Night photography and Pull processing

[Eyepix]

I do some BW night shooting. I tested Tmax 400 (rated @ 200) with Xtol ages ago and it has worked well for normals and push processing. I used a Jobo for the tests.

For night shooting, I often have exposures around 2-15 minutes, sometimes even longer because I am shooting LF (mainly 4x5). I usually do an N-3 for these exposures. Btw, I usually meter the highlights because my meter won't read the darker parts of the scene. I just cross my fingers and hope that there is enough detail.

So I am thinking of increasing the exposure times 1 or 2 more stops to compensate for this. On another note, as you might have guessed, I am also having some problems bring the highlights to where I would like. Under these shooting conditions, I am not confident about pulling Tmax400 with Xtol at N-4 or N-5.

Do you have any suggestions?

Thanks.

 

[DrPablo]

Have you thought about using a staining developer instead, like PMK?

Someone had mentioned before Bruce Barnbaum's technique. I believe it was about 2 minutes in normal developer (HC110 in his case) with constant agitation, then a much longer time in an extreme dilution of the same developer with no agitation. He pulls like 7 stops this way.

 

[Konical]

Good Morning, Eyepix,

You might also consider using T-100 film; I understand that, given its very favorable reciprocity characteristics, your exposures may be no longer than those with T-400; the benefit would be in even finer grain. Fuji Acros seems to be the real champ in long exposure work, but isn't as easily available, except in expensive Quickloads.

I've had excellent results with T-100 and Technidol for night shots. There are some other APUG posts on this topic; do a Forum Search.

Konical

 

[Eyepix]

Pablo
I've been thinking of trying out Pyrocat. What about WD2D+, have you heard anything about this?

 

[Eyepix]

Konical
I've heard T100 is a really fussy with contraction? Besides I dont know if I want to be hanging around downtown DC for more than an hour for each shot. I've never used HP5, what do you know of this film?

Maybe I'll give T100 a shot. When I know what the normal time is for Technidol, how much do I pull the time for drum processing?

 

[jstraw]

Good Morning, Eyepix,

You might also consider using T-100 film; I understand that, given its very favorable reciprocity characteristics, your exposures may be no longer than those with T-400; the benefit would be in even finer grain. Fuji Acros seems to be the real champ in long exposure work, but isn't as easily available, except in expensive Quickloads.

I've had excellent results with T-100 and Technidol for night shots. There are some other APUG posts on this topic; do a Forum Search.

Konical

Well, everything else being equal, T-100 will still require two more stops than T-400.

 

[Konical]

Good Afternoon, Eyepix,

I have never used HP5 and can't comment on it. T-100 exposure times for night shots in an urban environment with building lights on and some floodlighting will normally run from about 45 seconds to 3 minutes at f11 to f16. I don't find metering to be particularly helpful and just go by seat of the pants and experience, usually shooting three or four sheets of a given subject at varying exposures.

Kodak recommends making 8 oz. of solution from each Technidol packet, but I ordinarily go with 10 oz. instead. My typical developing time is 12 to 15 minutes in a continually rotating Chromega drum. The only disadvantage with Technidol is its expense, but it tames highlights very well.

I've never come anywhere close to one-hour exposures with T-100, although I'm sure that some subjects could need that much. Again--a Forum Search will provide quite a bit of discussion of this topic; successful results can be achieved in various ways.

Konical

 

[Lee L]

Howard Bond tested TMX and TMY (among other films) for reciprocity failure in 2003, Photo Techniques July/Aug pp. 20-23. His results were contrary to published Kodak data. He set his baseline exposure for Zone III density and found that TMX failed more rapidly than TMY. At 60 sec indicated exposure times, TMY needed 1:44 and TMX needed 1:47. At 120 secs, TMY needed 4:00 and TMX went to 4:39. At 240 seconds indicated, TMY needed 9:00 and TMX needed 12:50. Taking into account the film speeds, TMY starts and stays faster than TMX.

Bond also noted that the highlights didn't run away as with older films, so there is not nearly the same need to pull development to tame the highlights. He found no increased density at Zone VIII with either TMY or Delta 100. Zone VIII on TMX and HP5+ were elevated about 2/3 of a Zone.

Lee

 

[Scott Peters]

Jsut a suggestion, but would developing by inspection help with determining proper density in the highlights? It may help reduce the guessing of timing?

 

[Jim Noel]

Fuji Acros is the fastest film available for these situations since it has practically no reciprocity departure. I photograph night scenes by metering the significant highlight, placing it on Zone VII or VII 1/2 and using the indicated exposure. No extended exposure, and no reduced development.

 

[gainer]

Howard Bond tested TMX and TMY (among other films) for reciprocity failure in 2003, Photo Techniques July/Aug pp. 20-23. His results were contrary to published Kodak data. He set his baseline exposure for Zone III density and found that TMX failed more rapidly than TMY. At 60 sec indicated exposure times, TMY needed 1:44 and TMX needed 1:47. At 120 secs, TMY needed 4:00 and TMX went to 4:39. At 240 seconds indicated, TMY needed 9:00 and TMX needed 12:50. Taking into account the film speeds, TMY starts and stays faster than TMX.

Bond also noted that the highlights didn't run away as with older films, so there is not nearly the same need to pull development to tame the highlights. He found no increased density at Zone VIII with either TMY or Delta 100. Zone VIII on TMX and HP5+ were elevated about 2/3 of a Zone.

Lee

And the next issue after that one, I used Howard's data to show that all the reciprocity curves were parallel straight lines to within experimental accuracy when plotted on log-log paper. The lines did not cross one another.

Not only Kodak, but Ilford as well used at best outdated curves in their data sheets. I haven't looked at any since.

 

[philsweeney]

I do some BW night shooting. I tested Tmax 400 (rated @ 200) with Xtol ages ago and it has worked well for normals and push processing. I used a Jobo for the tests.

For night shooting, I often have exposures around 2-15 minutes, sometimes even longer because I am shooting LF (mainly 4x5). I usually do an N-3 for these exposures. Btw, I usually meter the highlights because my meter won't read the darker parts of the scene. I just cross my fingers and hope that there is enough detail.

So I am thinking of increasing the exposure times 1 or 2 more stops to compensate for this. On another note, as you might have guessed, I am also having some problems bring the highlights to where I would like. Under these shooting conditions, I am not confident about pulling Tmax400 with Xtol at N-4 or N-5.

Do you have any suggestions?

Thanks.

I cannot comment on the Tmax film. But for extreme N- development I would suggest semi-stand development using dilute pyrocat. Using HP5 I am able to rate it 400 (manu speed), and shadow values are fine. Look up Steve Sherman's procedures and posts. I have achieved N-7 easily and have actually gone beyond that (though not practical).


(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

 

[Larry L]

Night shots with Tmax 100 - diluted Tmax Developer

I've had pretty good success with Tmax 100 at F/8 and F/11 for 2-3 minutes followed by developing in Tmax developer at 1:9 dilution for 10-12 minutes with agitation every 1 minute. If you can search old articles in Photo Techniques magazine sometime between 1995 and 2000 there was a good article on the above using Tmax 100 film. Got me going on a good track. From that starting point you'll have to work out detials suited to your techniques.

Taken shots of white marble buildings, marble fountains in Rome, etc. with street lights directly in image with this techique and have held detail in the marble and a black dog in foreground at same time.