Looking for that N-2 and N+2 chart for film developing?

[ToddB]

Hey guys,

I'm trying to locate the film ajustment chart for N- and N+ for zone system. I use use Ilford film. Was it on Freestyle web-site as free down load? PDF version would be good.

ToddB

 

[NB23]

I'd check digitaltruth.com

 

[ToddB]

Digitaltruth just has standard developing times. I'm looking for density adjustment times for b&w film. N is 12 minutes for Ilford delta 100. I'm looking for time adjustment in N+1, N+2, N+3 and N-1, N-2, N-3 there was a list someone made a list of all major manufacture of b and W films. Can't believe I didn't print it out.

ToddB

 

[Bill Burk]

Can you find time/contrast charts? That might be all you need to derive those times.

 

[NB23]

Digitaltruth just has standard developing times. I'm looking for density adjustment times for b&w film. N is 12 minutes for Ilford delta 100. I'm looking for time adjustment in N+1, N+2, N+3 and N-1, N-2, N-3 there was a list someone made a list of all major manufacture of b and W films. Can't believe I didn't print it out.

ToddB

I remember seeing one in the Ilford website...

 

[Doremus Scudder]

Todd,

Zone System expansions and contractions are not "standardized" in any way; nor is N for that matter.

The entire premise of the Zone System is that you do your own calibration tests to match your meter technique and film development to the print paper you are using in order to get the results you desire. You are not going to find usable N+2 or N-2 times for your purposes anywhere.

So, read up on the Zone System and learn to do your own tests if you are serious about this type of exposure and development control.

Or you can take a simpler route and just try to get yourself in the ball park and use variable contrast paper to adjust contrast while printing.

As a starting point, I would increase development 20% for an expansion (i.e., low-contrast scenes) and decrease it by 20% for a contraction (i.e., high-contrast scenes). You should also add a half-stop of exposure for contractions. Note, this is not N+ or N- anything, just developing for more or less contrast than your usual normal time. You should then be able to do whatever contrast adjustments are needed with your vc paper.

FWIW, I am a Zone System user and have done all my calibrations.

Best,

Doremus

 

[Rafal Lukawiecki]

Todd, the development time adjustments depend not only on the film but also on the developer, and on your developing technique, as well as what is your "normal" contrast, which depends on how you like to print. If your approach were like mine, and you used DDX 1+4 as your developer for Delta 100, then you could use my times which I shared in this post: (there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Otherwise consider testing all by yourself. The process of testing will reward you with much understanding of the tone reproduction process.

 

[erikg]

I've never seen such a published chart and I doubt that I'd trust it anyway. I agree with Doremus, the whole idea of the zone system is that it brings everything into account within your own process, camera, shutter, film, meter, all of it. It becomes very personalized. The testing process itself is journey of discovery and challenge, and well worth the trip.

 

[ToddB]

Found it.. I realize that this bench mark, but used this in the past and worked really well.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Todd,

Zone System expansions and contractions are not "standardized" in any way; nor is N for that matter.

The entire premise of the Zone System is that you do your own calibration tests to match your meter technique and film development to the print paper you are using in order to get the results you desire. You are not going to find usable N+2 or N-2 times for your purposes anywhere.

So, read up on the Zone System and learn to do your own tests if you are serious about this type of exposure and development control.

Or you can take a simpler route and just try to get yourself in the ball park and use variable contrast paper to adjust contrast while printing.

As a starting point, I would increase development 20% for an expansion (i.e., low-contrast scenes) and decrease it by 20% for a contraction (i.e., high-contrast scenes). You should also add a half-stop of exposure for contractions. Note, this is not N+ or N- anything, just developing for more or less contrast than your usual normal time. You should then be able to do whatever contrast adjustments are needed with your vc paper.

FWIW, I am a Zone System user and have done all my calibrations.

Best,

Doremus

This is correct, but it can take you half a lifetimeto find the right values with this hit-and-miss approach. You're better off spending a week end on a proper film testala BTZS.exposeand develop 5 rollsmeasure and chart the results .interpolate the desired values. test onceand be done with uncertain trialand error methods

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Found it.. I realize that this bench mark, but used this in the past and worked really well.

as others already said,this cannot possibly work.Conduct your own test.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

slightly disagree with Doremus,
There are commonly agreed 'normal' contrast values for condensor and diffusion light source enlargers. an average negative contrast of 0.57=1.05/2.1is considered 'normal'or fittingwell on an ISOgrade 2 paper,'1.05'being the negative density range and 2.1 being 7 stops of subject contrast in log units(7x0.3)

 

[Bill Burk]

as others already said,this cannot possibly work.Conduct your own test.

ToddB,

I don't trust calculators or charts from anybody else, though they can provide a starting point, I really value having a spot-check of the development contrast... Even if it's only a two-point test.

It would help to know who came up with the chart and if there is a book or publication explaining how the times were derived.

Odd that the chart agrees fairly well with my N times for 400 TMax - even though my times are for 4x5 tray development... which isn't the same times I use for roll film in small tank.

