Ilford Film development problem

[peter38]

I have a problem that has baffled both myself and my photography teacher.

I set up my Nikkormat EL on a tripod and shot a gray card three times on succeeding days--FP4, 36, shot the whole roll. Shooting at indicated meter reading I should have had negatives that printed at Zone 5. The first roll printed at Zone 7—I have already calibrated my in camera meter and it is right on. I shot another roll, same procedure but I cut back development time by 10% i.e. I went from 8.5 (8.5 was indicated on the D-76 bottle) minutes to 7.39. These negatives printed at Zone 7 also, no change. I thought I made a mistake and re-shot and re-developed at 7.39—no change in the print zones! I shot yesterday and cut development time 20% i.e. to 6.42. There is a very, very slight change in the negatives and print but hardly noticeable. What, oh, what could be wrong that my negatives aren’t thinning as a cut back on development time? Here’s the kicker. I followed the same process with my 120 film and when I cut development by 10% my print moved right down from Zone 7 to Zone 5!!! Yet, every step in the processing of the two films is exactly the same.

Following instructions in Brian Lav’s book, Zone System: Step By Step Guide for Photographers I am attempting to calibrate my in camera light meters with my film and find the correct length of time for my film development.

1. I am using Ilford FP4.
2. My cameras are a Nikkormat EL and a Mamiya 645E.
3. I am using D-76 at a one to one ratio at 68 degrees as my developer. My fix is Lauder 763 Rapid Film Fixer with Hardner. I also use HG85, Heico Perma Wash.
4. On step one I found that my in camera meter in my Nikkormat EL was correct but that I had to make a correction to my ASA on my Mamiya . I did the latter.
5. Following step two of Brian’s process I put up a ‘gray card’ (in shade at 12:30 pm) and shot an entire roll of FP4 using the Nikkormat’s indicated meter readings. I should have then had negatives that printed as zone 5. Instead they printed as Zone7—Ok, that would indicate that I needed to cut back on development time. I shot the next day and cut development time by 10% (from 8.5 to 7.39). No change, the negatives were still printing at Zone 7. I cut development time 20% (8.5 to 6.42) and there is just the slightest thinning of my negatives.
6. Checking my Fixer chemicals I put a piece of film leader in the beaker and the film went clear within 30 seconds so I am assuming my fixer is still potent.
7. When developing I agitate on the minute and at 30 seconds.

Can you think what might be wrong?

 

[Les McLean]

There could be a problem with the shutter of the Nikormat.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Why are you targeting Zone V for your development test, and have you done a speed test first, and how are you determining what your negative densities are?

If you are following the instructions from this book carefully, you might want to consider using another book. Too many things seem to be missing from the process.

Ansel Adams' _The Negative_ is the classical source. _Beyond the Zone System_ by Phil Davis is a popular alternative approach.

 

[peter38]

Thank you both for your replies.

Les, my teacher thought of my shutter also but I have never had a problem with any of my negatives other than that they have been thick to very thick. Wouldn’t a shutter problem reveal itself either consistently or randomly as ‘unexplained’ negatives? All 36 exposures on all the rolls of film in question are consistently at Zone 7 and ‘unexplained negs’ way off in the ether some place are very rare. I have in the past and still do take pictures with this wonderful camera under very trying conditions (bright or dark) and it has always come through or I see where “I” have messed up.

Thank you David. I have Beyond The Zone System but found it difficult to understand. The book I am following, Brian Lav’s, is logical and easy to follow but than I am really just an amateur at this so let me explain his process a little further.

The first thing he has you do is shoot a gray card—bright day, card in deep shadow—but adjusting your f-stops so that you should be getting a Zone 1—this procedure is to eliminate normal film fog. Then you are instructed to shoot one below that reading, one at +1 and one at +2 and then finish the roll.

You take a clear piece of film and set your enlarger at a good height and stop your lens down to some middle f-stop. You then do a contact test strip at three second intervals until you have ten or so of them—You always use the same paper for all tests of course. You then determine how many seconds it takes to reach maximum black. If the test strip says it is 15 seconds he has you retry at just that interval because five 3 second intervals may not be the same as one 15 second interval. This is the amount of time to get ‘through’ the film fog. This is your Standard Contact Time (SCT).

