HELP! I forgot to account for reciprocity failure.

This is what happens when you shoot digital and film at the same time, I guess. I took some long exposures on Tri-X 400 (between 1.5 and 3 minutes), and forgot to account for reciprocity failure, which apparently is insane for Tri-X. Is there a way to make up for this in development, or are my shots lost forever?

I cannot believe the curve for Tri-X!

Not much you can do now.
What sort of SBR (scene brightness range) were you trying to record? If there were some bright highlights, a "push" development might reveal some of those.
I would suggest, however, that you develop normally. Nothing will teach you more about how low intensity reciprocity failure manifests itself than viewing negatives that are developed normally.

According to the iphone app reciprocity, the exposure should be about 26 minutes. BTW, the iphone app is FREE. What will happen is that your shadows may not have adequate exposure while mid tones and highlights will have adequate density. This is the reason why prolonged exposures pick up contrast. Why I would do is not to give up hope. If you can, you might want to snip a piece and process it normally. Here's the link for the iphone app. I wish you luck.
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/reciprocity-timer/id459691262?mt=8

Would post-flashing exposed film help in anyway to handle reciprocity failure?

Raghu Kuvempunagar said:

Would post-flashing exposed film help in anyway to handle reciprocity failure?

Click to expand...

No, but it would render a small part of the shadow detail developable. Hence, it may help a little bit, but not very much.

There's not much that can be done besides developing for a bit longer to get at least the midtones and highlights to a decent density.

“Exposure indices can be raised about 1 stop if the film is presoaked for 1 minute in a 1% solution of Sodium Perborate instead of a water presoak. Film is developed after presoaking without rinsing. (If you cannot find Sodium Perborate, this presoak can be made by diluting a 3% solution of Hydrogen Peroxide with 2 parts water then adding enough Kodalk (Sodium Meta-borate) by weight to make a 1% solution). Incidentally, this presoak will also boost film speeds with conventional development as well.”

This is off of Antec’s website. They make a desensitizer and mono bath as well as sell bulk chemicals. Could be worth trying?

Mainecoonmaniac said:

According to the iphone app reciprocity, the exposure should be about 26 minutes. BTW, the iphone app is FREE. What will happen is that your shadows may not have adequate exposure while mid tones and highlights will have adequate density. This is the reason why prolonged exposures pick up contrast. Why I would do is not to give up hope. If you can, you might want to snip a piece and process it normally. Here's the link for the iphone app. I wish you luck.
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/reciprocity-timer/id459691262?mt=8

Click to expand...

Thank you, I use that app. I could not believe it was calling for a 26 minute correction at one minute. This is my first time with Tri-X, and HP5 does not behave like that. Regardless, I forgot to compensate altogether because I was rushing.

I am at the beach with my family and thought I would try out a long exposure on a cliche pier scene. The light was flat (overcast) for the image I really wanted, so I’m not sure there will be any highlights. The waves should come out as a bit of a fog, but that is probably lost, even If I were ok with hard contrast from the pier. I have a couple that had stronger highlights, and a couple that were not long exposures.

Thanks for all the tips, everyone.

Don't know about the monobath but I tried Antec's desensitiser once. The desensitiser stained the film (Orwo UN54), the reels and the tank heavily but the film got fogged as soon as I lifted, after a few minutes of developing, the lid of Patterson tank and took the film off the reel to inspect in ambient light.

Raghu Kuvempunagar said:

Would post-flashing exposed film help in anyway to handle reciprocity failure?

Click to expand...

I don’t think so. I may be wrong. But it may boost shadow detail if it’s under exposed a stop or two. The under exposure is any stops beyond that. Again, I wouldn’t give up hope. If the scene has mostly mid tones and highlights, development may work. Any shadows below zone III will have no detail.

I took a couple more pics, this time of palm trees, with the reciprocity failure accounted for. I am going to develop normally and post the pics here, unless I screw something else up. Although they are not of the same subject, we will at least get to see examples of the same film with and without correction.

Ariston said:

Thank you, I use that app. I could not believe it was calling for a 26 minute correction at one minute. This is my first time with Tri-X, and HP5 does not behave like that. Regardless, I forgot to compensate altogether because I was rushing.

Click to expand...

FWIW, my reciprocity correction tables for 320Tri-X for an indicated 1 minute exposure say 2 - 2.5 minutes. Not even close to 26 minutes! I'd develop normally and see what you have. The highlights are likely just fine; you'll lose a bit of shadow detail.

