Overexposed or Poor Developing?

[RattyMouse]

Today I shot and developed my first roll ever of Ilford FP4+ and the results were not as good as I hoped. Previous to this roll, I shot some Neopan 400 with my Canon 1V and they came out much darker than usual. So this time I was out with my 1V and I rated the film at ISO 80 instead of 125. I figured a bit more light would help with the shadows and not really hurt me in the highlights.

I developed this film using Kodak HC-110, dilution B w/1 minute agitation, then 10 seconds every minute. Total developing time was 8 mins at 20 C.

The results are far brighter than they should be. Most images were unusable. This is one of the best, but still far too bright in my opinion. Is this film over exposed or over developed? Comments?

Thanks,

 

[trendland]

Today I shot and developed my first roll ever of Ilford FP4+ and the results were not as good as I hoped. Previous to this roll, I shot some Neopan 400 with my Canon 1V and they came out much darker than usual. So this time I was out with my 1V and I rated the film at ISO 80 instead of 125. I figured a bit more light would help with the shadows and not really hurt me in the highlights.

I developed this film using Kodak HC-110, dilution B w/1 minute agitation, then 10 seconds every minute. Total developing time was 8 mins at 20 C.

The results are far brighter than they should be. Most images were unusable. This is one of the best, but still far too bright in my opinion. Is this film over exposed or over developed? Comments?

Thanks,

Well RattyMouse this is looking very nice
like a massive overexposure of min.
5-8 stops.
So it was your camera - but never mind about.

with regards

 

[trendland]

PS : 5-8 stops in concern you mentioned
about the other shots of cause...

with regards

PS : total wrong exposure time I guess.
1/60 insted of 1/500 1/1000 for example......but this happened sometimes....never mind your darkroom
work seams to be correct.....

 

[RattyMouse]

My Canon 1V has never produced images overexposed by 5 stops before. I am not sure why it would do so today. This was early morning sunlight (before 7am) and not very bright. Shutter speeds from memory were around 1/200 sec.

 

[Craig75]

Overdeveloped to me. Theres some deep blacks in there but highlights have gone walkabout. Cant just dodge / burn to balance it out? Theres a nice shot in there with some work.

Difficult to see how it could be massively overexposed at 1/200 80iso at 7am although if rest of roll is unusable then maybe aperture was stuck open all day or something like that?

 

[pentaxuser]

Is this a scan of a neg or a scan of a print? Under a loupe I take it that the neg has a lot of black areas where there should be dark grey? If you print in a darkroom have you tried printing at a lower contrast. The highlights on the duck on the sunny side look a little featureless but I'd have thought that a lower grade of print might correct this to an extent

pentaxuser

 

[Sirius Glass]

I would need to see the negative, not the print. Probably over exposed so shoot box speed. Also over developed, the contrast is very high.

 

[voceumana]

The high contrast and excessive grain suggests over development. It might have been over exposed as well. Are you sure you got the developer dilution right?

 

[ic-racer]

Try printing on lower contrast paper. What does the negative look like?

 

[markbarendt]

I would not assume there is a metering problem. Get out your loupe Ratty, look at the highlight areas of the negatives, is their detail?

 

[tomfrh]

Look at the edge markings too. That tells you a lot about developemnt

 

[slx]

If you post a picture of the negative (not a scan) it could be easier to track the problem.

 

[removed account4]

seems over agitated/developed. (1st image , the 2nd image didn't show up on my screen )
the feathers in the reflection and out of focus area ( bottom half, 1st image )
look perfect, the top seems to have bit too much density/contrast.
try reduced exposure time (dodging the top ) and burning in
at a lesser contrast filter.

 

[darkosaric]

HC-110, dilution B w/1 minute agitation, then 10 seconds every minute. Total developing time was 8 mins

My vote is for overdeveloping, usually in HC110 dilution B I do 5-6 minutes.

 

[Anon Ymous]

My vote is for overdeveloping, usually in HC110 dilution B I do 5-6 minutes.