Now you take the film that you shot with a Zone 1 frame from above and contact print at SCT. If the frame shot at Zone 1 shows just decernable gray than your meter is correct. My Nikkormat was correct, my Mamiya first showed discernable gray at the +1 setting and he had a chart for adjusting your ASA setting in such situations.

At this point you are advised to do the test as described above for Zone 5 i.e. shooting for the Zone and using standard development times and then changing them until ‘shot at’ and ‘printed zones’ are the same.

As I said when I first saw that I needed to lessen my 35mm development time (down 10%) when I didn’t see a difference in the contact print (came out as a Zone 7) I re-did the test with a new roll of film arriving at the same results. What drives me crazy is that after I developed the first roll of 35mm at 10% less time and seeing that I needed to do the same with my 120 film I developed the latter using exactly the same temperatures and times and the negatives dropped right back down to Zone 5!

I am going to do all the tests again but I wanted any input from experienced people before I did so. School is in session Monday morning again and I’ll have another go. Any suggestions you can provide would be absolute gold to me. I'd like to know any problems you see with the process, I'll abandon it and try a new method if I have to.

 

[lee]

I say you need to take the zone I negs to a place that has a transmission densitometer. The correct density is .10 above or minus film base + fog. That means subtract the clear frame density from the ones that are suppose to be zone I. Once that is found, use that for your ei and re-shoot the gray card but open up 3 stops. That should be zone VIII. Once that is done measure the z VIII frames on the same densitometer. Zone VIII is 1.20 minus fb+f (This is assuming you are using a condenser enlarger) (on the chance that you are using a diffusion type enlarger the density should be no greater than 1.30 minus fb+f). This may take you several attempts to get there and you need to make sure the temp of the developer is what you think it is.

The reason you need to use the densitometer is there are way too many variables to deal with when you make the Max black tests. With the densitometer it is pretty cut and dry. Look for a custom lab in town and call them and see if they will read your negs. Another place is a good size print shop. Just make sure they understand that you need to read the negs on a transmission densitometer.

good luck,

lee\c

 

[Ed Sukach]

—I have already calibrated my in camera meter and it is right on.

Just how did you calibrate that meter?

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

I'll Echo Lee's remarks and suggest using a densitometer to find Zone I and testing development time on Zone VIII rather than Zone V.

Zone I is determined almost entirely by exposure. Once the Zone I area on the negative has been fully developed, you can increase development time all you want, but you won't increase Zone I density--and therefore you won't increase film speed--by changing the development time or temperature (though you can genuinely increase film speed sometimes by changing developers). The reason the film speed test is based on Zone I, is that you want to find out what the minimum exposure is to effect a significant change in density.

Now the fact that Zone I doesn't change significantly with development time, while higher values do change significantly with development time, is what allows you to use development time to adjust the contrast of the negative to the brightness range of the scene. You test for Zone VIII, because that is the highest value that shows detail, and your goal in using the zone system is to get as much detail as possible on the film at both ends and good tonal separation throughout the range.

When you use +1 development, you want to push Zone VIII up one zone to increase contrast, but note that not every value will increase by one zone throughout the range--Zone I will stay approximately the same, and Zone V will usually increase by some value less than one full zone. That is why one should test for Zone VIII to determine development time, and not Zone V. If everything went up by one zone when you used +1 development, then +1 development would give you no change in contrast.

A couple of qualifiers--

If Zone I isn't developed fully, say when you reduce the development time for -1 or -2 development, then you may want to increase exposure to support the shadows.

After doing all the tests properly, you might find that the film isn't giving you the look you want, so you can adjust your EI to emphasize different parts of the film curve. Say for instance, that you have a film with a long scale (plenty of room before the highlights hit the shoulder) and a long toe--you might reduce the EI (or increase exposure), to push the shadows off the toe.

 

[lee]

that is what I meant to type but I got tired of typing so thanks David for clearing the muddy water I passed. I would be willing to bet a small sum that when he tests zone VIII he will see that his development is pretty still far off .

lee\c

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

We'll cross that bridge when we get there.

 

[peter38]

Thank you again David and Lee. It’s late and I’ve already had my wine so I hope I don’t make a complete fool of myself with this post.

