Push Process Thumbrules

[Elvispen]

Hay!

I'm kind of new to this forum (as well as to analog photography, and to my new Hasselblad 500c) and i suppose this question has been asked several times but as I am new here I cant really find it... So have patience and if there already is an answer to this question I would love a link to it.

I was wondering how much you can push process different films with good results?

Right now I am sitting here with KODAK 400TMY-2, 400NC and a couple of FUJI PROVIA 100F (yes I know, the two last ones aren't black/white but maybe you could tell me anyway so I don't have to start a thread that's a copy of this one...) and I'm wondering how much I can push process these ones? I was thinking to try and make the KODAK 400TMY-2 to ISO 1600, the 400NC to 800 and the PROVIA 100F to 200? Is this insane or will it work?

But I'd love some general rules about this as well. Should you never push process posetiv film? Is black/white the one that can handle the moast push processing? and so on...

The reason I'm wondering this is that there are not much 120-films to buy anymore so I thought that if I could push process the once that I can buy I'll have more different films to play with...

Sorry if the spelling is bad but I hope you can understand me, and help me.
Thanks
/Elvispen

 

[markbarendt]

Elvispen,

First, welcome.

Second, the question is subjective not objective, testing the films yourself is the only good way to really figure this out because you and I will normally see and meter differently and our ideas of what is good and bad are different.

Pushing is essentially made up of two parts.

1) You plan ahead of time to extend the chemical process to increase the film's contrast knowing that you are sacrificing the films normal ability to deal with highlights in order to push what would be a dark tone, in more normal lighting, up the films curve toward the highlight end.

2) You set your meter to under-expose by a certain amount, which means you are planning give up some shadow details in order to get a faster shutter speed or more DOF.

On number 2, you are simply placing the exposure of your subjects on the curve you chose in number 1.

Setting the meter's ISO at something other than box speed is just a way to trick the meter into "telling you what you want to hear".

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Tjena elvispen!

Your nickname made me laugh. It's funny.

The best way to find out how much you can under-expose a film is to try. But, since you are new to film photography, it makes a lot more sense to learn how to expose and process your film normally first. By doing so, you can learn how much shadow detail you get by exposing the film normally, and this helps you understand how much of that shadow detail you would inevitably loose when you underexpose the film, and how much loss is acceptable to you.
That's essentially what happens with black & white film when you underexpose - you lose shadow detail. The less exposure you give the film, (rating the film at a higher exposure index; 800, 1,000, 1,600, etc), the higher up the gray scale you lose detail. So it is essentially a judgment call from you how much of that you find acceptable to lose.

You also need to ask yourself why you are push processing these films. Is it because you want to hand hold in low light? Or is it something about the look of underexposed film that you like?

Good luck,

- Thomas

 

[Elvispen]

First of all, thanks for the responses.
I've taken som pictures with normal exposure and I'm happy with the results (wich you can see here) but I want to try something new.

Ok, so it's in the shadows that you loose the most detail? Is this becouse you get more contrast? (wich I think i read somewhere)

The main reason thats making me want to push process is that I want to take pictures in bad light...

I know this is not objectiv, but what's your opinion?
Perticulary on the films I said I have...

 

[Anon Ymous]

...Ok, so it's in the shadows that you loose the most detail? Is this becouse you get more contrast? (wich I think i read somewhere)

Any film will need a minimum amount of exposure to "register" the faintest image. If you expose - develop your film normally, these details at the shadows will appear at the negative. On the other hand, if you underexpose - push process your film, you'll never get an image of something that wasn't recorded. What you do is simply making what would become a faint image in a negative, something with more density. You effectively stretch the tones of the faint negative. Nothing more, nothing less, and that's why you will get more contrast.

 

[Elvispen]

Of course , thanks for the lecture

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Skickade privat meddelande. Se om det hjalper.

 

[markbarendt]

Ok, so it's in the shadows that you loose the most detail? Is this becouse you get more contrast? (wich I think i read somewhere)

The more you increase development, the more highlight you lose.

The more you under-expose, the more shadow detail you lose.

The main reason thats making me want to push process is that I want to take pictures in bad light...

You might also consider using flash or a faster films like Portra 800 or Superia 1600 or TMax 3200 or Neopan 1600 or Delta 3200. That is what they are made for.

A well exposed 1600 speed film will beat a push processed 400 in many situations.

I know this is not objectiv, but what's your opinion?
Perticulary on the films I said I have...

All the films you talked about are fine/good/great, of course so are most of the other films you can buy today. Any slide film is going to be more finicky with regard to exposure problems than negative film.

I can't stress this enough, the only way you can really know is to try.

 

[Anscojohn]

[I was wondering how much you can push process different films with good results?

******
Push to save an underexposed film. Emergency, only.

 

[Elvispen]

.....
You might also consider using flash or a faster films like Portra 800 or Superia 1600 or TMax 3200 or Neopan 1600 or Delta 3200. That is what they are made for.

A well exposed 1600 speed film will beat a push processed 400 in many situations.

All the films you talked about are fine/good/great, of course so are most of the other films you can buy today. Any slide film is going to be more finicky with regard to exposure problems than negative film.

I can't stress this enough, the only way you can really know is to try.

The thing is that I can't get my hands on those high-speed films, thats my main problem here... I suppose I have to surrender for ebay...

But I'll try myselft, and push process one step at the time, thats seems to be the main tips from everyone around here.

 

[Erik Petersson]

Hi Elvispen,

In Sweden there are a couple of good mail-order shops. Myself, I have used Scandinavianphoto. They will probably be able to help you. Or talk to one of the good photo magazines in Stockholm. There are still a couple of them left.

/Erik

 

[markbarendt]

The thing is that I can't get my hands on those high-speed films, thats my main problem here... I suppose I have to surrender for ebay...

Many of us have the same problem, the local shops just don't stock the fun stuff. All but a few rolls of my film is purchased via mail-order.

I haven't tried Ebay for film.

But I'll try myselft, and push process one step at the time, thats seems to be the main tips from everyone around here.

The reason that is true is because most modern films are really good, the "quality" differences are more artistic than technical.

For me, and probably for most of us, the biggest factors in the quality of any finished negative today is how we exposed it and how well it is processed, not the choice of the film.

Also when I say experiment, I don't mean with every film. Superia 1600 for the "bad" light, Portra 400 for the good light is probably plenty.

 

[Elvispen]

Well, now I've been through every photoshop in Stockholm (at least it feels like it) and I've got my hands on a VELVIA50, a FUJICOLOR PRO 800Z and a PORTIA 400F.

With that I now actually have some fun films to test. I'm thinking I'll start with no push process to know how these films look when you use them as your supposed to. But after that I'm going to try to push one step on those films I like.

Thanks for the help so far, and you'll be hearing from me again.

 

[markbarendt]

Elvispen,

The 800z has a lot of lattitude; try a few frames over exposed (by setting the camera at 400 and 200) and one underexposed (camera at 1600) without worrying about a chemical push.

The over-exposed negatives will be "thicker", darker, but with a loupe you should still be able to see plenty of detail in the highlights and you will have better detail in the shadow areas. If you are enlarging you'll simply adjust your process, in essence "burn in", to print these frames at a normal brightness on paper. If you get prints from a mini-lab they will probably look light/overexposed and might even toss them.

Under-exposed negatives will be "thinner" than normal. In an enlarger you will need to essentially "dodge" the whole image. The mini-lab proof will probably look very dark.

Try this with your E-6 films too. You'll probably find that you need to be much more cautious about getting the exposure perfect.