How much does exposure really matter with stand developing?

[Jim Noel]

I've been surfing the internet, reading photography forums about stand developing and whether to get an RB67 or an RZ67 instead of working today (one of the bad things about working at home). After reading up on the stand development process quite a bit, it seems that, given development times and developer concentrations are the same for any brand and ISO of film and any amount of pushing or pulling, it seems that, as long as you are within roughly 3 or 4 stops of the correct exposure, it probably doesn't make a lot of difference what shutter speed you use. Is that an accurate assumption?

I ask because I'm considering the older, heavier, and cheaper RB67 for environmental portrait and docu-street-style photography. I'll have my micro-four-thirds camera either on my neck or in my bag as well, and there's even a possibility of trying out the new ambient light meter attachment for my iPhone. I'll use the digital camera for a light meter to get a basic reading of the scene but if I'm stand developing B&W film, it doesn't seem that exposure latitude is very narrow, so it's more about DOF than it is "nailing" exposure within a half-stop.

How do you folks doing MF meter when you know you're going to be stand developing everything?

I don't care what developer or developing method you use, if there isn't enough exposure there will be no shadows, and possibly mid-tones, in the image.

 

[jonbrisbincreative]

A couple of weeks . . . errmmmm. I know this sounds negative (pun-alert) but try using some film in the way recommended by the rest of the world before you go down the lomography route. I suspect that you will be puzzled that the manufacturers recommendations generally work. And start weight-training now, don't wait until Thursday. Good luck.

Thanks for the concern over my stamina with handling this camera! Having carried around multiple large DSLR bodies with battery packs, long tele zooms, and the resultant crap that tends to accumulate (I have to to have this on me because what if I need it?), 8-9 pounds of camera, WL finder and lens is easily within my capabilities as a still relatively young whippersnapper . I have routinely carried over 20 pounds of camera gear for extended periods of time (why is another story). I was also considering a Graflex but decided 6x7 was good enough for my purposes without the extra bulk of the 4x5.

I'm acquainted enough with the "right way" to develop film using traditional techniques that I'm not wandering into stand development without knowing exactly why I want to try it. If I was interested in the best capture possible I'd build out my digital arsenal rather than adding film. I've had great success with digital and they're only getting smaller, lighter, and better. I'm after that image that has to be created rather than that picture that is simply captured.

 

[jonbrisbincreative]

I don't care what developer or developing method you use, if there isn't enough exposure there will be no shadows, and possibly mid-tones, in the image.

The consistent refrain I'm hearing now from everything I've read so far is to expose to ensure that enough of the shadows and midtones as are needed to tell the story you're trying to tell are recorded on the emulsion and that stand developing can help with the high and mid zones. This is interesting because the opposite has been my experience with digital. I usually have to compensate enough to expose for the highlights and I can usually just bring out shadow detail from the RAW file.

Very useful discussion. Thanks.

 

[MartinP]

Ah, fair enough Jon. I mis-understood that this was to be your first experience of film. It is true though that the Mamiyas are not very ergonomic when handheld. Isn't there a handgrip for them, or was that the 645? If it exists then it may help.

 

[jonbrisbincreative]

Ah, fair enough Jon. I mis-understood that this was to be your first experience of film. It is true though that the Mamiyas are not very ergonomic when handheld. Isn't there a handgrip for them, or was that the 645? If it exists then it may help.

There is an L bracket with a handle and a cold shoe on it that I probably will end up picking up at some point. We'll see how it goes.

 

[MattKing]

The L brackets with built in triggers make the RB67 and RZ67 work well when shooting without a tripod.

If you are using a waist level finder, consider a shorter neckstrap as well. The ones that have clips that allow insertion of an extension are most flexible.

The L grip designed for the RB67 is also designed for the C330. That may help you in your search.

Be careful you don't stumble on an L grip for a Mamiya 645. They look like they should work, but there is no guarantee that the trigger will line up.

The RZ67 grips may work, but I cannot guarantee that.

 

[jonbrisbincreative]

The L brackets with built in triggers make the RB67 and RZ67 work well when shooting without a tripod.

If you are using a waist level finder, consider a shorter neckstrap as well. The ones that have clips that allow insertion of an extension are most flexible.