Ed, I felt that when I shot the gray card for a Zone 1 and it came out on my contact sheet as a “1” that I had calibrated my meter. Am I incorrect?

I understand much of what you way but certainly not all. I will look for a place with a transmission densitometer tomorrow.

<<That means subtract the clear frame density from the ones that are suppose to be zone I. Once that is found, use that for your ei and re-shoot the gray card but open up 3 stops.>>

But once I have subtracted my clear frame density what do I do about changing my meter? Lets say I have a “number” how do I translate that into changing my ASA setting for my meter? I don’t recognize “ei”. What is it and what are its implications.

<<Zone I is determined almost entirely by exposure. Once the Zone I area on the negative has been fully developed, you can increase development time all you want, but you won't increase Zone I density--and therefore you won't increase film speed--by changing the development time or temperature (though you can genuinely increase film speed sometimes by changing developers).>>

I understand this except that portion about “increase film speed”. What do you mean increase film speed when you are developing? I believe if you use a compensating developer that you can increase film speed when you shoot but I don’t see how film speed increases in development.

&lt;<If Zone I isn't developed fully, say when you reduce the development time for -1 or -2 development, then you may want to increase exposure to support the shadows.>&gt;

Ok, and after increasing exposure it’s back to the densitometer right? And you contact print to find the standard contact time to print z 1??

&lt;&lt;After doing all the tests properly, you might find that the film isn't giving you the look you want, so you can adjust your EI to emphasize different parts of the film curve. Say for instance, that you have a film with a long scale (plenty of room before the highlights hit the shoulder) and a long toe--you might reduce the EI (or increase exposure), to push the shadows off the toe.&gt;&gt;

“EI” again, I looked in my books and can’t find a reference. Sorry, I’m slow on this. Also, when you say “push the shadows off the toe” you mean bring them up Zone so they have more detail, right?

Of course what I am seeking here as an end goal is that my meter will read the scene well enough that when I spot meter or “see” a shadow and want to make it a z 3 or what ever that I will have a reasonable chance that I have accurate enough information to do that. Then I want to establish standard development times that will give me a ‘normal negative’. All this can be calibrated to one paper.

Now if need be I can push or pull my film to gain more control over my final negative. A question at this point really is how much do you change development time up or down to push or pull one Zone?

Also, my instructor suggested that I should switch to Ilford developer. Sounds good to me since I only use FP4 film. What developer would you suggest?

 

[Robert]

&lt;&lt;That means subtract the clear frame density from the ones that are suppose to be zone I. Once that is found, use that for your ei and re-shoot the gray card but open up 3 stops.&gt;&gt;

But once I have subtracted my clear frame density what do I do about changing my meter? Lets say I have a “number” how do I translate that into changing my ASA setting for my meter? I don’t recognize “ei”. What is it and what are its implications.

EI = Exposure index. It's the film speed you've calibrated your whole system to. Everything from the film,camera and processing. The ISO number given by the manufacturer can't take into account your developer choice.

I'll try and explain the way I understand it. What you do is take a clear frame that equals fog base. Now take several zone one exposures at zone I. Starting at 1 stop below the ISO and working up by 1/3s of a stop until you hit 1 stop over. I guess that's seven total exposures. Measure the density of those zone I exposures. The one that is about 0.1 higher in density then the clear frame. Well at leasts that's the way I understand it.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Robert's explanation of the film speed test is accurate and to the point.

By way of example, you might read a blank frame or the unexposed margin between frames to have an absolute density of 0.2, say. Then you would read the frames that are exposed in the way Robert describes to find one that reads 0.3, subtract the value you got for the blank frame (film base + fog), and you get 0.1--your Zone I density.

Sorry if "increased film speed" added another distraction. It is a common misconception that if you extend development time to "push" film to a higher EI, you are actually increasing the speed of the film. I had the misimpression that you were trying to adjust the Zone I density by changing the development time, which you can't do beyond a certain threshold.

By "pushing the shadows off the toe," yes, I mean moving them up to the straight line portion of the film's characteristic curve to improve tonal separation in the shadows. If the film's curve has a long enough straight-line area, you can do this without losing the highlights at the other end.

