kentmere 400 @ 100 in D76 1:1

[j.ponakmo]

Howdy, on a recent trip to Japan I realized half way through my 3rd roll that I forgot to manually set the ISO on my Ricoh GR1v since I was using my generic uncoded cartridges. So, when I came back I was pretty disappointed about losing some awesome shots etc.

So, I set about to deal with it the best way I could. I opted for the D76 1:1 since it would be a little less active than the Tmax dev. The results were pretty good I think. I developed at 20C, 10.5min, with 3 inversions every minute.

The only things I detect are the sort of uninteresting contrast/tonal range though I was developing pretty cautiously without my super hard agitation regiment. Which leads me to wonder if the draw backs of a two stop pull are just a function of my agitation regiment or if this film has a decent two stop latitude because it shoots great at 1600 too.

Just thought I'd blast this nugget of info into the ether if there were any other kentmere 400 "freaks" out there.

 

[Dennis S]

Have been doing some experimenting with Kentmere 400 not by pushing or pulling the film but trying different developers. One mixture I used with acceptable results was using ID-11 with a shot of Rodinal 1-115. You get the grain but that works well on some photographs. Nothing too exciting but that is what experimenting is all about

 

[markbarendt]

Over exposure isn't really a good reason to pull.

The only thing that extra camera exposure does is move exposure placement up the curve, and normally all that needs to be done to fix the issue is more exposure in the enlarger.

The real reason to pull (or push) is to change how much of the scene prints to paper or adjust the contrast. A 2 stop pull for a scene that needs normal contrast means flat, dull prints.

 

[j.ponakmo]

yes, typically for what I like to do with BWs is more contrast so often a push is in order either as a function of development time or aggressive agitation. and working in available light, too.

I'm curious to see how these will print out since they are roughly as dense as the negatives I made when I first started developing film using a more normal development regiment.

 

[markbarendt]

Yes, definately worth playing with to see what happens.

Part of what I'm getting at is that the specific density of any given point on a negative, is irrelevant. Any point on the negative can be printed as any shade of gray on the paper.

Your extra exposure added a couple stops of extra shadow detail that you weren't planning on, the reduced development limited the density to what you used to get. The difference is that you've flattened the curve which makes room for the extra shadow detail to print along with all the rest of the detail you wanted. All the relative steps between tones got smaller, less contrasty.

Using a harder paper grade and extra print exposure (printing all the extra shadow detail clear to black) may get you back close to what you were planning on.

 

[kevs]

David "Diddyman" Cameron thanks you for supporting our economy.