My first Hasselblad Successes!

Hey dudes

Just wanted to post a couple of my first "Hasselblad Successes" - a few shots I took in London two weeks ago using Fuji Acros 100 and my Hasselblad 501CM that I am quite produ of. I rather like them. The starburst on the first photo from the bridge light was a fluke, I have to say. No filters used with this either.

Shots were between 1 - 4 seconds and these two were the best of the batch of 12 (a number I'm still getting used to have shot 36 exp on 35mm for years!!)

Ted

Wonderful shots. I never get tired of looking at Tower Bridge, my wife and I lived close by for a couple of years and its amazing how many times a day it opens !

They look amazing! Blad is a wonderful piece of equipment. As for the number I love 12 now...
Could you please tell me the developer that you used for the Acros? Is it a film or a print scan?

Thanks guys! I was staying at "The Tower Hotel" so tok the opportunity. The photos were taken from the south side of the river.

It's a scan of the film conducted by the lab. They do a "standard" scan service for £4 a film, or a "high-res and corrected" scan for about £15 a film. This is a standard scan - the prints themselves look better still, as you can probably imagine! I don't know about the developer - I am afraid to say I don't develop my own medium format. I send them off to "The Darkroom UK" in Chelmsford, UK. You could always ask them direct - I'm sure they'd tell you. They seem to do a good job with my Fuji films.

Very nice! I noticed something very interesting in the first pic. By the leftmost tower, between the bridge and and the darkish building, there's an arc of light. Do you know what that might be?

Well spotted!! No, I have no idea what that is. Do you know?

Great shots, but I'm not that sure that your lab is doing a great job!
Perhaps it's just due to the scanning, but the first picture has something of the "vertical-run-120-film-developing-desease" i.e. tendency of overdeveloping right and left edges of the film due to inadequate agitation. Perhaps there is some light coming in both from left and right, hard to tell, it just looks like a common fault (not that uncommon that photographers working with vertical run middle format cameras show landscape pictures were it seems as if the sun shines both from left and right - had several myself, therefore quite sensible for this tendency!)
But, also, perhaps due to the scan, there seems to be some unevenness in the sky, some tight vertical streaks.
Take a closer look at your negs - but hopfully just a scanner/upload effect!
Welcome to the Hasselblad family!
/Bertil

BTW the "arc of light" on the first picture looks to me as a drying mark on the film – hope I'm wrong and that is really something interesting you got on your film!
/Bertil

'Good eye,' to those that noticed the arc. Closer examination, it's actually a perfect circle.
Also, lots of 'debris' on that first scan, too. Lint, fuzz, dust, and maybe even a short n' curly.<grin>

Ted,
BTW, still nice pics!

Did you have a star effect filter on the first pic, but not on the second pic?

Marc

Bertil, can you tell me how you solved the "vertical run 120 overdevelopment disease." I have it in my Hass!

Hi Jeff, yes it was a problem for me also several years. I think the problem is this: using ordinary small developing tanks and agitating by inversion of the tank, tend to make movements of the developer more vigorous around the edges of the film spiral, thus causing overdevelopment compared to the middle part of the film surface. If you agitate softly (say 1-2 inversions each half or full minute) you may be lucky and for most subjects get an acceptable result, but it's risky, particularly with even surfaces like clear skies and the like, since the exchange of fresh compared with used developing agents at the whole film surface is not optimal. Supposing that I don't have a full guarantee of even development across the whole film surface unless the exchange of fresh compared with used developing agents is optimal, I use the following method. I have always used stainless steal tanks for some reason, I use only one 120 spiral in a tank for 2 and I use only 500 ml developer; I inverse the tank during the first minute quite vigorous, also rotating it in various ways. Now it depends on emulsion developer and temperature how fast the developing process proceeds. I try to keep my total developing time somewhere between 6-10 minutes (or in rare cases even more). Agitating quite vigorously some 10-15 seconds each minute should give you no problems within 6-10 minutes total developing time, but normally I agitate quite vigorously 15-20 seconds each second or third minute (my standard is something like: 18-20°C temperature, 8-9 minutes D-76/Rodinal1+50 (TMY-2 Acros 100 i.e. 320/64), inversion first minute, 15-20 sec. the second, forth and sixth minutes.). In my experience with a total development time like 8-10 minutes it doesn't happen very much developing during the agitating period of 10-15 seconds, rather makes the exchange of fresh compared with used developing agents across the film surface very good, which is important. Due to surface tension with a liquid at a film surface, just slowly move the film in the liquid doesn’t make for a good exchange of fresh compared with used developing agents. Following this method/idea for agitation I have no more problem with uneven development from 135 film to 120, and 4x5", 5x7", 8x10" sheet film. I was quite released when I managed to get fully even results also on critical subject like skies and the like.
Using a Peterson type developing tank where the developer goes into the “big mouth” of the tank when you inverse the tank perhaps makes it possible to put 2 120 film in a tank for 1 liter and get good results. Hate uneven development, so I don’t experiment with that! Rather have several tanks for two roll with just 1 roll in each, having cut a piece from a coca-cola bottle to keep the single roll in place in the tank when I inverse it.
Best wishes
/Bertil