How much to change development time for a one zone increase or decrease?--depends. It's usually on the order of 20-40% The development time test based on Zone VIII will tell you. Once you've established the film speed (EI), then you can test to see which development times give you normal, +X and -X results.

What developer to use?--There is no particular reason to use the same brand of film and developer. Some, such as Kodak D-76 and Ilford ID-11 are virtually identical. Go to the Ilford website and download the technical data file for FP4+, and it will give you recommendations for different developers for different priorities (minimum grain, maximum speed, best acutance, etc.--you can't have them all!). Anchell and Troop's _Film Developing Cookbook_ also has lots of information on different types of developers.

 

[Donald Miller]

The way to arrive at a zone I density for your camera, light meter etc. Is to meter the grey card you have in evenly lit conditions. Focus your camera lens at infinity. Leaving the lens focused at infinity, move the camera to where the card fills the viewfinder. Be careful to not shade the card while doing so. If your meter on the camera indicates 1/60 sec at F 11 (for instance), manually set your camera for four stops less exposure. Then make one exposure at F11 and 1/60 second, the second exposure would be F16 at 1/60 second, the third exposure at F16 and 1/125 of a second, the fourth exposure at f22 and 1/125 second. Shoot your fifth through 8th exposure with no exposure by leaving the lens cap the lens. The above exposures are examples only. Use your meter recommendation, and give a total of four stops less exposure (incrementally as in the example above)plus the four exposures with the lens cap on the lens.

Rewind the film and remove from the camera. In the darkroom remove the film cannister, open it. Process the film according to your film and developer combination recommendations. The negatives that are clear are your exposures with the lens cap on. That will be your base plus fog. The first frame that will give you a density greater then your base plus fog with a measurable density of .10 above FB + fog will be your actual film speed. That typically will fall on the third exposure but not always. For instance if you were using a 125 ISO film and using the example above the third exposure showed a density of .10 above fb+fog then your actual film speed would be 64.

Once you have done that test then the next step will be developing for a Zone VIII density. But you need to do the film speed test first. Come back to this forum when you have it finished.

Always remember exposure is for shadows and development is for highlights. Film speed is the place to begin to get your exposure properly placed.

 

[Ed Sukach]

Ed, I felt that when I shot the gray card for a Zone 1 and it came out on my contact sheet as a “1” that I had calibrated my meter. Am I incorrect?

No. The meter itself serves one real function: To measure the amount of light it receives. That is independent of any particular film-developer combination.
There is, in most meters a "translation" to produce f/stop and shutter speed information, but there are talbes (I've made one myself) to determine exposure from foot-candle illumination and film speed. The calibration of the METER itself would be to determine the departure from indicated light levels as compared to "true" values.

I have horrible thoughts of those who have fallen into the "Sunny 16" trap, where they maesure light on a sunny day with their meter, and if the reading agrees with the "Sunny 16" idea (when set to f/16, the shutter speed will equal the exposure index) they consider their meter to be "calibrated".
There is a great deal more to calibration, including the "lineartiy" of the reading - is it accurate at high light levels AND low light levels-, how it is affected by the COLOR of the light... and a whole bunch more.

When you determine the aount of light necessary to effect "Zone 1" on the film, you are establishing a WORKING exposure index for that particular film, which may or may not coincide with the advertised exposure index of the film. If it does, it does not necessarily mean your meter is correct, a.k.a, "calibrated".

 

[peter38]

Thanks to all of you for your time and help in this matter. By some chance I have found a film processing company that will do a transmission densitometer test on my negatives.

Here is what I’ve done and I am posting this before processing my film. I set up a gray card in deep shade, I set my 50mm lens to infinity and made sure that the card filled the view finder.

My reading was a hair under 125 at f 2.8. I set my shutter speed at a hair under 125 and since this “f” stop would give me a z5 I cranked my aperture down to f 16 (one under z1). Estimated ½ stops between marked f stops coming all the way back up to 125 at f 2.8 or 11 exposures all together. Then I did it again but only going from one ‘click’ f stop to the other for 7 exposures. I also put the lens cap on for four exposures to give me clear film base. Now I will process my film if that all sounds right to you folks and then I will have my film checked tomorrow morning and see what’s what.

After the densitometer reading I will adjust the ASA on my camera to reflect as close as possible the true film speed.