The L grip designed for the RB67 is also designed for the C330. That may help you in your search.

Be careful you don't stumble on an L grip for a Mamiya 645. They look like they should work, but there is no guarantee that the trigger will line up.

The RZ67 grips may work, but I cannot guarantee that.

Here's the grip I've been looking at:

Dead Link Removed

I've also been looking at the BlackRapid sling strap which looks like it might complement the location of the tripod mounting hole on the RB grip by allowing the camera to hang by my hip.

I'll also very likely dangle the GX7 from the wrist strap I use on it so I can meter and grab both digital and analog at the same time.

 

[MattKing]

That grip is perfect.

I wouldn't trust a BlackRapid connector with the weight and size and potential torque of an RB67 with lens and back.

 

[Jaf-Photo]

Exposure is the fundamental corner-stone of photography.

Always think about exposure first, then composition, then everything else.

 

[jonbrisbincreative]

Exposure is the fundamental corner-stone of photography.

Always think about exposure first, then composition, then everything else.

This probably deserves an entire thread just its own, but I would probably not rank exposure and composition in that way (I might be tempted to not rank them at all but make them equal partners).

Anyway, I don't want to take this thread in that direction. I think I'll start a new one because I think this discussion is very important.

 

[Jaf-Photo]

This probably deserves an entire thread just its own, but I would probably not rank exposure and composition in that way (I might be tempted to not rank them at all but make them equal partners).

Anyway, I don't want to take this thread in that direction. I think I'll start a new one because I think this discussion is very important.

True. Exposure is to some extent dependant on composition.

But I think light, lens and fim has more impact than small adjustments in composition, so you need to start thinking about exposure.

But you're right, this topic is deserving of its own thread.

 

[nworth]

Exposure always makes a difference. Black and white films have a huge latitude, so you can get printable negatives over quite a range of exposures. But there is a best exposure and development for each scene. With roll films, you have to aim for an average or maybe switch backs or some combination of these, but you still have to try for the best exposure possible. The RB67 does not have an internal meter, so you have to try a little harder. Stand development is not some magic that will overcome the physics and chemistry of photography. In fact, stand development is a rather extreme variation on compensating development. It cuts back on development of the highlights, preventing them from blocking up, while allowing full development of the shadows. The amount of compensation depends on the film, the developer, and your technique, but the result is often a rather strong reduction in contrast. Some modern films, like the TMax films, tend to build contrast quickly after a certain amount of development, and many workers have found that semi-stand development can help avoid this buildup. It is largely a matter of technique. Making a good print from a low contrast negative is at least tricky and may be impossible. Ordinary development to normal contrast, if you can manage it, is usually best to get printable negatives. There are times, however, where you have very contrasty lighting, that stand development is needed to get normal contrast.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

You should think about your output first of all.

Any decision you make with respect to choosing film, developer, camera, lens, filters, developing technique, agitation, temperature, time, metering, exposure, composition, and such is funneled into one single object - the resulting negative, which is what you use to make your print.

Therefore, priority one is to know what to target, and then you work to control as many of those elements as possible to get what you want in your print. In the end that is the only thing that matters, with respect to making beautiful prints.

True. Exposure is to some extent dependant on composition.

But I think light, lens and fim has more impact than small adjustments in composition, so you need to start thinking about exposure.

But you're right, this topic is deserving of its own thread.

 

[markbarendt]

Since the whole idea of stand development is to develop the different zones of the exposure in a way that can't be achieved when agitating, it seems to follow that "pushing" ISO 400 to 1600 in stand development doesn't actually do what we think it does if we're still thinking in terms of normal development techniques that continually develop all zones of the exposure throughout the development time.

There's a point at which the film emulsion you are using will stop recording information because the highlights are completely blown and there's a point at which you have to give it enough light to start recording details.

The purpose of stand developing is to reduce contrast in low and high tones and have the mid tones remain "normal". It is intended to reduce the need for burn and dodge when printing.

It is essentially trying to get a more pronounced "S" in the curve. The theory is to create more shoulder and toe.

In theory to get the best results you actually have to be more accurate with exposure because the straight line portion of the curve is shorter.

The quality of the result when printing from shoulder or toe is always a compromise. So the real question is how low of quality/contrast can you stand.