Best,

Doremus

Doremus Scudder said:

FWIW, my reciprocity correction tables for 320Tri-X for an indicated 1 minute exposure say 2 - 2.5 minutes. Not even close to 26 minutes! I'd develop normally and see what you have. The highlights are likely just fine; you'll lose a bit of shadow detail.

Best,

Doremus

Click to expand...

Hi Doremus, Where did you get your table? Did you make your own? I am seeing conflicting information. This site shows something different from the app: http://www.huecandela.com/hue-x/pin-pdf/PinPLUS_Rfail.pdf

I have a couple of questions for Ariston (the OP).
Are you working with a pinhole, or are you using ND filtration to markedly reduce the light intensity?
In either case, you are working with light intensities (at the film plane) that are markedly less than the light intensities that the film is intended to respond to.
Some films respond to a wider range of intensities than others do.
FWIW, I use the Pinhole Designer utility when I'm doing these sorts of calculations - I don't live in the land of Apple and there isn't an Android version of the app referred to above - and Pinhole Designer indicates that for both flavours of Tri-X - 320TX and 400TX - an exposure indicated at 2 minutes requires an actual exposure of 27 minutes.

Ariston said:

Hi Doremus, Where did you get your table? Did you make your own? I am seeing conflicting information. This site shows something different from the app: http://www.huecandela.com/hue-x/pin-pdf/PinPLUS_Rfail.pdf

Click to expand...

You should expect to see a wide variety of suggestions when it comes to compensating for reciprocity failure. Inevitably when you apply these corrections you will end up with some parts of the scene being over-compensated for. So arriving at a suggestion is an exercise in balancing the advantages of an increase (a bit more shadow density) against the disadvantages of an increase (over-exposure/blocking up/loss of detail in the highlights.
I take it from Doremus' post that he has worked out his own "table", almost certainly based on his preferences with respect to the afore-mentioned balancing act. Knowing what I do about his photography, it doesn't surprise me in the least that his preferences may favour highlight and mid-tone rendition.

MattKing said:

I have a couple of questions for Ariston (the OP).
Are you working with a pinhole, or are you using ND filtration to markedly reduce the light intensity?
In either case, you are working with light intensities (at the film plane) that are markedly less than the light intensities that the film is intended to respond to.
Some films respond to a wider range of intensities than others do.
FWIW, I use the Pinhole Designer utility when I'm doing these sorts of calculations - I don't live in the land of Apple and there isn't an Android version of the app referred to above - and Pinhole Designer indicates that for both flavours of Tri-X - 320TX and 400TX - an exposure indicated at 2 minutes requires an actual exposure of 27 minutes.

Click to expand...

I was using a 15-stop ND filter on 120 film (if the film size matters). My app shows 26 minutes and 13 seconds for a two minute exposure, so it seems to be about the same as yours. I caved and bought an Apple phone specifically because developers refuse to bring the good apps to Android. I actually wish the Windows Phone survived. It was the best.

Ariston said:

I was using a 15-stop ND filter on 120 film (if the film size matters). My app shows 26 minutes and 13 seconds for a two minute exposure, so it seems to be about the same as yours. I caved and bought an Apple phone specifically because developers refuse to bring the good apps to Android. I actually wish the Windows Phone survived. It was the best.

Click to expand...

So you are using a traditional (sort of) film at light intensities about 1/32768 of the light intensities the film is designed for .
Give or take.
If you are going to work in those ranges, you would be best to customize your own reciprocity failure approach. The film will respond very differently to different scenes.

MattKing said:

So you are using a traditional (sort of) film at light intensities about 1/32768 of the light intensities the film is designed for .
Give or take.
If you are going to work in those ranges, you would be best to customize your own reciprocity failure approach. The film will respond very differently to different scenes.

Click to expand...

Well, I can’t do those long exposures with a digital camera - the battery will die! The battery on my RB is the perpetual kind. It has never died once.

In fact, I was doing a long exposure on my D300 first, and the stupid batteries in my shutter release died. It is so annoying that I have to have batteries for a shutter release cable, and the “pro” D300 does not have a Time function.

With prolonged exposure beyond a minute. Reciprocity failure causes the shadows to expose less than mid tones and highlights. If the film is exposed correctly for the shadows, highlight density builds up faster during development. Contrast build up becomes an issue. I’ve experimented with stand development. It seems to work well. BTW, the worst film for long exposures is Arista EDU. The best is Fuji Acros which is now discontinued.

I didn't read any responses. I would push it to 1600 in stock XTOL or HC-110 dilution B. TXP exposed for 100 seconds call for 3 stop increase in exposure. TMY is pretty good reciprocity wise as well.

mshchem said:

I didn't read any responses. I would push it to 1600 in stock XTOL or HC-110 dilution B. TXP exposed for 100 seconds call for 3 stop increase in exposure. TMY is pretty good reciprocity wise as well.