I will then tomorrow shoot a roll at z 8 and process my film for different times (checking with a densitometer or through contact prints?) and finally arrive at an optimum development time for FP4.

Whew! Could I have all this right? I’ll have to admit that pretty shortly into this exchange I was feeling in very deep water.

Ed, thank you and of course you’re right about calibration. I miss spoke in that I was not under the impression that my meter was “calibrated” any further than in a gross way. But at the present that’s all I want.

I have The Film Developing Cookbook by Anchell and Troop but what is disconcerting is that it seems what ever book I read or knowledgeable person I speak with I am given a different way to do things e.g. times, type and amount of agitation. For now I only want the simplest way to give me a ‘normal’ negative most of the time.

If I can get my meter, film and development somewhat synchronized then I feel I will have a firm base to work from for quite a while making modifications from a position of some understanding rather than a series of guesses.

Thanks again and how does that film exposure series that I described above sound as far as my going ahead and processing the film and taking it in to be analyzed?

Hmm, it appears at this point that I'm not posting my replys correctly am I?

 

[Donald Miller]

Sounds like you have the exposure test finished. Process the film according to the recommendations for the film and developer combination. Everything that you will do insofar as the development test will be dependent on getting your film speed established. When you shoot your roll at Zone VIII, I would recommend developing to a lower contrast then what I would recommend for sheet film. I would target my Zone VIII densities so that the negative will print on grade three paper. The reasoning behind this is that this reduces developing time somewhat and this will help control excessive film grain. The smaller film format will benefit from all of the help that you can give it. You will still have grade four paper if you need it and you will have grades two and one if you need those as well. Good luck.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Sounds like you're on the right track.

For now it's probably best to use a densitometer to test for zone VIII. For a condenser enlarger targeted for printing on grade 2, you'll want a zone VIII density of about 1.2 over base+fog. A little more if you are using a diffusion enlarger or a longer scale paper. A little less if you take the above suggestion and target your negatives for grade 3. And even then, once you set aside the testing and start taking pictures, you may decide that you generally want more or less contrast than you're getting, and you can adjust your development times accordingly.

If you want to experiment a bit, shoot your test rolls with a few shots at Zone VIII at the beginning to be sure you've got your Zone VIII test, then shoot the rest of the roll in sequence from zone 0 to zone X or more, and then you can read each frame with a densitometer and plot the characteristic curve for the film for each development time you try and see how development time changes contrast throughout the curve.

 

[lee]

This morning I wrote this long article on just how I would proceed with the test and what to expect and that sort of thing. When I went to preview it and then send it the site told me I was illegal. It would not post it. Fortunately for you and me the information I wrote about is also being written about by David and Don. Both men know what they are talking about. Follow their instructions. Your photography will thank you for it.

lee\c

 

[peter38]

Thank you for the thought on that anyway Lee.

Well, many a slip between cup and… I made all my exposures, wrote down the info and went to mix my developer only to find I had just half as much as I needed!!!!!!!!! I left the film in the developer can, hoping that doesn’t ruin anything and early tomorrow I will buy new developer and have the film tested.

We have condenser enlargers. My amateurish preference would be to print on grade 2 paper but am very curious as to the advantages of printing on grade 3. Grade three it would seem to my ‘newbie’ thinking would print fewer tones than 2 if I am making myself clear.

&lt;<If you want to experiment a bit, shoot your test rolls with a few shots at Zone VIII at the beginning to be sure you've got your Zone VIII test, then shoot the rest of the roll in sequence from zone 0 to zone X or more, and then you can read each frame with a densitometer and plot the characteristic curve for the film for each development time you try and see how development time changes contrast throughout the curve.>&gt;

&lt;Grin&gt; you know these posts have been a whole education in and of themselves! I think that a zone 0 to X test would be a good idea and I can see that each frame can be read with a densitometer but upon what would I plot the test result numbers? And are you suggesting that when I change development times that I run the test again each time? Wouldn’t my ‘eye’ evaluating a finished print be a better judge of what I want than a graph?

