problem with reducing contrast in push processing

[pmu]

I know some tricks how to reduce contrast when when dealing with normal ISOs, but what about when using push processing? I usually shoot in contrasty situations and push ISO400 film to ISO800-1600 and that tends to give contrasty results (no surprise here!). But how to reduce contrast? By reducing agitation? I normally use 10 sec (4 inversions) per minute, but last time I used 10 seconds every 3 minutes (18 min development with rodinal+xtol combination). The results were just excellent, but in lighter frames I got those "sprocket hole stripes"...can't see those stripes in negatives, but they appear in printing. So, how to reduce contrast / agitation and not get those sprocket hole stripes?

 

[mario Ag+]

dont know about the holes but as far as the contrast goes you might want to try a more highly diluted developer. As this has a compensating effect this should help keep contrast under some control. By the way what film r u using?

 

[pmu]

dont know about the holes but as far as the contrast goes you might want to try a more highly diluted developer. As this has a compensating effect this should help keep contrast under some control. By the way what film r u using?

I found out about that rodinal + xtol combination from an article here on apug and it had this; 1+4 xtol and 1+50 rodinal combined. That is what I used and the film was (and usually is) Adox chm 400 (similiar to hp5+).

 

[df cardwell]

If you need to push ( and from my work I know that it IS necessary ), use Xtol 1+1.

That will build shadow density, but not "push the highlights" so hard.

Agitate 5 seconds per minute.

d

 

[Claire Senft]

Low light latensification will help. It will reduce contrast and increase real film speed by up to 2 stops with no grain penelty whatsoever. It works like magic.

Do a search if you are interested because there is a long thread on this topic.

 

[Tom Duffy]

Acufine developer will reduce the overall contrast of pushed film. EI for Tri-x is about 1200.

 

[Paul Howell]

Split developers like Dinafine also reduce contrast with a 1 to 2 stop push.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Acufine will give you an honest one stop increase in speed while keeping contrast reasonable.

If you don't mind mixing your own developer from bulk chemicals, go to unblinkingeye.com and look at the article on Perfection XR-1 developer. It will give you an honest two stops or more increase in speed, but the results are very low contrast. I experimented with it, and it was too flat for my needs, but if you're shooting in inherently contrasty situations (night photography, stage photography), it might be perfect.

 

[Kino]

(snip)The results were just excellent, but in lighter frames I got those "sprocket hole stripes"...can't see those stripes in negatives, but they appear in printing. So, how to reduce contrast / agitation and not get those sprocket hole stripes?

Do you just invert the tank and not "swirl" it occasionally?

Sounds like you got directional effects from the velocity of the developer across the perforations VS the sections that are not perforated. It is not normally an issue with regularly agitated development, but could be with infrequent agitation coupled with low density images.

Do these bands appear to be the "strongest" on the leading edge that was up and fade as they go toward the center? Is the streak density plus or density minus?

If you must shoot negs so thin, you might try varying the agitation pattern to keep from having these effects.

 

[mario Ag+]

I've tried HP5+ rated at ISO 800 in Rodinal after reading a thread here at Apug concerning low light photography. I forget who posted this(thanx whoever you are) but I tried it and it's a really good combo. Rmu I know you said your using Adox 400 but you might want to note this as a guide line proccesing tip. It goes as follows.
Hp5+ rated at 800 in Rodinal (1+100) for 60 minutes(agitation being 2 inversions every 5 minutes) Ofcourse you will have to experiment with Adox 400 to find the correct dev time for you. Hope this helps.

 

[Ian Grant]

Try using Ilford XP2, I used XP1 & XP2 from their launch for shooting Rock Concerts always with great results, superb tonality, and much finer grain than traditional films like Tri-X or HP5

Ian

 

[pmu]

Ok... here is one example of the problem. Those sprocket hole "stripes" that is.

In every other way these negatives are the best I have ever done -- printing was very easy and I really love the tones on the prints! But those stripes.... Is the problem in my agitation cycle 10 sec / 3 minutes or in my agitation technique (=should turn/twist the tank differently)?

