The prints were judged by ten observers who expressed their estimation of the quality of each print by means of the terms: Excellent, Good, Fair, Poor, and Very Poor. The observers were provided with a chart on which to record their judgments. On the chart, the quality terms were shown equally spaced along a scale on which each observer placed a mark for each print. Thus he could rate the print at one of the five quality levels or at any intermediate level. These judgments took into account not only the tone-reproduction characteristics of the print but also the other factors that affect quality, such as graininess, sharpness, depth of field, and camera motion. The judgments of the observers were averaged to obtain the final ratings. The details of this method of judging have been described by Sorem. -- P S & E, Vol. 4, 1960 SAFETY FACTORS IN CAMERA EXPOSURES
Not sure why you consider this pull processing. Normal development in Xtol at 24C is 5 minutes. You have just overexposed and overdeveloped.read this article last year and wanted to give this a try . . .
http://www.alexluyckx.com/blog/index.php/2015/05/08/the-panatomic-x-trick/
TMax 100 @ 32ASA, Xtol 1+1 8 minutes at 24C
. . . and these are my results, I am very pleased with the look:
The look is fine John but what does it give in terms of a look that exposure at box speed would not, given the snags with possibly lower shutter speeds and ic-racer's resolution graphs? It is difficult to tell from the light conditions of the scenes but it seems that EI32 will open the shadows well, although there may be scenes in which this is no better or even slightly detrimental to the scene
However nice to see what can be done with Xtol and to know the dev times and dev temp.
pentaxuser
thanks for the reply pentaxuser (FWIW I have a Pentax MX and K1000 SE I shoot some 35mm with) . . . this is a negative scan pentaxuser, I used an Epson v600 with no edits to the scan.Thanks for the reply, John. I should have read your link and would have realised what your objective was. Unless you have manipulated the neg scan or is it a print scan then they don't look over developed to me. If the "correct" time is only 5 minutes then I'd expect to see a bigger difference when over developed by 60% but you have covered this in your explanation.
pentaxuser
Thanks MattKing for the explanation on what is actually going on here. I am always learning from the vast experience on this board. My education and background/career is Electrical and Telecommunications Engineering (it's a curse, along with being Scottish/Irish LOL) . . . Analog Photography is a hobby that I try to ~over Engineer~ LOLThe link contains an incorrect use of the label "to pull".
To "pull" means to reduce development in order to reduce contract.
It has nothing to do with exposure, although people sometimes choose to increase exposure when they plan to "pull" development.
What I see here is a 1 1/3 stop increase in exposure, and either normal development or a small "push" - depending on what the net effect of the temperature drift was.
The small increase in exposure is probably well within the normal latitude of T-Max 100, given the lighting conditions.
And if the contrast was increased slightly, that would suit the lighting conditions as well.
I expect what you are seeing is the result of exposing generously, which is something that T-Max 100 rewards, unless the conditions are contrasty and the subject has a lot of important highlights where detail is critical.
I'll let those who work a lot with characteristic curves tell you about the differences/similarities between the films.the bottom line MattKing . . . I am trying to replicate the look of Kodak's old Panatomic X using Tmax 100 . . . what are your thoughts on that?
Thank you for your thoughtful reply MattKingI'll let those who work a lot with characteristic curves tell you about the differences/similarities between the films.
But if you are working under conditions where the lighting is of moderate contrast, increasing the exposure by one stop (meter at an EI of 50 rather than 100) seems to give you the sort of results you like.
I don't know about your development. Proper development traditionally matches the negative density range to the printing conditions (paper and enlarger). So, if you found them easy to print, they were probably developed correctly."Crickets" (faberryman, ic-racer) on my request to tell me WHY these images were overexposed and overdeveloped . . . . jus' sayin'
Xtol 1:1 at 8 minutes is fine, you must have checke Xtol stock timesNot sure why you consider this pull processing. Normal development in Xtol at 24C is 5 minutes. You have just overexposed and overdeveloped.
I don’t worry about much. But underexposure scares me to deathBTW, I add a safety factor back to my film but that is to account for variability in shutters, lenses, apertures and meters to avoid dreaded under exposure in the field.
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?