Deleted member 88956
And I've just listened to Frank Zappa, coincidence ?
And I've just listened to Frank Zappa, coincidence ?Use orange or yellow filters, just do not eat yellow snow.
Xtol 1+1 and Delta 100 seem to cause quite serious highlight roll-off if you start to push your exposure up the scale - I've attached screenshots of the comparator curves available here. There are caveats - I recall finding some of the Fotoimport results have been developed for slightly wayward times etc, but they do give a useful snapshot. The other point is that as you extend development times you'll steepen the midrange and enhance the roll-off, exaggerating the results into the highlights that are already causing the muddying of details in the higher scale which you are currently dealing with. It also explains why I was a bit puzzled by the Xtol results you were getting compared to what I know Delta 100 does with D-76 and Rodinal. I would however say that my suggestion of TMax developer stands for what you are wanting to do - but that T-Max 100 and T-Max developer might together act to kick the tonal separation up a notch - again the Fotoimport results may seem a bit confusing, but if you adjust the dev time for TMax 100 so the midtones match (9-10 mins, going by Kodak's data, I reckon - see pg.8 and pg. 9), you'll get significantly stronger - even exaggerated beyond linear - highlight separation than Delta 100 and TMax developer give. It's for situations like this that TMax 100 was designed - it just requires a bit of common sense in its usage, rather than the often very casual/ outright sloppy approach people had to the exposure & processing of 100 speed films in the (now quite distant) past - TMax is older than I am!
I'd avoid the Rollei film - it's an Agfa aerial recon film that is a fair bit slower than box speed at sea level - and it doesn't seem to hold linearity through the highlights particularly.
I should have the film in the next day or two, I'll try the T-Max first.Fuji seem to have published some data for Acros II - it looks like it does upsweep a bit in the highlights, even in D-76 (Microfine is more or less Perceptol/ Microdol-X, Super Prodol is more or less Microphen from what I recall). Might avoid Xtol as it seems to be intended to dampen highlight density to make negs 'easier' to print.
Worth noting that I don't think Sammallahti uses anything particularly exotic (I did find a reference somewhere to him using XP2 Super) - but his overall printing style tends to differ from what you are after - unless I am much mistaken?
I’ve re-read your posts numerous times and I’m still not entirely sure how to interpret the comparator curves for Delta 100. Am I making the correct following assumptions
honestly, i'd be checking the camera shutter speeds and metering before worrying about film curves because what you have described in the negatives sounds like gross over exposure. already - low contrast and grainy snow = exposure already on the shoulder and being overexposed imo and possibly by 3 stops or more.
I'd bracket a scene -4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 changing shutter speed and the same again changing aperture this time as something doesn't sound right with the camera to me from you description of negatives.
but if you adjust the dev time for TMax 100 so the midtones match (9-10 mins, going by Kodak's data, I reckon - see pg.8 and pg. 9), you'll get significantly stronger - even exaggerated beyond linear - highlight separation than Delta 100 and TMax developer give
honestly, i'd be checking the camera shutter speeds and metering before worrying about film curves because what you have described in the negatives sounds like gross over exposure. already - low contrast and grainy snow = exposure already on the shoulder and being overexposed imo and possibly by 3 stops or more.
I'd bracket a scene -4 -3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 changing shutter speed and the same again changing aperture this time as something doesn't sound right with the camera to me from you description of negatives.
The camera has been CLA'd, and shutter speeds are identical to my backup camera, and shutter speeds sound right, so I think they are properly calibrated. Same for my light meters and digital thermometers. I am overexposing a little by setting my EI to 80 and basing exposure on an incident light meter reading. My negatives of snow/white-out scenes with gray/white skies aren't particularly dense, just VERY flat. There definitely isn't a full range of tones in the actual scene, so what I'm trying to figure out is how to get the maximum amount of contrast (contrast index ? ) from the film in these particular lighting situations.
The Kodak development times for TMAX100 developped in TMAX don't look right
https://125px.com/docs/film/kodak/f4016_tmax_100-2018.pdf
It looks fine for iso 100/Normal exposure 68F, 7.5 minutes - using a dilution of 1:4
but for iso 200/Pushed 1-stop 68F, 7.5 minutes doesn't specify a dilution - implying FULL strength ?
This is different than what is posted on the massive development chart
which states that in both cases dilution remains the same (1:4)
With xtol and delta 100 the highlight region flattens out compressing tones effectively reducing contrast.
Kodak recommends that if you are using T-Max developer, you should use normal processing - do not change development if you under-expose T-Max 100 by one stop (EI of 200).The Kodak development times for TMAX100 developped in TMAX don't look right
https://125px.com/docs/film/kodak/f4016_tmax_100-2018.pdf
It looks fine for iso 100/Normal exposure 68F, 7.5 minutes - using a dilution of 1:4
but for iso 200/Pushed 1-stop 68F, 7.5 minutes doesn't specify a dilution - implying FULL strength ?
This tells me that you are over-exposing. The highlights in the skies are in the shoulder, and the mid-tones and shadows are crowding up against them.The densities of the bad negatives look darker than they acutally are, the density of the skies are about the same as the good negative.
This tells me that you are over-exposing. The highlights in the skies are in the shoulder, and the mid-tones and shadows are crowding up against them.
This tells me that you are over-exposing. The highlights in the skies are in the shoulder, and the mid-tones and shadows are crowding up against them.
Yep, the lowest shadow densities are way above base + fog.
If you are working in a fairly flatly lit scene, I'd probably try 12 mins in TMax 1+4 and see - it may be not enough, it may be too much. But it should get you a starting point. EI will have to be determined by trial & how you prefer to meter.
So definitely overexposed and not overdeveloped ? Is my first negative also overexposed ?
could the cold be affecting the shutterspeed ?
is that the cold is making the voltage drop in the Noblex, the drum runs slower & thus overexposes.
I usually use Delta 100 at EI 100 when making negatives for Platinum printing. The negatives can get really dense and blocked up quickly when overexposed and developed.
FWIW, that overly dense negative might be perfect if you were seeking something like this:
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?