judging the time of processing for BW

[brianentz]

In processing Black and White films I often hear "judge for yourself if you should extend of shorten your development times" and something similar regarding your agitation habits. But, specifically, what should I be looking for? That is, what would cause you to look at a negative and say to yourself, "I need to keep it in the developer longer or shorter" . And what results would lead you to think that you are agitating too much or too little.

 

[gone]

It means to develop the film based on the film/developer's recommended times and agitation protocol, then see if you have underdeveloped it or overdeveloped it. You be the judge, and that judgement/guess/prayer will be the direction you need to go on the next roll of film.

 

[MattKing]

Development time controls negative contrast. More development or more agitation or higher temperature all increase contrast in the negative.
Just as exposure controls shadow detail in the negative.
Both have an affect on highlight detail in the negative.
The goal is to arrive at a negative with the right amount of detail and contrast. That right amount means a negative that either prints the way we want it to (in the darkroom), or scans to a useful file (or both).
All adjustments are oriented toward the results when printing or displaying.
I find the examples and discussion at the following "Assessing Negatives" site to be useful for those who are learning about this:
https://www.ephotozine.com/article/assessing-negatives-4682

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

https://www.ephotozine.com/article/assessing-negatives-4682

Unfortunately the examples were faked in photoshop. The best 'ring-around' example I know of that relates development and exposure is in a book by (I shudder to recommend him) Mortensen.

 

[pentaxuser]

So are the ephotozine pictures of real negatives and then manipulated in PS? If they are, what is it about them that in fact prevents them from serving as instructive examples of the range of negatives in helping students recognise what over/under negs look like?

I may not need to say this but just in case, this is not a challenge but simply a reply seeking information

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[MattKing]

Does it matter if they are accurate facsimiles of real results?
The article has been a useful internet discussion reference since it originally appeared 20 years ago.

 

[Doremus Scudder]

Kodak's advice from a century ago still applies: If your negatives are consistently to contrasty, reduce development time, and vice-versa.

That's about all there is to it.

Doremus

 

[Paul Howell]

Depending on the size of your negatives, the old saw is that you should be able to see details in the shadows, thinnest part of the negative and read news print though the highlight, the darkest part of the negative. If you highlights are blocked to the point you cannot see any detail then you reduce development time. If you prints look flat with muddy highlights you need to increase development time. You can shoot a ring around, I use the method descripted by Carson Graves in his book, The Zone System for 35mm Photographers. In open shade you need a model, fair skin works best, a swath of white cloth, swath of dark cloth, a 18% gray card. For example you are shooting Tmax 400, set your camera or light meter to ISO 25, set the shutter speed and aperture to match the light meter, take a shot. Use your hand or lens cap to over the lens and shoot a blank frame. Then repeat for ISO 50, 100, 200, 400, 800, 1600 and 3200, be sure to keep a blank frame between each shot as it will make it easer to judge later. Develop in your standard developer at the recommended time and temperature. Next using a negative you have gotten an acceptable print as a guide use the same time and aperture with the same paper to print a proof sheet. Once dry see which frame gives you the best shadow detail and highlights from the dark and white cloth and 18% gray card matches your 18% gray card. Once you have a personal E.I or personalized ISO you need not worry about increasing or decreasing development times for a recorded print. At that point you can decide if you to invest time to learn the Zone or Beyond the Zone System.

 

[Bill Burk]

How to begin? The advice to develop more or less according to results isn’t something that sinks in even though it is just a few sensible words.

The good news is that you can make good negatives simply by using the times published with the film or developer, by asking questions here or looking them up online.

Even though I would read Todd-Zakia for fun when I was a kid, I always used the published times as-is and my negatives were just fine.

It was only after my fiftieth birthday when I joined here and started practicing Zone System and then sensitometry that I got into making predictable negatives that fit what I want to do with them.

I can tell you how to develop film for the right time… that’s for sure. And it’s not that hard.

You will want to start with an idea of what kind of qualities you want.