Conversely, normally developed negatives have a longer straight line which means a longer range of higher quality/contrast image info.

A film like Tmax 400, normally developed, has a really long straight line and for a normal scene can probably stand 4-6 stops extra easy without losing highlight detail. C41 films act much the same. Think disposable cameras from the grocery store. This is the theory they work under.

The trade off is that longer print times will be needed and possibly some burn and dodge.

 

[Jaf-Photo]

You should think about your output first of all.

Any decision you make with respect to choosing film, developer, camera, lens, filters, developing technique, agitation, temperature, time, metering, exposure, composition, and such is funneled into one single object - the resulting negative, which is what you use to make your print.

Therefore, priority one is to know what to target, and then you work to control as many of those elements as possible to get what you want in your print. In the end that is the only thing that matters, with respect to making beautiful prints.

Sure, but after messing about with film, I work with the aim to produce the best possible negative. Then you keep all options open for producing images.

To do that, you basically need to know how to expose the film for best results.

Sometimes you have to compromise, e.g. if your film is too fast or slow. Other times you may be going for a particular look by bending the envelope.

Forresten finns det en bra gammal svensk bok som heter Avancerad svartvitteknik. Den innehaller bland annat ett test av alla faktorer som paverkar kvaliten pa negativet. De gar igenom allt mojligt som syrahalt i stoppbad och tid mellan exponering och framkallning. Syftet ar att hitta den perfekta metoden. Jag marker iaf battre resultat genom att folja dessa principer.

 

[jonbrisbincreative]

Sure, but after messing about with film, I work with the aim to produce the best possible negative. Then you keep all options open for producing images.

To do that, you basically need to know how to expose the film for best results.

Sometimes you have to compromise, e.g. if your film is too fast or slow. Other times you may be going for a particular look by bending the envelope.

Forresten finns det en bra gammal svensk bok som heter Avancerad svartvitteknik. Den innehaller bland annat ett test av alla faktorer som paverkar kvaliten pa negativet. De gar igenom allt mojligt som syrahalt i stoppbad och tid mellan exponering och framkallning. Syftet ar att hitta den perfekta metoden. Jag marker iaf battre resultat genom att folja dessa principer.

Not to be a contrarian, but a negative that is optimally exposed but lacks interesting composition or an engaging subject is not any better for having been exposed and developed within the acceptable limits of the emulsion. I would much rather err on the side of a negative that has good composition of an interesting subject but lacks shadow detail than the reverse.

There seems to be a lot of references to printing from these negatives. I can't say never, but it's extremely unlikely any of these negatives will ever see an enlarger. The only analog part of my process will be the capture and stand development of the negative. After that it's digital all the way with a print on inkjet. I might end up doing some albumen contact printing but from an inkjet-printed transparency. I'm not overly concerned about lacking contrast because once I get it into Lightroom, an image with a 6x7 negative's ~100mp should have plenty of information for digital manipulation.

 

[jonbrisbincreative]

I wouldn't trust a BlackRapid connector with the weight and size and potential torque of an RB67 with lens and back.

Some reviewers say otherwise:

http://www.wexphotographic.com/blog/black-rapid-rs-7-strap-review

 

[Jaf-Photo]

Not to be a contrarian, but a negative that is optimally exposed but lacks interesting composition or an engaging subject is not any better for having been exposed and developed within the acceptable limits of the emulsion. I would much rather err on the side of a negative that has good composition of an interesting subject but lacks shadow detail than the reverse.

There seems to be a lot of references to printing from these negatives. I can't say never, but it's extremely unlikely any of these negatives will ever see an enlarger. The only analog part of my process will be the capture and stand development of the negative. After that it's digital all the way with a print on inkjet. I might end up doing some albumen contact printing but from an inkjet-printed transparency. I'm not overly concerned about lacking contrast because once I get it into Lightroom, an image with a 6x7 negative's ~100mp should have plenty of information for digital manipulation.

No worries. For every two APUGians there are at least three diametrical opinions.

But really exposure is much easier to master than composition.

There is no reason why exposure should not be practiced to the degree of instinctive reflex.

Then worry about composition.

