• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

How to develop exposed film for shadows ?

The shadow you choose is the darkest one with details that matter for your shot. To verify whether one shadow is darker than another you use your spot meter to determine relative reflectivity.

Honestly i do not feel it’s that complicated, at least for the goal of getting started. I totally respect that others approach exposure as a complex process and I’m not deriding that approach. But I also think folks who are new to film, as the OP obviously is, need advice that builds confidence and is not overwhelming. And to that end I’d rather try to simplify the process.

It’s the same with film stocks & developers. The best advice is just pick one stock, one developer, one process, and stick with it for a year or whatever. Does that mean it’s the best possible combination of film & developer. No. But is it good enough until the photographer builds experience and grows out of it? Yes. Will they better understand the materials and how to work with them as a result? Yes.
 
Ardpatrick said:
The best advice is just pick one stock, one developer, one process, and stick with it for a year or whatever. Does that mean it’s the best possible combination of film & developer. No.
Click to expand...

What's kind of ironic is that the second sentence in that statement also applies to the first.

In other words, it's good advice to suggest such a thing. Is it the best advice? No.

Should also remind people commenting that the OP's original enquiry was regarding development time. The whole debate about shadows — what are they, where are they and can I get change for a 50$ when I'm in them? — comes from the fact that we were unclear as to how exactly the scene was metered, and how that would influence the development time.
 
This "which shadow" discussion has being going back and forth ever since "expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights" became a thing!
And yes, learning how to deal with the question is a challenge for the inexperienced, because until one has some experience printing or otherwise preparing a final result, it can be hard to recognize.
I remember a photography instructor - not mine - who described teaching beginners as a regular part of their routine. He indicated that most beginners tended to end up with negatives that were too contrasty, because they would tend to choose shadows that were too dark, and then would tend to choose development that would result in highlights that were too light.
 
Ardpatrick said:
folks who are new to film, as the OP obviously is, need advice that builds confidence and is not overwhelming. And to that end I’d rather try to simplify the process.
Click to expand...
+1

Way too often I see beginners ask a simple question on Photrio and they get inundated with answers that would be impossible to comprehend by anyone who does not already have a solid foundation of photographic knowledge and voculabulary.
 
Dyed-in-the-wool Zone-System user here.

I place an important shadow on a Zone that will render it the way I want to see it in the final print. I choose anywhere from Zone II (3 stops underexposed from the meter reading for the non-Zonies out there) to Zone V (no deviation from the meter reading) depending on on the situation.

Using Zones has an inherent margin of error of up to half a stop, more usually 1/3 stop. That's close enough for me with a bit of built-in underexposure buffer. Is it precise? To within the margin of error, yes. Is it complicated? Only the deciding where I want to place the shadow; the rest is EZPZ.

When in doubt, I'll give a bit more exposure. Always better to err that direction. The important thing is to get the information on the negative.

Best,

Doremus
 
runswithsizzers said:
+1

Way too often I see beginners ask a simple question on Photrio and they get inundated with answers that would be impossible to comprehend by anyone who does not already have a solid foundation of photographic knowledge and voculabulary.
Click to expand...

Glad you said it for me. My thoughts exactly.
 

Matt,

I’ve been teaching art students in and out of darkrooms for 25 years. They learn by making mistakes.

Nearly 40 years ago when I was an art student interested in photography, there was a surly, grumpy not so old lab technician who just didn’t like students. One day he told me that the way we were learning photography from the lecturer - starting with 35mm black and white neg, was all wrong. He said we should all start with 4x5 transparency, so we’d have to learn properly. I’m not sure who was to pay for the film & processing! In hindsight I can see it wasn’t an accident that he was a technician and not a teacher.
 
Ardpatrick said:
I’ve been teaching art students in and out of darkrooms for 25 years. They learn by making mistakes.
Click to expand...

IMHO, it isn't just the students who learn by making mistakes .
I think though that the lesson that does need to be learned is that the choice of shadow is a matter of judgment, and as such not a simplistic one.
With some experience and judgment in hand, it does become somewhat straightforward, because by that time one has an idea what they are looking for and looking to accomplish. Prior to then, one needs to experience at least a little bit of surprise and disappointment
 

Indeed - learn from experience.
 
there was both clody days and very contrasted ligh days

but if iso 400 was adviced for a standard development with that kind of film I should maybe do a little less than 6.3 ?

I think i have not always done that, I customized it a bit based on my needs, I'm very curious to see the result.

but generally if i If I measure for the shadows and take away 2 stops I do what the 300v light meter suggests to bring the exposure to 0
 
in the past i did and the result was not too bad at all.

but that time i will develop the film and i thought I could compensate for the highlights by reducing the development time a little, maybe if it says 6.30 I should try to do 6 minutes of development to be a little more cautious.

because I'm generally sure that I shouldn't have dark shadows but I'm afraid that I could have very light highlights if I develop too much in that direction, so I'm undecided between 5.30m or 6.0 minutes


maybe if I do 5.30 I risk having an inconsistent development of the negative? i read that it can happens.

A compromise could be do 6 minutes and agitation 5 seconds every 60 seconds after first 30s.
 