Sounds lofty but really… it’s just thinking about how you print. Do you want to make negatives that are easy to print? What kind of pictures do you like?

Are you going to use a tripod? How will you deal with light? Will you “control” it, “wait” for the perfect time or “plan” to be somewhere at just the right time?

The right time to develop film is based on sensitometry and the best data is the time contrast curve. You take the kind of print you want, and the kind of light you had, to pick the contrast you want. Then use the time contrast chart to pick the time.

The best part is that the tolerance is wide. I like to say you can miss what you aimed for by 30% and still get a decent print.

That is why using the published times will work until you come up with a better plan,

 

[Agulliver]

Use the film and/or developer manufacturer's recommended time/temp/concentration as a starting point and see if you like it. The recommended times should work for most people in most circumstances, but are not hard and fast rules. And even then sometimes more than one concentration of developer is recommended and will give slightly different results at the appropriate recommended times.

Bottom line is you'll get negatives you can print or scan with the recommended regimen unless something else went horribly wrong. You might personally decide to shave time off, add time, play with temperature, agitation or concentration to achieve different end goals....most often more or less contrast, more or less detail in either the shadows or highlights. Depends on your preferences, goals with an image and the conditions under which you are shooting.

After a time you kind of get to know....."Ah, this film I am going to develop for a 8 minutes instead of 7"...for example.

 

[radiant]

It is really important to understand that suggested developing times are trying to develop the film by certain standard. And also to understand that standard is just a standard, not a truth. If you for example like contrasty stuff, the standard might be even bad for you.

I would suggest everyone to always overdevelop your films for example by 15%. It doesn't ruin the film. It just helps you get good negatives for printing. For example if you have underexposed, overdeveloping might save the negative for darkroom printing. Or at least I would advise myself now that way.

I've done experiments with 2x developing time, hot developer etc. and really - nothing "bad" happens. Don't be afraid to try and find your own style!

 

[brianentz]

Wow. The wealth of information on this forum is fantastic. Thanks everyone. I am better educated now.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I've tested a film and developer combination for different contrast/lighting situations, so I know when to end development. If I want edge effects, I'll use a specific developer for that, and reduce the amount of agitation cycles. You'll know after testing, shooting... Pick one way, and stick with it for a while.

 

[Vaughn]

I have done the same, but not so much 'testing' but keeping notes (scene brightness range and values, actual exposure, development, etc), printing the negatives and judging by the results. Avoid the mistakes, and with the notes, repeat the successes...and keep oneself open for seeing other possible paths and destinations.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

My trajectory through photographic processing:

• First months: Follow the manufacturer's directions and things work out.
• Next five years: Try every developer I can get my hands on, try every agitation scheme, try every temperature and as a result things aren't so great
• Next decades: Follow the manufacturer's directions and things work out.

 

[MattKing]

The big advantage you will gain from doing this a while, and dealing with the resulting negatives, is that you will begin to recognize the results you like, and how the negatives appear when they give those results.
Printing or otherwise preparing the negatives for presentation is critical to that feedback loop.

 

[brianentz]

My trajectory through photographic processing:

• First months: Follow the manufacturer's directions and things work out.
• Next five years: Try every developer I can get my hands on, try every agitation scheme, try every temperature and as a result things aren't so great
• Next decades: Follow the manufacturer's directions and things work out.

Excellent quote.

 

[howardpan]

Kodak's advice from a century ago still applies: If your negatives are consistently to contrasty, reduce development time, and vice-versa.

That's about all there is to it.

Doremus

I am a student when it comes to photography and printing in the darkroom. But I'd like to share my thoughts on this topic.

I have always thought of the negative as an intermediary step to the final print. In other words, if the negative is difficult to print (requires a lot of dodging and burning), I can try to make life easier by altering my development and exposure process. If my shadow areas are too dark, I need to expose more. If I frequently need to burn in my highlights, then I need to develop less (or use a graduated neutral density filter). I think if you look at this question through that lens, you will quickly see what you need to do. There are a lot of tools but their ultimate objective should be to produce a negative that is easy to achieve the final print as pictured in your head.