I have tons of rodinal and xtol and I think I will have to develop with these...I want to learn how to work with these before getting new developers... And my xtol stock is getting old in 2 months and I have maybe 70% left of it And also I will stick with adox film

 

[MMfoto]

Are you sure your darkroom is 100% light tight? Is that frame from near the beginning of the roll? It looks to me like the projected sprocket hole patterns you see when a small amount of light exposes the film through the sprocket holes of the leader-that mostly protects the rest of the roll-when loading film reels.

 

[pmu]

Are you sure your darkroom is 100% light tight? Is that frame from near the beginning of the roll?

Yes, darkroom is light tight. That frame is almost in the middle of the roll. As I mentioned before, I can't see those "stripes" on the negatives -- I had to give about 40% more exposure to those sides in the image to get the tones I wanted and only then those stripes appeared.

 

[MMfoto]

Than it sounds these are sprocket hole flow patterns from uneven or inadequate agitation.

 

[gainer]

I haven't tried Xtol with Rodinal, but there is an article in unblinkingeye about Rodinal that describes using ascorbate in Rodinal. It's easy to do and you don't have to worry about age of the Xtol. A teaspoon of ascorbic acid, half a teaspoon of baking soda and a little water. Mix it, let the effervescence subside, add it to a liter of 1+50 Rodinal working solution and treat it as if it were 1+25 Rodinal. Some joker named Gainer says it works well. That same joker wrote for P. T. about how not to do stand developing with Rodinal. When you do agitate, do it vigorously so as to mix the different densities of developer as rapidly as possible. The advice to use greater dilution is good, as it makes differences in local density less likely to cause flow patterns to or from high to low areas of activity.

 

[kunihiko]

As I mentioned before, I can't see those "stripes" on the negatives

Hi,
Are you sure that the nega doesn't have stripes ? Is it seen only on prints ?
If so, what type of negacarrier are you using ? Are sproket holes projected on the easel or easel blades ?
I see the strong lights come through the sproket holes are reflected on the easel and cause stripes in a print just like yours.

 

[pmu]

...what type of negacarrier are you using ? Are sproket holes projected on the easel or easel blades ?
I see the strong lights come through the sproket holes are reflected on the easel and cause stripes in a print just like yours.

Oh man, that could be it! I just got a new enlarger with glass negacarrier and I remember that I could see those sprocket holes on the easel blades -- and that particular blade side where those stripes appeared is in that kind of angle that the light possibly could reflect to the paper...

 

[dancqu]

Acufine will give you an honest one stop increase
in speed while keeping contrast reasonable.

If you don't mind mixing your own developer from bulk
chemicals, go to unblinkingeye.com and look at the article
on Perfection XR-1 developer. It will give you an honest
two stops or more increase in speed, but the results are
very low contrast.

I'm quite skeptical of those formulas listed for Perfection
XR-1. I doubt they represent what went in the can. What
went in the cans may have been a PMQ developer but
who knows the ratios. The patent allows for
considerable variation.

I've finally gotten around to working with P, M, and Q as
a print developer with some interesting results. Dan

 

[pmu]

Hi,
Are you sure that the nega doesn't have stripes ? Is it seen only on prints ?
If so, what type of negacarrier are you using ? Are sproket holes projected on the easel or easel blades ?
I see the strong lights come through the sproket holes are reflected on the easel and cause stripes in a print just like yours.

Kunihiko, you were right I looked at the negatives -- looked normal. Scanned the negative (2400dpi) and it looked normal... Oh man, I'm so pleased that I don't have to change anything in my film developments!

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

I'm quite skeptical of those formulas listed for Perfection
XR-1. I doubt they represent what went in the can. What
went in the cans may have been a PMQ developer but
who knows the ratios. The patent allows for
considerable variation.

I've finally gotten around to working with P, M, and Q as
a print developer with some interesting results. Dan

Agreed. I have no idea whether those formulas represent the commercial preparation, but when I tried it I was more interested in the formula for a high speed developer that could gain more than one stop than I was in reproducing the commercial version of XR-1.

The high speed developers I've settled on are Acufine and RAF pyro-metol (which is a good match for ABC pyro, which I use as a normal speed developer for many things).

 

[kunihiko]

I'm glad to hear that the problem seems to be solved