• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Overexposed the film - advice for development needed

Craig

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 8, 2004
Messages
2,543
Location
Calgary
Format
Multi Format
I was shooting some 8x10 HP5+ on the weekend and realized part way through that my meter was set to 100, not 400. Naturally, it was a low contrast scene shot on an overcast day, so I know that overexposing and underdeveloping is exactly the wrong thing to do.

My one saving grace might be that it was a 4 second exposure, and I didn't add any compensation for reciprocity failure. If I read the exposure compensation chart right, I'm probably just about right for normal development. Any agreement/disagreement with that? I was planning to develop in Xtol in a Jobo, other suggestions welcome. Should I be using a lower energy developer, such as Perceptol? Dilute Rodenal?
 

Thomas Bertilsson

Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2003
Messages
15,715
Location
Switzerland
Format
Multi Format
I would recommend a developer that by itself adds a brilliant tonality to the film, such as Developer 12 from Photographers' Formulary.
First of all, base exposure is best at around EI 200 with HP5+ and this developer, so you'd be only one stop overexposed.
This developer is best used replenished, but can be used diluted as well. Edwal 10 would also be giving you a similar look, and since you're shooting 8x10 the increased grain compared to dev 12 would matter not at all.
Rodinal also doesn't give very good shadow detail, so maybe process your negative normally at 1+25 dilution? That way you keep the shadows suppressed, but you'd bring the highlights up.
 

cliveh

Subscriber
Allowing Ads
Joined
Oct 9, 2010
Messages
7,792
Format
35mm RF

I would suggest you increase the development time by about 20%
 
Last edited:

Gerald C Koch

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jul 12, 2010
Messages
8,131
Location
Southern USA
Format
Multi Format
The latitude of most films is from 4-1/2 over to 1 stop under exposure. Just develop the film normally. Negatives will be a bit denser than usual but will print correctly. By attempting to compensate by reducing development time you will effect the negative's contrast and tonality. BTW, many people normally over expose by 1 stop for the very purpose of better tonality.
 

Craig75

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
May 9, 2016
Messages
1,234
Location
Uk
Format
35mm
you should have nailed it -those two stops will balance out forgetting reciprocity compensation.
 

ckuwajima

Subscriber
Allowing Ads
Joined
Oct 28, 2016
Messages
28
Location
São Paulo
Format
Multi Format
Craig75 said:
you should have nailed it -those two stops will balance out forgetting reciprocity compensation.
Click to expand...
The metering was 4s for ASA100, or 1s for ASA400. Eyeballing the reciprocity failure compensation curve, it would be a bit less than (12.5/5)*1=2.5s.
I would say that it was overexposed somewhere 1/3 and 2/3 stop.
 
OP
OP

Craig

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 8, 2004
Messages
2,543
Location
Calgary
Format
Multi Format
Craig75 said:
you should have nailed it -those two stops will balance out forgetting reciprocity compensation.
Click to expand...
That's sort of my gut feel too. I'm mixing a fresh batch of Xtol and I will find out! I realized the meter setting error while I was there, so I have a sheet at the "correct" exposure too. I'll develop them one at a time and see what I get. I have 3 sheets in total of the same scene (plus digital for insurance!)
 

removed account4

Subscriber
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Messages
29,832
Format
Hybrid
hi craig
xtol can sometimes be a flat developer, i think you will be fine.
good luck !
john
 

removed account4

Subscriber
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Messages
29,832
Format
Hybrid
hi pentaxuser
it was kind of an inside joke.
every time i use xtol, (for years) all i got were flat negatives.
i over exposed, i over processed, it never gave me contrast.
(caffenol can sometimes do the same thing, that is why i spike
caffneol with a little print developer.)
so to answer your question, under what circumstances will it give flat negatives
my answer ( from MY experience ) is all the time

that said, i agree with jerry, that craig's exposure wasn't badly off and processing as if it was normal film in xtol would
give perfectly printable negatives.
 
Last edited:

Arvee

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Aug 23, 2006
Messages
976
Location
Great Basin
Format
Multi Format

+1
 

markbarendt

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
May 18, 2008
Messages
9,422
Location
Beaverton, OR
Format
Multi Format
Develop normally.
 
OP
OP

Craig

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 8, 2004
Messages
2,543
Location
Calgary
Format
Multi Format
I will run it as normal and see what I get. Thanks for the advice.
 

Andrew O'Neill

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Jan 16, 2004
Messages
12,923
Location
Coquitlam,BC Canada
Format
Multi Format
A 4 second exposure with that film only needs an additional 2 seconds to get it back on track. As far as development goes, if it were me, I'd just develop for your normal time. You'll still have a printable negative... hey, you may have even stumbled onto something special!
 

pentaxuser

Member
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
20,335
Location
Daventry, No
Format
35mm
Thanks jnanian. I have heard of the Church of Rodinal so is caffenol a break-away movement for the Church of java? That's Sam Spade's "java" and not the place where a volcano exploded

pentaxuser
 

removed account4

Subscriber
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Messages
29,832
Format
Hybrid
pentaxuser said:
Thanks jnanian. I have heard of the Church of Rodinal so is caffenol a break-away movement for the Church of java? That's Sam Spade's "java" and not the place where a volcano exploded

pentaxuser
Click to expand...

not sure if it is a church, maybe a "café or clutch"
 
OP
OP

Craig

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 8, 2004
Messages
2,543
Location
Calgary
Format
Multi Format
I ran the negatives tonight, and they look good. A little darker than I would normally develop to, but a full range of tones and good shadow detail without the highlights being baked. At least that's my impression from holding them up as they came out of the wash, I have not tried printing one, but I think they will print well.

I shot it with my digital camera as well, this is the scene:


On the negatives I have preserved the detail in the trees behind the bridge, and under the stone arch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register