I second Bertil's words and would like to add some of my own trickery.

Uneven development along the edges of 120 film is a tricky issue that I'm not sure I understand fully myself. Everybody seems to have their own recipe for success, and I am no different. Sometimes I fail as well, though only rarely now. My road to success:

1. agitate at least the first 30 seconds (I do 45),
2. make sure the tank is big enough to allow all developer to clear the film when the tank is fully inverted,
3. use a bit more solution than what is indicated on the tank (e.g. 600 ml instead of 500 ml); this helps against air trapped under the top reel,
4. tap the tank *lightly* after agitation (but first allow some time for the solution to settle, otherwise the film may kink) in order to release air bubbles that cling to the film,
5. don't just invert the tank, also rotate (combine the two),
6. avoid short developing times (<5 minutes).

Bertil said:

Using a Peterson type developing tank where the developer goes into the “big mouth” of the tank when you inverse the tank perhaps makes it possible to put 2 120 film in a tank for 1 liter and get good results. Hate uneven development, so I don’t experiment with that! Rather have several tanks for two roll with just 1 roll in each, having cut a piece from a coca-cola bottle to keep the single roll in place in the tank when I inverse it.

Click to expand...

Two 120 films in a 1 litre tank is a no-no for me also, even with the large-head Patersons. I speak from experience .

The coca-cola bottle solution against shifting of the reel up the column may be substituted by adding an empty reel on top of the reel containing the film. Or use the retaining rings Paterson used to supply with the older non-Super System 4 tanks (I don't know why they stopped including them in the Super 4 system- shame).

Sander

Thanks Sander, I think we are on same track!
Good you added the problemes with air bubbles, forgot that!
And yes, I also think I normally use somewhat more solution than just above the film, I think I end up at 550, perhaps even 600 ml,
Your formulation: "2. make sure the tank is big enough to allow all developer to clear the film when the tank is fully inverted," points to why filling up the tank with rolls of film will give you problems, the "up going" airbubbles that manufactures talk about when inverting the tank is just not enough!
You also confirm my hesitaion about two rolls in 1 liter Paterson tank, even though it has a big mouth, but probably will not fulfill your point 2 which is most important.

I can also add that the rotating drum Jobo system (like my CPE-2) gives overdeveloped edges on 120-film. I try to avoid that by regularly inverting the drum during the development process, and it seems to work well for my C-41 developing process.

Best regards
/Bertil

Where in the US is tower bridge??

Welcome to the land of 'Blad!

ted_smith said:

Thanks guys! I was staying at "The Tower Hotel" so tok the opportunity. The photos were taken from the south side of the river.

It's a scan of the film conducted by the lab. They do a "standard" scan service for £4 a film, or a "high-res and corrected" scan for about £15 a film. This is a standard scan - the prints themselves look better still, as you can probably imagine! I don't know about the developer - I am afraid to say I don't develop my own medium format. I send them off to "The Darkroom UK" in Chelmsford, UK. You could always ask them direct - I'm sure they'd tell you. They seem to do a good job with my Fuji films.

Click to expand...

This page seems to give some hints about the developer they are using: http://www.the-darkroom.co.uk/frames/Abwfilm2010.html

Looks like X-Tol or T-Max.

Where in the US is tower bridge??

Click to expand...

Didn't Maggie Thatcher sell it off and it is now outside some hotel in Las Vegas?

Apparently not. The urban legend that it was purchased in the '60s and set up in Arizona is just that - a legend. The developer in question actually bought the old London Bridge.