Click to expand...

Long exposures need less development not more, see post 18. Pushing does not alter the film's basic sensitivity.

Ariston said:

Hi Doremus, Where did you get your table? Did you make your own? I am seeing conflicting information. This site shows something different from the app: http://www.huecandela.com/hue-x/pin-pdf/PinPLUS_Rfail.pdf

Click to expand...

Ariston,

First, a correction. My personal table for reciprocity failure for 320Tri-X (TXP) says that for a metered time of 1 minute, 3 minutes should be given (I inadvertently read the wrong column). Still that's a long way from 26 minutes mentioned above or even the 9+ minutes that the table you linked to indicates (and which agrees with the Kodak official tech sheet).

Matt is right that I've tested times and arrived at my own adjustment tables, but I didn't do that in a vacuum. There's a couple of things going on which I'll attempt to explain.

First, if you get the Kodak data sheet for new 320TXP, you'll see a table that suggests the adjustment for an indicated 1 minute time should be about 9 minutes. The problem here is that Kodak, when the reformulated Tri-X in the early 2000s, didn't change the reciprocity table from the older version, which needed significantly more exposure. Howard Bond wrote an excellent article for Photo Techniques magazine in 2003 called "Black and White Reciprocity Departure Revisited" that used to available from their website as a pdf. I can't seem to find it quickly any more and the Photo Techniques website appears to be gone.

In any case, Bond found that the reciprocity characteristics of several Kodak films in their new versions were markedly better than the older versions. He also indicates 3 minutes adjusted exposure for 320Tri-X at a metered exposure of one minute. Ralph Lambrecht in Way Beyond Monochrome also has a lot of reciprocity information, which seems to corroborate Bond's findings. In other words, the published Kodak adjustment times for Tri-X at least is likely wrong. My own experience bears this out.

Early on, I made reciprocity correction tables bases on the manufacturers' graphs, often extending them out to several hours, since I do enough work in low-light situations to often need a couple of hours or more exposure. When the new versions of the Kodak films came out, I immediately noticed a discrepancy. Bond's article confirmed this and gave me a better baseline to start testing on. Since then, I've been using tables based on work and infor from Bond, Lambrecht and Patrick Gainer and tested and verified by my own work in the field for some years now with good success.

There are still a lot of sources on the web that give times based on Kodak's information (understandably, even though it's likely wrong) and many that pre-date the reformulation of the films. All these give way more correction that I (and Bond, et.al.) find necessary. Still, I believe you can find some reciprocity tables on the web based on Bond's findings. Google is your friend here.

At any rate, your film is likely just a stop or a bit more underexposed, and that just in the shadows. I'd develop normally and go from there.

If you're interested in a copy of the Bond article, pm me. I can send you a pdf.

Best,

Doremus

bdial said:

Long exposures need less development not more, see post 18. Pushing does not alter the film's basic sensitivity.

Click to expand...

I know reduce development by 30 % and open up three stops. That ship has sailed. Why someone is using huge amounts of ND on TXP is beyond me. Either develop the daylights out of it or get some TMX, rate it at 25 and start over without the welding glass filter.
This is not really recoverable to any kind of normal. .

mshchem said:

Why someone is using huge amounts of ND on TXP is beyond me.

Click to expand...

Who is this "someone"? Is it me?!

I am trying to get a photograph of Bigfoot. And everyone knows that he only shows up on Tri-X. I didn't know exactly when he was arriving, so I just left the shutter open.

Ariston said:

Who is this "someone"? Is it me?!

I am trying to get a photograph of Bigfoot. And everyone knows that he only shows up on Tri-X. I didn't know exactly when he was arriving, so I just left the shutter open.

Click to expand...

We have always used 3000 ASA Polaroid black and white roll film for Bigfoot around here.

I would suggest an array of BFFBs (Big F***in' Flash Bulbs) like Ol' O Winston Link used to stop steam locomotives in their tracks (pun intended) Get yourself some Dektol 1&1 and a Jobo. Develop for 45 minutes at 75F. Bigfoots don't like tripods, so you gotta be real steady hand holding for 23 minutes
Peace! Mike

Maybe you can try a two bath developer such as diafine or emofin. They have worked for me, especially with night photography because the highlights don't block.
Tri-x with diafine is legendary, It gives a boost of about two stops.

Otherwise some form of latensification can help, as mentioned in post #5 or #6.