This only sort of works since my office grade scanner tops out at 1200dpi
Since negatives are only a means to an end, it's very difficult to judge them without making prints.
These days you can take a photo of the negative “without” inverting it on your phone and upload the picture of the negative here and ask us about it. You’ll get lots of advice.
“A picture is worth”… well it helps a lot.
Because the contact sheet applies a certain amount of contrast.if you can surmise what's possible from a middling contact sheet, why not directly from the negative?
Because the contact sheet applies a certain amount of contrast.
there's contrast inherent in the negative, non?
Here is my test shot. I usually develop my 400TX with HC-110 but first time trying D-76 (1:1, 9.5 minutes). I feel HC-110 tones looks better hence checking.
Yes, but you cannot tell exactly if the negative will make a good print. A lot of folks over-develop their film. It's only a means to an end. Without experience, it's hard to judge. A negative should look "flatter" (less contrasty) than a print.
Just print the damn thing!
I have a good tip. Use the same film, developer, agitation, time temperature and perfect the highlight and shadow density with trial and error. This may take many films over many months. From then on you can concentrate on composition and the decisive moment.
That is perfect! Development looks great, there’s some specular highlights that are going to print white but they’re appropriate.
I’d have given a bit more exposure only to give a chance for a little texture in the blank background. But your exposure is the “correct” exposure.
You’re good to go.
I’d have given a bit more exposure only to give a chance for a little texture in the blank background. But your exposure is the “correct” exposure.
Yes this is a good tip for me too. I have good and consistent success using 400TX with HC-110. I also want to use Fomapan 100 (due to lower cost) for good sunny days outdoor but have not discovered a good developer with good results yet. I have not been successful with HC-110 with Fomapan 100 (too much contrast and too dense following the Massive Dev Chart) so now switching to D-76 and continue to experiment.
Very true Martie, I aim to shoot more Fomapan mainly due to cost per film and am trying to tune in my preferred developer at the moment. And this is unlikely HC-110 so trying out D-76 now.HC 110 is arguably 'the' most versatile developer on the market, you made a good choice and it would be worth your while persevering with it.
Bear in mind, manufacturing data and MDC info. is only a starting point and the rest is down to you, both the fun and the frustration!
I understand your 'itch' to experiment but there is no 'silver bullet'. And in 'switching' you may end up learning less and paying more in the long run.
Your negatives don't 'lie' and are a physical culmination of your work in the field and in the darkroom and should form the basis for informed change to your materials and practice, if deemed necessary.
The build-up of density and contrast you experienced with foma isn't a mistake or a fault or a processing error or a bad film dev combination.
By 'assessing your negs', see the article above, you will most probably determine that the negatives fall into the overexposed and overdeveloped category. Based on this insight, you can make meaningful changes, so, iso and exposure tweaking, assuming everything is in order camera-wise. And time/temp/dilution/agitation tweaking at the processing end.
This whole exercise has been about the acquisition of knowledge and the gaining of practical experience. The validation of which, will come in the form of incremental improvements to your skills and results.
My Epson V600 photo does just fine for making contact sheets, scanning the negatives in the pages in three passes at 600dpi. I assemble and print them in Photoshop, making individual adjustments to some frames as necessary. It's good enough to judge the overall negatives to print. Plus, I have a database of the contact sheets on my computer, making it easier to locate a particular negative. Of course, all work prints and finals are done in the darkroom.
Here is my test shot. I usually develop my 400TX with HC-110 but first time trying D-76 (1:1, 9.5 minutes). I feel HC-110 tones looks better hence checking.
I've used this site as a internet reference over the years: Assessing Negatives - ephotozine
It isn't perfect, but it is helpful and usable.
The biggest aid is that when you get in hand a negative of a subject with normal contrast and a normal distribution of tones, and you are able to reasonably easily obtain from it an end result that also shows normal contrast and a normal distribution of tones, you should set that negative aside as a control reference - a "Shirley" negative in old time (Kodak supported) lab parlance.
With such a reference at hand, your visual comparisons will be much better.
There seems to be a white haze over it when I reversed it.
Why three passes at 600?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?