Apparently not. The urban legend that it was purchased in the '60s and set up in Arizona is just that - a legend. The developer in question actually bought the old London Bridge.

Click to expand...

I know I was really only joking.
But, I think when they did buy London bridge they may have thought they were getting the nicer looking and more iconic Tower Bridge.

Robert Paxton McCulloch, of McCulloch Chainsaw fame. Interesting read...and his in-laws, too.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_P._McCulloch

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Bridge_(Lake_Havasu_City)

Bertil said:

Thanks Sander, I think we are on same track!
Good you added the problemes with air bubbles, forgot that!
And yes, I also think I normally use somewhat more solution than just above the film, I think I end up at 550, perhaps even 600 ml,
Your formulation: "2. make sure the tank is big enough to allow all developer to clear the film when the tank is fully inverted," points to why filling up the tank with rolls of film will give you problems, the "up going" airbubbles that manufactures talk about when inverting the tank is just not enough!
You also confirm my hesitaion about two rolls in 1 liter Paterson tank, even though it has a big mouth, but probably will not fulfill your point 2 which is most important.

I can also add that the rotating drum Jobo system (like my CPE-2) gives overdeveloped edges on 120-film. I try to avoid that by regularly inverting the drum during the development process, and it seems to work well for my C-41 developing process.

Best regards
/Bertil

Click to expand...

Bertil and Sander: I hope you're still monitoring this. I got sidetracked but wanted to show you a couple of frames to see if you think they show what you're talking about. I had pursued this on another thread, thinking it was light leaks in my Hasselblad 120 back. Do you think this is more likely to be the type of uneven development you're talking about? This is the contact sheet and one frame from the problem roll:



The other thread about light leaks is here: (there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Hey Jeff,

This looks like uneven development, definitely not a light leak. I've had a light leak in my Hasselblad once- it looked completely different.

In 2008, when I picked up medium format again after too long a hiatus, my first film or films (I don't remember how long the problem persisted) showed the exact same unevenness as your example photo(s). After some reading, thinking and trying I got rid of it.





There is a personal element to solving this problem (because not one workflow is the same between different people/equipment), but I can say for myself that sticking to my own rules p), as set out in my previous post in this thread, simply works. Maybe you can take these and other people's advice on this issue as a starting point for finding your own consistently successful developing method.

I am a bit puzzled as to why there isn't more talk about this issue floating around on the web. Surely many starters in 120 must run into this or some similar agitation problem. Well, maybe there is talk, but not so much a unanimous solution. This again may have to do with everybody working in their own particular way. Too many variables, in other words.

When I was confronted with this problem I was somewhat dismayed that none of the 'official' sources (Ilford, Kodak, Way Beyond Monochrome, etc.) take it on in a practical manner. If it is mentioned at all, then most sources suffice to say something like "uneven development is most likely related to improper agitation, agitate sufficiently, most importantly at the start of the process". Well, maybe it is properly dealt with (i.e. practical and in detail) somewhere. If somebody knows a good source please let us know.

It would be a pity that beginners turn away from 120 because of such a trivial problem.

I hope you get this sorted out Jeff. No need to explain to me how annoying and frustrating it can be.

"There's no trick to it, it's just a simple trick!" (The Simpsons- Bart's Inner Child, 1993.)

Sander

Sander, thanks for posting your negs. They look like several others I have, where the unevenness is more subtle than the ones I posted above. I believe my problem has probably been developing two rolls in a two-roll tank or developing one roll in a one roll tank and taking it too easy on the agitation. With 35mm, I always have an empty reel or two on top of the tank, but not always with 120. I'll follow your advice and that of Bertil. It's odd, everyone kind of agreed on the other thread that it was light leaks, but I believe now that it's a devlpt problem.

Thanks!

In the other thread I myself said: "Your problem looks like a light leak from the slot but it's nice to be sure before doing a replacement of the seals."

Honestly, I don't know why I said that. It really doesn't like look like a typical Hasselblad dark slide slot light leak at all, but every bit the result of uneven development due to (probably) stuffing too much film and solution in too little tank volume.

I may be wrong again though.

A Hasselblad back light leak will occur when the bright source [usually the Sun] is to the left. The light crosses the back and exposes the film on the right side of the camera. Since the photograph image is inverted, the left side of the slide or print has the light flare.