Reading negatives

[Ashfaque]

Hello Everyone,

How do I read/extrapolate from just seeing negative after development without the help of scanner, printing and all - say, when the roll is still wet and when dry? Essentially what I'm seeking is the ability to understand
- if the negative has been properly developed, over- or, under-developed.
- dry marks v. dust
- anything else I should be aware of

Please advise and suggest me some easy references.

Bests,

Ashfaque

 

[MattKing]

I would advise against assessing wet negatives unless and until you have gained some experience assessing dry negatives.

As for assessing dry negatives, I find that this web reference gives at least a good starting point: http://www.ephotozine.com/article/assessing-negatives-4682

 

[Xmas]

Hello Everyone,

How do I read/extrapolate from just seeing negative after development without the help of scanner, printing and all? Say when the roll is still wet and when dry... Essentially what I'm seeking is the ability to understand
- if the negative has been properly developed, over- or, under-developed.
- dry marks v. dust
- anything else

Please advise and suggest me some easy references.

Bests,

Ashfaque

It is best to wait until it is completely dry.
If you have clear film in the frame similar to the rebate area you have underexposed, and will have difficulty getting a good print.
You should have no foreign objects on either side of film.
You should have no uneven density correlated with the sprocket holes.
A good quality jewelers loope or lens may help.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

Evaluating negatives is not an easy task. For example, distinguishing between an over developed negative and an over exposed one requires requires a lot of practice. Many photobooks will have a 3x3 matrix of samples going from under exposed and under developed to over exposed and over developed.

 

[winger]

+1 to the link Matt gave and what he said. And experience.

 

[jeffreyg]

On your quest to read negatives, I suggest first to equip yourself with: a light box, a good magnifying loupe and some cotton or such gloves for handling negatives and prints. Also one of the worthwhile resource book is "Beyond Monochrome" by a frequent APUG contributor Ralph Lambrecht. Learn proper exposure techniques. At the start I would follow the film and chemistry mfg's suggested settings, dilutions, times, etc. There are simple tests to determine your personal film ISO. Start with evenly lit subjects and/or scenes also start with one film, chemistry and paper. You then have a base (control). From that you should be able to make an acceptable negative and print. Look at as many prints by others that you consider to be worth emulating. Once you are competent and comfortable with the basics you are ready to modify as you wish. In my opinion jumping from one technique and material to another will be frustrating and expensive.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

 

[Bob Carnie]

Very old Kodak method that I still use today..Dry negative

I place the negative over printed material...If I can see the type barely through the highlights, and I can see detail in the thin area shadows, I know that the negative is decent.

I also look at the rebate to see how clear it is if using D76 ..clearer the better , also the numbers should jump out at you within the rebate.

This kind of working is much like how I meter ... I use the Sunny f16 and sometimes if using hot lights an incedent meter.

 

[Ashfaque]

Thank you all very much for your advices. This 'analogue venture' has been quite educational for me so far.

Matt: I'll read it soon. My head's boiling now (did too much maths today)

Noel: I've been meaning to get a loupe. Thanks for the reminder. I have two magnifying glass for philately (my oldest hobby). But I'll have to find them 1st. Will they do?

Jeffrey: My lightbox is coming. I need that for quick scanning too. Re Ralph's book, I'll have to check if I have access to it through my university network.

Bob: Thanks.

Re Sunny f16 rules (in relation correct exposures): I read from the internet long time ago. But can you please suggest some relatively easier reference for that too?

Bests,

Ashfaque

 

[Xmas]

Noel: I've been meaning to get a loupe. Thanks for the reminder. I have two magnifying glass for philately (my oldest hobby). But I'll have to find them 1st. Will they do?

Yes or an interchangeable lens.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunny_16_rule

 

[cliveh]

It depends on whether you are printing with a condenser, point source or diffuser enlarger.

 

[Hatchetman]

Start printing and it will become less abstract. You will quickly learn when a negative is going to be difficult to print!

 

[Konical]

Good Evening, Ashfaque,

" I have two magnifying glass for philately (my oldest hobby). But I'll have to find them 1st. Will they do?"

I agree that they'll do.

Good to see another philatelist here. I wonder how many other APUG members fit that description?

Konical

 

[Ashfaque]

Cliveh and Hatchetman: I know very very little about enlarger. As much as I'd like to buy one, I can't afford it - mainly due to time constraint (reading and all). However I'll be buying one soon - hopefully later this year. Sadly, there is no darkroom service in here either. This is one of the main reasons for asking that question.

Konical: Thanks and good to find you, too. I've been collecting stamps since 1985/86, when I just entered primary school. I still have all my stamps. Haven't bought anything of late. But please don't tempt me! Wife is already monitoring my activity.

Bests,

Ashfaque

 

[NickLimegrove]

- dry marks v. dust

If your negatives were free from dust before you hung them up to dry, they'll certainly be full of it if after you've inspected them while still wet.

 

[Ashfaque]

Thanks for the tip, Lynd.

Bruce (The Online Darkroom) wrote something very useful here. I should've noticed it earlier (since I try to read his blog regularly). Hope this is useful to others like me.

Bests,

Ashfaque

 

[HiHoSilver]

Just a word of thanks for each of you who've posted. This was a question of mine as well.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Kodak's B&W Handbook contains examples.

PE

 

[Sirius Glass]

When the negative is dry, can I read a newspaper through it? Does it have enough denseness.

 

[HiHoSilver]

I can only see text. Reading would w/ any coherency would be a stretch. Maybe overexposed or overdeveloped.

 

[ValoPeikko]

If you're in a hurry for some reason (read, you use monobath for speed reasons and you need to get the prints out of the door asap). Then I would suggest two things, first final rinse in isopropyl alcohol and second, you can do contacts while negatives are still wet. (Note on making wet contacts, don't use solvent for final rinse and also be very very gentle on to avoid scratching the negatives or ruining them in other ways, not recommended, unless you're in a rush).

For anything else, let them dry before you try to read them. Also at least for me, making contacts helps a lot. From a contact sheet I can usually make educated guess on how to print the negatives. Then using those notes, process to making work prints. After that you can make adjustments.

Contact printing is a must for me, specially from 6x9:s. It makes printing easier and contacts are much much easier to read then negatives them selfs. Specially larger negatives made for alternative processes (which mostly need quite dense negatives).

 

[sergioto]

Check this, one of the best I've seen regarding reading negatives, with clear examples http://www.theonlinedarkroom.com/p/how-to-read-negative.html

 

[HiHoSilver]

Again, my thanks to each of you.

 

[John51]

Once the film is dry, you can hold it at an angle to the light, emulsion side up. When you get the angle just right, you can see a positive image. Not sure if that is any use in evaluating the negative but it's the quickest way to see a positive image.