And editing negatives in Lightroom has very little to do with resolution. There is little difference between editing MF or 35mm. It really has to do with maintaining grain structure and tonality. The techniques for this are quite different from digital originals.

The really good software for editing scanned negatives, uses quite different algorithms from LR and PS.

Finally, the quality of the negative REALLY matters when scanning. If it's thick you lose the gradients. If it's thin you get a lot of noise.

 

[jonbrisbincreative]

And editing negatives in Lightroom has very little to do with resolution. There is little difference between editing MF or 35mm. It really has to do with maintaining grain structure and tonality. The techniques for this are quite different from digital originals.

The really good software for editing scanned negatives, uses quite different algorithms from LR and PS.

Interesting point. I suppose there is a dedicated thread for this topic, but I'm curious what software works best (I realize that's very subjective...not looking to diverge from the topic on this rabbit trail ) with scanned negatives?

 

[Jaf-Photo]

Interesting point. I suppose there is a dedicated thread for this topic, but I'm curious what software works best (I realize that's very subjective...not looking to diverge from the topic on this rabbit trail ) with scanned negatives?

Sending PM as this sort of discussion is frowned upon (here).

 

[Tebbiebear]

Here's the grip I've been looking at:

Dead Link Removed

I've also been looking at the BlackRapid sling strap which looks like it might complement the location of the tripod mounting hole on the RB grip by allowing the camera to hang by my hip.

I'll also very likely dangle the GX7 from the wrist strap I use on it so I can meter and grab both digital and analog at the same time.

I have not used that grip but it looks like it might help a bit. The thing you are missing is that we are not talking about weight so much as ergonomics. Mamiyas are wonderful cameras, as I said I love my RZ it is my primary Medium format camera, but they are not designed in any way to be hand held. The biggest issue for me is that the weight shifts quite a bit as you are focusing and the focus knobs on the sides are great when on a tripod but are really a PITA for handheld. It makes the entire process of handheld shooting into a kind of juggling event where, at least for me, I start thinking more about holding the camera than about composing photographs. I guess it makes no matter as you have ordered one anyway and will soon see what we are concerned about. I certainly do hope you have no issues with the camera.

As far as the blackrapid goes, I don't know that I would carry the mamiya on one. My main concern would be the focusing system coming unlocked and the lens maxing out the bellows. I have heard issues of breakage of the focus rails when too much stress is placed on them. For my SLRs I use a black rapid exclusively, great straps but again the mamiya is simply not designed for this type of usage. I just feel like you would be better served by a 645 camera or a medium format Rangefinder, cameras that are designed to be hand held rather than a camera that is designed to be used on a tripod. Just my opinion, again I hope I am wrong and you get great use out of the camera.

 

[MattKing]

Some reviewers say otherwise:

http://www.wexphotographic.com/blog/black-rapid-rs-7-strap-review

The shape, size and distribution of mass with an RB67 is really different than a DSLR with a big lens.

And I have a couple of friends who have had problems with BlackRapid connectors and expensive DSLRs that ended up on the ground due to the connector unscrewing itself from the camera.

EDIT I really depend on my old-fashioned, shortened neck strap when I use my RB67 hand held.

 

[Truzi]

Odd regarding the strap. I often carry my camera like that with a longer but otherwise standard camera strap, attached to the lugs as normal.

 

[MattKing]

Odd regarding the strap. I often carry my camera like that with a longer but otherwise standard camera strap, attached the lugs as normal.

You do realize that the BlackRapid strap attaches to the tripod socket rather than the strap connectors, do you not?

 

[Truzi]

You do realize that the BlackRapid strap attaches to the tripod socket rather than the strap connectors, do you not?

Yes, and I'd followed the link to see the picture of the "innovative" concept. That is why I specified a regular strap "attached [to] the lugs as normal." ("Lug" being the strap connector.) I'd left out the word "to," so that may have caused my sentence to not make sense. Anyway, with a slightly long but regular strap, I have carried my camera as depicted on the Black Rapid page. Okay, not exactly the same, my camera isn't upside-down.

This is no different than how many women may carry a purse in a bad area... or since I work in a university in downtown Cleveland (Ohio), how most people carry satchel's in the bad areas. It also helps, as stated on that page, when carrying heavier objects.