High contrast negatives - how to achieve them in developing?

[Nige]

Thank you for your reply. Let me try to re-ask my question since I am certain that my first attempt was not clear. Assume the numbers you posted were correct.

Shooting an image with correct exposure gives us this:

HP5+, EI400, D76 Stock, 20C, 7.5mins

Is "under expose over develop" this?

HP5+, EI800, D76 Stock, 20C, 10.5mins

Or would it be even more time since 10.5 mins is the correct time for ISO800, thus "normal" development time for that setting. The term over develop is what I am trying to understand. To me it seems possible that this term means develop for ISO1600.

Thank you.

you have it right.

Just remember when people say 'push to EI800' and develop N+40% mins they are not getting the same negs as EI400 and N mins. They will be losing shadow detail (from the underexposure caused by using EI800) and the tonality of the negs will be different.

 

[zehner21]

You now have 3 rolls of 12 photos each, all exposed in the same sequence but developed differently. Now print them all the same way. Whatever exposure time it takes your enlarger to get the photo exposed at the recommended time and aperture to print well. Now print every negative the same way. If you don't have your own darkroom then send it to Blue Moon and explain what you want.
When you are done you will be able to go through these prints and see which print looks best.

Should I use a fixed grade paper?

 

[Pioneer]

For mine I didn't try to get fancy, rather tried to go as inexpensive as possible the first time. I just used Arista EDU Ultra RC VC Glossy 8x10, and exposed them all at Grade 2 settings using my Beseler using the Beseler 45 Dichro Color Head. I don't remember the settings offhand, but I do remember it being a long run of printing. I did 12 prints each day, then started over the next with 12 more. And so on.

 

[Pioneer]

I would definitely try such an exercise if I could print, which I can't. 2 years shooting film and I have yet to do my first print. sigh...........

Having never tried it I cannot say for certain, but you may be able to scan your negatives completely flat and then print them for a similar response.

Of course, the other, more expensive option, is to send the negs to Blue Moon Camera and have them print them on an enlarger for you.

 

[cliveh]

I think the lighting is probably the most important factor. On a gray overcast day you may not get the style you want, no matter how much contrast you try to add by development. Try adding some lighting with flash, hot lights or reflectors.

I'd just take an iterative approach to exposure and development. Shoot the film at the box speed and develop 20% more than the recommended value. Print normally on a grade 2 paper or filter. See if it needs more contrast. If so, try grades 3, 4 and 5. If you don't get in the ball park contrast wise, add another 20% to the development.

Look at the shadow detail if it needs more then expose at less than box speed and keep your development the same.

And herein is the problem. Just consider the variables, original lighting ratio, exposure, type of film, film speed, spectral sensitivity, development of negative, type of developer and dilution, time, temperature and this is before we ever get to printing. Do the maths and how many variables do we have?

 

[rexp2]

I have used Ilford FP4+ 8x10 and 5x7 film on cloudy days exposed at EI 125 with the intent of Kallitype printing, which requires high contrast. Step wedge testing of D-19 showed that 11-14 min at 64 F showed no significant difference in the Log density curve. At 10 min, however the film was under developed.

 

[DcAnalogue]

H

The problem is that where I live we do not have a lot of sun, in fact, in the winter there's lots of overcast days with very little contrast which would give me 'dull' negatives without crispy whites.

What could I do to get those contrasty negatives? The options I'm considering so far are:

1. Underexpose Tri-X at EI 800 or 1600 and develop longer in Rodinal, so I would lose shadow detail (black shadows) but midtones and highlights would become more crispy/ contrasty. The problem is that iso 800 / 1600 is too much for shooting in overcast light.


Thanks !

Did you consider about using a ND (Neutral Density) filter when shooting?

 

[mauro35]

Thank you for your reply. Let me try to re-ask my question since I am certain that my first attempt was not clear. Assume the numbers you posted were correct.

Shooting an image with correct exposure gives us this:

HP5+, EI400, D76 Stock, 20C, 7.5mins

Is "under expose over develop" this?

HP5+, EI800, D76 Stock, 20C, 10.5mins

Or would it be even more time since 10.5 mins is the correct time for ISO800, thus "normal" development time for that setting. The term over develop is what I am trying to understand. To me it seems possible that this term means develop for ISO1600.

Thank you.