 

[radiant]

One question I haven't yet got an answer; shouldn't we always aim for more contrasty negatives than the "standard" gamma? I think it is much easier to print with lower grade filters than try to squeeze all contrast out of low contrasty negative.

Also; we have discussed / analyzed this before here and the general assumption was that most of the enlargers cannot really reach grade 5. However you can easily achiece grade 00 or even lower on for example LED based enlargers.

 

[MattKing]

One question I haven't yet got an answer; shouldn't we always aim for more contrasty negatives than the "standard" gamma? I think it is much easier to print with lower grade filters than try to squeeze all contrast out of low contrasty negative.

Also; we have discussed / analyzed this before here and the general assumption was that most of the enlargers cannot really reach grade 5. However you can easily achiece grade 00 or even lower on for example LED based enlargers.

Until recently, the Ilford multigrade (MGIV) RC papers had a distinct flat spot at the end of their contrast response curves. They perform much better if you start out with a normal to slightly lower contrast negative.

 

[Sirius Glass]

As a starting place, the negative should be thin enough for a newspaper can be read through it, AND thick enough to clearly see the negative details.

 

[removed account4]

hi brianentz

if you want to get all fancy, you can get a green safelight and develop your film by inspection
http://michaelandpaula.com/mp/devinsp.html
from what I understand the kindhearted lab person who processed all of HCB's film did it all by inspection
so .. if you are daring you can translate the info on processing sheet film into processing any film
what i typically do when I am not sure of what processing time I should do with a certain film is shoot bracketed exposures
so you expose as the meter reads and then 1 full stop over and 1 full stop under what the meter reads for a variety of scenes
you do this for 3 rolls or you can take 1 long roll of 36 and just take a pair of scissors to them and cut it into 3 sections ...
then you bracket your development 1 strip as recommended by the manufacturer one 30 or 40 of 50% more time and one for the same amount of less time
then ... you either scan or print or whatever you films so you can see the final product ..
shoot a roll at the speed and development you liked and then adjust as needed
this is an easy way to determine what your shooting style and processing style looks like, and its not too time consuming
and you can inspect the prints and film together, and it takes less learning than the green safelight ...
good luck!
John

 

[pentaxuser]

hi brianentz

if you want to get all fancy, you can get a green safelight and develop your film by inspection
http://michaelandpaula.com/mp/devinsp.html

John

OP if you do try this let us know what it was that you could see on the negs that enabled you to inspect them well enough to make a good judgement. There may be some green safelights that are both safe and emit a good enough light to make this method a possibility from the first try or even the first few weeks of a try every day but my experience with a Durst tri-color safelight with the green filter was that after 15-20 mins I still could not see a hand in front of my face let alone inspect a negative

Other safelight and other sets of eyes may be different and better but I have yet to see anyone here say they could do it OK other than the reference to michael and paula

pentaxuser

 

[RalphLambrecht]

In processing Black and White films I often hear "judge for yourself if you should extend of shorten your development times" and something similar regarding your agitation habits. But, specifically, what should I be looking for? That is, what would cause you to look at a negative and say to yourself, "I need to keep it in the developer longer or shorter" . And what results would lead you to think that you are agitating too much or too little.

the short answer is: the overall density of the negative and also the highlight density specifically. the shadow density is controlled by the exposure; the highlight density is controlled by development.
With a little experience,it's easier than t sounds.

 

[laser]

Make your primary evaluation of your negatives by the appearance of the print NOT how they look on a light box.

1. Photograph "typical scene" +/- 1 stop

2. Development time +/- 15%

3. make the best straight print on #2 paper with full paper development time.

4. select best print

5. fine tune 1/3 stop and 10% development time is close enough

6. Compare the best negative to future negatives on a light box for a quick evaluation. Compare film types with caution especially between coarse grain films (Tri-X) and fine grain t-grain films (TMX) .