locked gate: Processed my first roll of black and white film!

[slitherjef]

Last night well, early this morning. Probably not the best thing to do when you are tired, but I wanted to see what all was involved in this stuff and I had to fix a lot of problems along the way like making my bathroom light-tight. Figuring out chemical mixes and times and so on.

Well, I gave it a shot and here is an image from that roll of tri-x 400 I shot and developed myself. It did need some adjustments because when I did that scan off my cheap HP scanjet the mask turned the image RED! So I had to use the channel mixer and also bosted the contrast a slight and dropped the brightness down. I scanned at a resolution of 600 and this is a 100% of that scan. I did not even need to sharpen.

Dead Link Removed

I used DD-X, ilfostop, kodak fixer and photoflo. I am sure this image has some problems, but it sure did put a smile on my face about half way through the films 20min wash when I pulled the cap off my jobo tank and looked (I could not resist) and first thinking I messed up and (did a big no-no) then pulling on the tail to see the frames where indeed there!

I processed for 8 min and fixed for 8 min. What a trip

 

[sajianphotos]

I now declare you chemically dependent. You are hooked. Congrats

 

[highpeak]

Welcome to the club!

 

[gnashings]

Awesome feeling, isn't it! Wait to try printing - seeing the image come up... wow!

 

[vet173]

Looks a lot better than my first one. Don't worry about wanting to take a looky. It won't be long till you realise that it only takes about a 30 second rinse after fixing till you can pull it's tail. Sometimes you just have to have a peak before it's done fixing. I use tf-4 fixer and I'm scopin' them out 30 seconds after they hit the fixer.

 

[Andy K]

Congratulations and welcome to the dark side. Next step is enlarging and developing your own photographs and to throw the scanner in the trash.

 

[noseoil]

Agree with Andy k, but don't throw away the scanner. We want to see scans of the prints when they're done! Looks like a tad more exposure and a tad less development might be in order, but wait until you enlarge to see how they print. This would give you more texture in the shadows and more in the highlights. What did you rate the film speed for this roll? tim

 

[wfe]

Congrats and welcome to the wonderful world of silver, chemistry and stuff done in the dark. Enjoy !!!!

 

[John Bartley]

This is bad ...


Really bad ....


Next thing you know, you'll be searching the web for dry chemical suppliers and you'll be mixing up your own developers and you'll be buying an 8x10 and Dave @ SatinSnow will have a new customer and Jim Galli will be selling you lenses and ......


this is bad ...


Congratulations !!!

 

[joeyk49]

Muahahahahaha!

Another succumbs to the POWER of the DARK SIDE!

Remember that little smirk that you made, when you first realized that the roll turned out ok? That little fist pump and, "Yes!" that followed right afterwards?....They'll be back! Many times over....

Of course, there will be many times when you fling a print across the room in the direction of the trash bin. But that will make the the successes all the more fun....

Enjoy and welcome to the Dark Side...

 

[pentaxuser]

slitherjef kindly appears to have posted a thumbnail of one of his scanned negs after getting that superb feeling of having made something which is common to all of us in APUG. I say "appears" because in the place for the thumbnail in his post which others have seen, there is only a red cross on my screen.

Why? This is not the first time I have noticed this. Any explanation from anyone will be gratefully received. Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

I can see the image. Maybe you have a browser problem (try another browser), or slitherjef is having a server problem (try again later).

 

[slitherjef]

What did you rate the film speed for this roll? tim

Tim, I rated the film at its box speed, 400

Thanks everyone though I got to admit *gulp* digital is easier and I hope to buy a 30D soon, I really enjoy shooting film and since I basicly jumped in to SLRs with a 300D I feel I have missed out on something and that is why I still like shooting film.

 

[joeyk49]

Tim, I rated the film at its box speed, 400

Thanks everyone though I got to admit *gulp* digital is easier and I hope to buy a 30D soon, I really enjoy shooting film and since I basicly jumped in to SLRs with a 300D I feel I have missed out on something and that is why I still like shooting film.

A good confession is the first and biggest step towards forgiveness (If you're Catholic). You're forgiven, but must also atone/do penance ....so, you must develop three rolls of bw film and make one print worthy of framing....(Tongue planted firmly in cheek; lest I be struck down.)

Seriously, I think that your digital imagry will be aided by your knowledge of the Dark Side.

 

[evarn]

I too developed my first film last week. It was the most exciting thing I've done in ages. To even get visible negatives that look printable on my first try was just awesome. unfortunately I have no darkroom and enlarger, but I do have a new scanner on the way soon. In the meantime I'll keep trying different films. So far i've tried about 4 or 5...

35mm was easy enough, but 120 is such a pain in a black bag... I want to move up to large format too.. one step at a time though

 

[noseoil]

SJ, If you were to rate the film at asa 200 and then give a bit less development on your next roll, there would be a bit more tonality from bottom to top. This is the really nice thing about "rolling your own" in the darkroom as you can play with tonality to make things happen. (Not to be confused with the same expression which happens in certain southern and western states)

Evarn, look for an old 4x5 press camera and a couple of film holders. This should be less expensive for you than a more traditional field or studio camera. I would skip everything else. The 4x5 offers plenty of film choices at a reasonable cost and will allow prints in 'most any size you would need. Best, tim

 

[evarn]

Evarn, look for an old 4x5 press camera and a couple of film holders. This should be less expensive for you than a more traditional field or studio camera. I would skip everything else. The 4x5 offers plenty of film choices at a reasonable cost and will allow prints in 'most any size you would need. Best, tim

Tim thanks for the advice... my only dilemna is that I print van dykes and so require a negative that's worthwhile to contact print... 4x5 just isn't big enough. but i don't think u can get daylight tanks for anything bigger than 4x5.. hmm