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

You would plot the values on a graph with densities on the Y-axis and the zones on the X-axis. Yes, you could do this test for each development time tested and you could plot each curve in a different color on the same graph. This is called the "characteristic curve" of the film. The flat part on the left near Zone I is the "toe," and the flat part on the right is the "shoulder," and the middle is the straight line portion. Tones that fall in the straight line portion will have good separation, while tones that fall on the toe will be muddy (with respect to each other), and tones that fall on the shoulder will be "blown out."

In the process of plotting these curves, you might discover that one development time gives you a normal contrast range, and another gives you N+1, and maybe another is N-0.5, etc.

Say for example that you've targeted Zone VIII density at 1.2, and you get that density at Zone VIII with your developer of choice at 10 min. Now what if you also did a test at 12 min., and discover that Zone VII has a density of 1.2 at that development time? That would be a one-zone expansion (N+1), and you could use that increased development time to get more contrast in a flat scene. You could also compare the 12 min. curve to the 10 min. curve and discover how much of a change you get at Zone V when you get a one zone increase at Zone VII, which is one of the questions we started out with. Maybe then you might try a test at 15 min. to see if you can get an expansion of N+2 (Zone VI with a density of 1.2), or you might discover that the film doesn't have enough density for an expansion of N+2.

Ultimately, of course the print will tell you all you need to know, but the process of plotting the graphs will teach you a lot about how film works, how to make it do what you want, and what it can't do easily.

 

[Jorge Oliveira]

Slightly off topic...

I do not - and think many doesn't also have access to a densitometer.

So, if I place the camera closely facing a evenly illuminated wall, lens at infinite focus, take a series of shots - normal reading, 1 stop less light, 2 stops less, ...., 4, 4 1/2, 5 stops less, develop normally (at manufacturer's recommended time) and print two adjacent frames at once (including the border area between two frames):

Suppose that between 4 1/2 stops and 5 stops I can notice that 4 /12 is lighter than interframe (film base) and 5 is as dark as interframe, is this 4 1/2 stop less close enought to Zone 1?

Thanks,

Jorge O

 

[Donald Miller]

Jorge O.,
It would seem, at first glance, that what you suggest would work. I have found in my experience that it will not be accurate. The reason is that Zone I, Zone II, and approaching Zone III all fall on the toe of the film's characteristic curve. Typically, these tonalities will also fall on the shoulder of the paper's characteristic curve. Therefore the negative densities and corresponding print tonalities are not well separated there.
I have heard that most humans can visually distinguish a film density change of .07 and above. Therefore if one has no access to a densitometer, I would rely on a visual inspection of the film before I would rely on the tonal difference in the print that you suggest. I think that this would be more accurate.

 

[Robert]

There are two threads on making your own densitometer. The one I made is very cheap to make if you already have a digital multimeter.

 

[Jorge Oliveira]

Thanks, dnmilikan.

That's one point not clear to me:

I do the exposure series and looking at the negative I obtain my personal EI.
Now, if I print the test strip and there is no difference in paper between -0.5, base, +0.5 frames it doesn't matter.

My viewpoint is that I should use as minimum density the one that gives first dark gray above black on a normal grade paper print - not in the negative.

i can't see what's wrong with this idea.


Jorge O

 

[peter38]

Ok, I got my densitometer readings back.

Film base value reading was 34

In both the incremental readings f 5.6 gave a value of 43

With my camera lens set on infinity, my in camera meter indicated that to capture the gray card I should use a shutter speed of 125 and an f stop of 2.8.

So that means, if I understand all this, that in order to get a Zone 1 I need only close down my aperture to f 5.6 rather than to f 11.

That being said what would I change my ASA setting to on my camera? I have the option of two dots between ASA numbers i.e. 100, dot, dot, 200. So the space between numbers is divided into thirds.

I presently have my ASA set at the first dot over 100 for FP4 which is 125 film meaning that I am exposing for a little less time than would be absolutely correct.

Whew, how I hope all that is correct! Now if I shoot a roll with several frames at Zone VIII and the rest at Zone 0 to Zone 10 I will find out if my film development time should be more or less because my Zone VIII reading should be 1.2.

If I can get modification advice on my ASA adjustment I can still, maybe, have time to shoot the Zone VIII test today—my store support being closed tomorrow. I would love that but I understand it is Friday afternoon so don’t worry at all anyone if you don’t have time to reply to my little problem right away you have all been great!