked the internal meter against a metering app and found it was accurate so I trusted it. I set it to EI 80 and shot mostly on auto. Later, I checked the shutter speeds and found they were quite uniformly (from the slowest speed to the highest) 2/3 stops too slow. So, in total, besides the long exposures and flash, all the auto shots are actually overexposed 1 stop from box speed.
The chandelier up top was the brightest object and the sky in the other frames didn't get nearly as dense. Sky usually gets quite dense on my previous (HP5+, Delta 100 all with the CS Monobath DF96):
Here are two exposures of NY. I recall the 2nd was wide open at 8 sec (I think I metered around 1s with my phone):
1st was just on auto on a brightly lit train platform at night; 2nd was done with an auto flash, so it wouldn't be affected by any inaccuracy in the shutter, bounced off the ceiling:
Additionally, the exposed leader was dark but it wasn't nearly as dark as my other B&W rolls. All these negatives are mostly close to the density of the borders.
For dev, I was testing some powder XTOL that I got and I hadn't used yet. I was only using DF96 for B&W before and the Arista 3 bath E6 for slides which I've been having way too much fun with.
I mixed the XTOL as directed, but cutting the volumes and masses to 1/10 to make 500ml stock. Made a 1:1 working solution and prepared Ilford rapid fixer at 1:4, as directed. Washed the film for almost a min, developed at room temp, maybe higher (68-70F), for 9.5 min, washed with a lot of water (7 changes), then fixed for 5 minutes. Then I washed again and added some Photo-flo.
Is there a reason I should be getting negatives as thin as this? I try to err on the side of overexposure for negatives and my monobath ones haven't home out anywhere near this thin.
I just a Canon Demi EE17 and wanted to test it with some B&W. I first checked the internal meter against a metering app and found it was accurate so I trusted it. I set it to EI 80 and shot mostly on auto. Later, I checked the shutter speeds and found they were quite uniformly (from the slowest speed to the highest) 2/3 stops too slow. So, in total, besides the long exposures and flash, all the auto shots are actually overexposed 1 stop from box speed.
The chandelier up top was the brightest object and the sky in the other frames didn't get nearly as dense. Sky usually gets quite dense on my previous (HP5+, Delta 100 all with the CS Monobath DF96):
Here are two exposures of NY. I recall the 2nd was wide open at 8 sec (I think I metered around 1s with my phone):
1st was just on auto on a brightly lit train platform at night; 2nd was done with an auto flash, so it wouldn't be affected by any inaccuracy in the shutter, bounced off the ceiling:
Additionally, the exposed leader was dark but it wasn't nearly as dark as my other B&W rolls. All these negatives are mostly close to the density of the borders.
For dev, I was testing some powder XTOL that I got and I hadn't used yet. I was only using DF96 for B&W before and the Arista 3 bath E6 for slides which I've been having way too much fun with.
I mixed the XTOL as directed, but cutting the volumes and masses to 1/10 to make 500ml stock. Made a 1:1 working solution and prepared Ilford rapid fixer at 1:4, as directed. Washed the film for almost a min, developed at room temp, maybe higher (68-70F), for 9.5 min, washed with a lot of water (7 changes), then fixed for 5 minutes. Then I washed again and added some Photo-flo.
Is there a reason I should be getting negatives as thin as this? I try to err on the side of overexposure for negatives and my monobath ones haven't home out anywhere near this thin.