Last edited:
Rosssiiii said:
because I'm generally sure that I shouldn't have dark shadows but I'm afraid that I could have very light highlights
Click to expand...
How light your highlights end up depend mostly on how you print or scan the film. Yes, you can have highlights that end up in a part of the film curve where they lose differentiation and start to look, well, ugly, but there's quite a bit of latitude in that area esp. on B&W negative film.

Rosssiiii said:
maybe if I do 5.30 I risk having an inconsistent development of the negative?
Click to expand...
I wouldn't worry about that.

For now I'm not convinced you have a problem that you need to address by cutting back development time.
 
koraks said:
For now I'm not convinced you have a problem that you need to address by cutting back development time.
Click to expand...
I agree with @koraks

Rosssiiii said:
there was both clody days and very contrasted ligh days
Click to expand...
... and therefore it is impossible to adjust your development time to benefit every shot on the roll. IF you are going to adjust your developing time, then you will have to decide whether you care more about your cloudy day shots OR your high contrast shots. Was your photo of Elvis, Amelia Earhart, and Sasquatch greeting space aliens taken under low contrast or harsh lighting?

Rosssiiii said:
maybe if I do 5.30 I risk having an inconsistent development of the negative? i read that it can happens.

A compromise could be do 6 minutes and agitation 5 seconds every 60 seconds after first 30s.
Click to expand...
All you can do now is pick one of those times, and develop your film. If you took notes about how you exposed each frame, then you will learn more from studying your negatives than you will from reading this thread.
 
Last edited:
Rosssiiii said:
but generally if i If I measure for the shadows and take away 2 stops I do what the 300v light meter suggests to bring the exposure to 0
Click to expand...

just to be clear, you metered the shadows then reduced exposure by 2 stops?

eg.
metered shadows 1/60sec @ f4
exposed film 1/60sec @ f8

if so, as suggested above, use the std time.

Are you printing conventionally or scanning? When printing the negs conventionally, if you need to print at G5, then increase the development time next roll, if you need to print at G0 or 1, then decrease the time. If you're around G2-3, your development time is ok. You can tweak the time as you go.

A slightly more systematic approach would be to shoot a roll of a single scene (metering shadows) then cut a portion off and develop for std time. Make a print. Depending on grade paper required, develop next section of film shorter/longer. If still not happy (i.e. printing at G2-3), do another section shorter/longer.

Lastly, if your friends are using the same film and developer and are happy with negatives developed for 9mins, is that also your normal time? That is a lot more than the std 6min 30secs.
 
Rosssiiii,

The Zone System is all well and good, but it's not really well-suited for small cameras with in-camera meters (matrix or center-weighted) and roll film. I use the ZS exclusively for sheet film, along with a spot meter to make reading shadows more easy.

For small cameras and negative film, especially black-and-white, I don't bother with the ZS. Instead, I do the following:

1. Find an E.I. for the film(s) I use that gives me good shadow detail for average-contrast situations when using your in-camera meter to just read the scene generally. No real testing is needed here, just a few sessions of bracketing to find what film speed works best in most situations. Then just standardize on that using the film-speed setting or exposure compensation on the camera.

2. Then, just use your in-camera meter for everything. The only compensation you need to make is for very contrasty scenes. For these, you need to add extra exposure. Contrasty? Add a stop. Really, really contrasty? Add two stops. That will get you a usable negative. Experience will refine the process. The whole basing exposure on a shadow is great, but if it's not practical (or just too slow), then this will do the job just fine.

3. Find a developing time for your film that lets you print average-contrast scenes at a middle contrast setting. The goal is have a lot of room for adjustment on either side of "average" (or in ZS-speak, "normal").

4. Then use the contrast control available from VC paper to adjust the print contrast to the contrast of the negative. If you find you're always using one extreme of the other, then adjust your developing time a bit accordingly so that most of your negatives print at a middle value.

That's really all you need.

Doremus
 
35mm is just as suitable for ZS as any other format.


"Exposing for shadows and developing for highlights" sounds very nice, reminiscent of a famous quote, a poem, or even a commandment, but it's just a very simplistic way of saying ZS.


My recommendation for a beginner is to learn photometry, then learn how to develop and print, and when the results are consistent, if you want...ZS.
 
Looks OK; you're tending slightly towards underexposure to my taste, but for the most part it's not a big issue.
There's a lot of drying spots on the negatives, but that can be dealt with separately. There's quite a lot of information also on this forum on how to avoid this.
 
but these drying spots can be removed by microfiber cloth ?
 
Usually they can be removed for the most part, yes. But it's better to avoid them from drying up on the film in the first place. Sometimes it's not possible to remove them entirely once they're dried without re-washing the film. There's also always the risk of scratching the film if you try and rub it when it's already dry.
 
A look at the jpegs confirms Koraks opinion. They are pretty decent negatives. Next time around, provided you use the same metering method / film type etc you could rate the film at a slightly lower ISO to improve exposure in the shadows. So if this is 400 ISO next time dial in 320 ISO and go from there. I think the highlights are pretty good with this development time / method. So if next time you give a little more exposure to get more detail in the shadows, you could restrain development a little so the highlights stay close to how they turned out this time. So instead of 6:30 you could process for 6:10 or 6:00 mins. You could also stick with 6:30 and see how the highlight work.
 

Thank you! That's all you need to do. No reason to complicate this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register