I think in this particular case the main point is not to consider manufacturer´s recommendations for a certain EI, but to decide on the EI simply based on how much shadow detail is needed or wanted and then develop based on the time/contrast index curve of that particular film to achieve the desired contrast in the negative. If the OP is talking about "chiaroscuro" I would assume he wants relatively dark shadows, meaning EI of one to two stops less than the nominal ISO speed and if he wants high contrast as well, then the developing times will be different than the manufacturer´s recommendations for any EI, since those are intended for negatives of average contrast (contrast index about 0.5 to maybe 0.8). At least Kodak publishes the developing time/contrast index curves for various developers.

 

[removed account4]

Hello everyone,

A quick introduction: I've been shooting b&w film for the last ten years and had a darkroom for about three years.
Unfortunately since moving to a new house the darkroom is gone but it's my intention to build a small one again and go back printing the analog way.

I consider my photography really experimental, I have used about every combination of film and developer out there and have never been really satisfied with the negatives I got.

I have a preference for really contrasty prints/ negatives and don't mind if there's grain if it reinforces the quality of the photograph. I very much like the style of people like Ralph Gibson or Renato D'agostin (see attached examples).

I know that Ralph Gibson used to shoot Tri-x at 200 iso in very bright sun and then overdevelops his negatives so they become very dense.

The problem is that where I live we do not have a lot of sun, in fact, in the winter there's lots of overcast days with very little contrast which would give me 'dull' negatives without crispy whites.

What could I do to get those contrasty negatives? The options I'm considering so far are:

1. Underexpose Tri-X at EI 800 or 1600 and develop longer in Rodinal, so I would lose shadow detail (black shadows) but midtones and highlights would become more crispy/ contrasty. The problem is that iso 800 / 1600 is too much for shooting in overcast light.

2. Overexpose Tri-X at EI 200 and overdevelop so I would op up shadows and get contrast in the highlights. The problem would be that EI 200 might give me too slow shutter speeds and I'm not sure if I'm interested in having lots of detail in the shadows. I like the 'chiaroscuro' look with really dense blacks and really dense whites.

3. Try stand development in Rodinal but I'm not really sure what this does to the negative contrast ?

I know that high contrast can be achieved in the darkroom with grades and filters etc. but at the moment I'm more interested in how to get the raw material, that is the negative.

Would be happy to hear your opinions

Thanks !

it might take a bit of testing to get everything right ...
you can take a roll of film and bracket you exposures ... ( 1 exposure right on, some under, some over exposed )
do this for a few rolls of film, the same exact exposures on each one ...
then develop each roll for a different length of time to see what works for you.
in the first photograph ( the two faces ) it seems more like a flash and intense light and not really
high contrast development but a negative that is a bit over exposed / dense. density can make a "high key" photograph too ...
the second image seems like more light on the bus so it is also a similar exposure. in both cases the background ( first / foreground 2nd ) seems
to be manipulated ( burned in dodged out &c ) in the darkroom ...
you probably wouldn't have too much trouble doing this same effect by figuring out what exposure+development works ( take notes when you bracket and develop )
and then just using a variable contrast filter when you make your print and burn/dodge your final image.

while you can certainly do a lot of acrobatics to get similar images they can be done without that much trouble ...
developing roll film ( 35mm or 120 ) in a dilute print developer like dektol or ansco 130, &c will also give you nice crisp negatives without excessive fuss
or excessive grain. you will read over and over and over again that it will make all your film excessively grainy, it doesn't .... and often times the folks who
chant the over the top golf ball sized grain mantra have never really used the developer they are speaking about and repeating what someone else might have said
.. it seems like it could be true, but in my experience, its not ( speaking from experience, i've processed roll film in print developer for more than 15years without excessive graininess) ... but then again ... for what its worth, i don't process my film in excessively warm developer, maybe that is part of the puzzle ...

good luck !
john

 

[jeffreyg]

If he can find some, how about Kodalith film or a high contrast copy film?

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

 

[Vaughn]

I have used Ilford FP4+ 8x10 and 5x7 film on cloudy days exposed at EI 125 with the intent of Kallitype printing, which requires high contrast. Step wedge testing of D-19 showed that 11-14 min at 64 F showed no significant difference in the Log density curve. At 10 min, however the film was under developed.

Same situation I have with producing negatives for carbon printing...tho I think my negs tend to have more contrast than is needed for Kallitype. My development times (FP4+ in such things as Ilford universal PQ, Dektol, and recently HC-110) tend to be around double the recommended times. Staining developers are great and I am using those again. But one can't be shy about giving the film heavy-handed development to get the contrast one needs for alt processes -- just have to be careful to keep the shadow detail and keep middle tones nicely spread out at the same time.

But everything is tied to the contrast range (SBR) of the scene I am photographing. I certainly treat a sheet of film differently based on the SBR and the process I will be printing it with!