 

[Rafal Lukawiecki]

It would help to know who came up with the chart and if there is a book or publication explaining how the times were derived.

Bill, this chart has been copied from an earlier edition of Chris Johnson's "The Practical Zone System". It is almost identical to a table from the 4th edition, bar one entry for 400TX. All the remaining text is identical. He did testing with a friend, hence the references to "we" in the text. Also, the order of entries in the table was based on their estimation of which film behaved the "best" with a given developer, top to bottom for best to worst combinations, for which each table was made (D76 1+1 in this case). The quoted table has the same order as the one in my copy of his book.

 

[Doremus Scudder]

slightly disagree with Doremus,
There are commonly agreed 'normal' contrast values for condensor and diffusion light source enlargers. an average negative contrast of 0.57=1.05/2.1is considered 'normal'or fittingwell on an ISOgrade 2 paper,'1.05'being the negative density range and 2.1 being 7 stops of subject contrast in log units(7x0.3)

We don't disagree Ralph. However, one has to test with one's own developer, developing method, agitation scheme, not to mention exposure and metering methods to find the "standard" contrast for N development. I can use the same developer and film as you and still need a different developing time to get the same results due to the differences in our methods. That's what necessitates testing.

Or, you can simply use Kodak's admonition: "If your negatives are consistently too flat, increase development time. If they are consistently too contrast, reduce development time." Admittedly, this is imprecise, but better than nothing. And, it is all that many photographers ever find the time to do. I'm not really advocating this, just acknowledging that hit-or-miss approaches exist and are often a marginal improvement over doing nothing at all.

Best,

Doremus

 

[Luis-F-S]

Doremus speaks the truth! There are way too many variables for any standardized charts. They are only a starting point. About 28 years ago I took a 2 week workshop with Oliver Gagliani in Carson City, Nevada and we started by determining our own exposure settings and developing times for N-1, N, N+1 and N+2. Oliver worked at 70 deg. because his well water came out at that temperature year round. His method uses neutral density filters to take a constant-light meter reading, set a shutter speed and aperture on the lens and then vary all else with Neutral Density filters (0.3 ND is 1 stop, 2.1 ND gets you from Zone XIII to Zone I, etc). That way, the only variable is the slight differences in the same shutter at the same shutter speed. Really a very well thought out method and one I still use. Oliver however is deceased and I don't know who owns the copyright to his workshop material (which I still have). L

 

[RalphLambrecht]

We don't disagree Ralph. However, one has to test with one's own developer, developing method, agitation scheme, not to mention exposure and metering methods to find the "standard" contrast for N development. I can use the same developer and film as you and still need a different developing time to get the same results due to the differences in our methods. That's what necessitates testing.

Or, you can simply use Kodak's admonition: "If your negatives are consistently too flat, increase development time. If they are consistently too contrast, reduce development time." Admittedly, this is imprecise, but better than nothing. And, it is all that many photographers ever find the time to do. I'm not really advocating this, just acknowledging that hit-or-miss approaches exist and are often a marginal improvement over doing nothing at all.

Best,

Doremus

understood.nevertheless,there is a 'normalcontrast to aim for;it is astatistical normaldetermined by field testing in the 1940s by Kodak

 

[Bill Burk]

Bill, this chart has been copied from an earlier edition of Chris Johnson's "The Practical Zone System".

Thanks Rafal Lukawiecki, I appreciate the attribution. It helps reinforce what I was seeing, that the chart is high-quality information that provides a good checkpoint to corroborate personal tests with or a starting point for those who don't want to do testing. I might add this book to my reference library so I can see the work that was behind the numbers.

It also caught my attention that the chart doesn't agree with your N-times, but I assume different developer...

 

[Bill Burk]

understood.nevertheless,there is a 'normalcontrast to aim for;it is astatistical normaldetermined by field testing in the 1940s by Kodak

I might get Chris Johnson's book... but not before I get yours!

I use a Kodak chart, derived from that referenced research, using an 0.4 Flare Model. And while I use N-numbers "in the field" to note the subject and plan development... When it comes time for me to determine processing times, I just read aim contrasts from that chart. I arbitrarily call N 7 stops off the chart from Kodak. I call N+1 6 stops and N-1 8 stops, etc. I don't know anybody else who does this so my N times won't match anybody else's...

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Thanks Rafal Lukawiecki, I appreciate the attribution. It helps reinforce what I was seeing, that the chart is high-quality information that provides a good checkpoint to corroborate personal tests with or a starting point for those who don't want to do testing. I might add this book to my reference library so I can see the work that was behind the numbers.

It also caught my attention that the chart doesn't agree with your N-times, but I assume different developer...

here is some more reading on the subject:

enjoy.
:confused:

 

[Bill Burk]

Ralph,

That is the exact Kodak chart I use. *Note the right hand column is mislabeled. It's 10 stops.

 

[Rafal Lukawiecki]

I use the Kodak chart, shared by Ralph, too. As for Johnson's book and his charts, I used them a good few years ago, but I much prefer the results I have been getting since I started my own film testing, much with the help from Bill Burk, Stephen Benskin, and others on this forum.