Ilford's recommendation in their datasheet is 6' for both HC110 and Ilfotech HC 1+31. 8' is a one stop push.

 

[RattyMouse]

Is this a scan of a neg or a scan of a print? Under a loupe I take it that the neg has a lot of black areas where there should be dark grey? If you print in a darkroom have you tried printing at a lower contrast. The highlights on the duck on the sunny side look a little featureless but I'd have thought that a lower grade of print might correct this to an extent

pentaxuser

This is a scan of the negative.

 

[RattyMouse]

Ilford's recommendation in their datasheet is 6' for both HC110 and Ilfotech HC 1+31. 8' is a one stop push.

Yeah, I screwed up. I pushed when I should have pulled, since I exposed at ISO80. What a total brain cramp.

 

[RattyMouse]

Look at the edge markings too. That tells you a lot about developemnt

Can you elaborate on this?

 

[RattyMouse]

Thanks everyone. I am pretty sure that I just over developed this film. I have another roll of FP4 and will return to this park again on Saturday and try again, this time developing for a much shorter period of time.

 

[jeffreyg]

I'm not familiar with your model camera but I believe it has various exposure modes and meter settings. You may have used settings that were not appropriate for you subject/light conditions. I would use box speed and mfg's development times but record the camera program settings for your tests. Perhaps using one combination but under different light conditions or different programs under one light condition which would probably be better.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

 

[trendland]

My Canon 1V has never produced images overexposed by 5 stops before. I am not sure why it would do so today. This was early morning sunlight (before 7am) and not very bright. Shutter speeds from memory were around 1/200 sec.

I can't remember to have any overdeveloped film in such a matter you mentioned here.But I indeed remember lots of overexposed films.May be not the whole film but I know much of overexposed single shots.

But there are lots of reasons.I also
remember films with much extended
developer time but this was from intention. And I remember very dark
and strong negatives from that point
but not a single wich such propperties that it was impossible to print a nice enlargement even if it wasn't 100% correct.
Perhaps you should just scan one of
your worst negatives and let's show.
That would make it quite clear.



PS : By the time HC 110 is like D76
isn't it - I remember tests with deluted D76 with max. extended times due to special concerns.
As I remember 45min. (Temperature at 27degree C) but even in that case I can't notice overdevelopment.
The negatives were strong but not in the near of yours - may be this was due to exaustion (deluted D76)
Sorry but I doupt a bit to D76 if it is
normaly able to cause a so massive
overdevelopement with correct exposure. And should it not like the same with HC 110 ?
And as you mentioned your E.I. -
I can see absolute not problem with
bw.
This E.I. may cause a problem to
E6 but no problem to your emulsion.

It looks just fine (little stronger exposure).But are you sure your setting with your camera was correct ?

with regards

 

[trendland]

To make it more cleare : "It looks just fine (little stronger exposure) - should mean

 

[trendland]

Sorry smartphone is extended with problems - should mean your E.I. ISO80 instead of box Speed ISO 80 should look just fine (due to this little stronger exposure).
with regards

 

[trendland]

......oh no I give up...Smartphone needs full resetBox Speed 125 of cause

 

[jeffreyg]

I use Ilford Delta 400 and 100 (120) and HP5 4x5 at box speed and developed in ID11 or Ilfotec DDX according to Ilford tables unless I feel more contrast is called for. I print on Ilford multi-grade fiber paper as well as scanning on my old Epson 4870 scanner and print on Hahnemuhle Photo Rag Baryta paper with an Epson 3880. I get excellent results either way and doubt most can tell a difference other than the surface of the paper. I have found no need to expose or develop a different way for scanning.

My philosophy is to keep it simple, be familiar and consistent with technique and materials and tweak only when necessary for a particular result. As I mentioned before he may have set the camera programs wrong for the conditions resulting in an overexposure. Some simple tests should correct that. He should keep to mfg's recommendations to eliminate that variable in film speed and processing. If it turns out to be a scanning error that too can be corrected.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/