Underexposed negs or problem with development?

[lbrown29]

Hi guys,

I recently attempted shooting 4x5 for the first time using a Sinar F and Fomapan 400. Developed in Adonol one-shot at 1:50 ratio. My negs have come out very flat and when scanned the image is super dark. I can't work out whether the problem is due to underexposure or under-development. I didn't factor in any bellows compensation as the bellows length was shorter than my focal length so I don't think that could be the problem. Example straight scan and negative attached below.

Any help with this would be great.

Thanks

 

[retina_restoration]

Hi guys,

I recently attempted shooting 4x5 for the first time using a Sinar F and Fomapan 400. Developed in Adonol one-shot at 1:50 ratio. My negs have come out very flat and when scanned the image is super dark. I can't work out whether the problem is due to underexposure or under-development. I didn't factor in any bellows compensation as the bellows length was shorter than my focal length so I don't think that could be the problem. Example straight scan and negative attached below.

Any help with this would be great.

Thanks

An extra stop of exposure would have been helpful. It's not underdeveloped.
I'm betting that you should have added a bellows extension factor to compensate for the focus length - did you attempt to calculate it based on the focal length and bellows extension, or did you simply assume it wasn't warranted? This would account for some underexposure. Also, in my experience, Fomapan 400 should be rated at 200 ASA to get acceptable shadow information.
Was the exposure longer than 1 second? Fomapan is notorious for requiring significant reciprocity adjustment. By the time you get to 2 seconds exposure, the adjusted time for reciprocity is already 6 seconds. It only gets much worse as times get longer.

I recommend that until you get your technique dialed in, always shoot a second sheet of film and give the second one a full stop more exposure. Develop the normal one first, evaluate it, and then develop the second one, adjusting development to account for any exposure error seen with the first sheet.

 

[MattKing]

Welcome to Photrio.
Could the "flat" negative be due to the lighting as well?
FWIW, the negative appears to be reasonably well exposed, and reasonably well developed, based on what I can see here.

 

[Paul Howell]

How did you meter the scene? I am not familiar with Adonol, but Foma 400 is more like am ISO 200. If you look at the Foma datasheet you will see that no developers reaches 400. I generally shoot Foma 400 at 200 or 320 depending on the developer. Last how accurate is the shutter on the lens?

 

[albireo]

Hi guys,

I recently attempted shooting 4x5 for the first time using a Sinar F and Fomapan 400. Developed in Adonol one-shot at 1:50 ratio. My negs have come out very flat and when scanned the image is super dark. I can't work out whether the problem is due to underexposure or under-development. I didn't factor in any bellows compensation as the bellows length was shorter than my focal length so I don't think that could be the problem. Example straight scan and negative attached below.

Any help with this would be great.

Thanks

That negative should give you a better scan than the one you shared. I think the issue lies with your scanning/inversion workflow.

 

[MattKing]

That negative should give you a better scan than the one you shared. I think the issue lies with your scanning/inversion workflow.

+1
From an inverted screen grab, with the colour removed:

 

[koraks]

Welcome aboard @lbrown29 !
Your negative looks fine. Somewhat tin, but should print fine on grade 3 or as a classic cyanotype. @albireo is right - this image can scan beautifully, but something evidently went wrong in the scanning process. What kind of scanner do you use and what settings?

 

[MurrayMinchin]

Looking at photo #2 in the OP: the films edge, which should be clear, appears to have quite a bit of density. Theories?

 

[MurrayMinchin]

Oh, I see it's your first post here...welcome aboard!

 

[koraks]

Looking at photo #2 in the OP: the films edge, which should be clear, appears to have quite a bit of density. Theories?

Looks quite normal for Fomapan 400; that film has a fairly high b+f level.

 

[MurrayMinchin]

Looks quite normal for Fomapan 400; that film has a fairly high b+f level.

Yikes, no kidding!

 

[lbrown29]

Welcome aboard @lbrown29 !
Your negative looks fine. Somewhat tin, but should print fine on grade 3 or as a classic cyanotype. @albireo is right - this image can scan beautifully, but something evidently went wrong in the scanning process. What kind of scanner do you use and what settings?

Thanks for the welcome I actually used an Epson V600 and scanned the neg in two halves and then merged in Lightroom. I've realised the problem was actually from letting the scanner do an automatic conversion. I just tried converting the negative in photoshop the image looks much better - bit of a facepalm moment.

 

[lbrown29]

How did you meter the scene? I am not familiar with Adonol, but Foma 400 is more like am ISO 200. If you look at the Foma datasheet you will see that no developers reaches 400. I generally shoot Foma 400 at 200 or 320 depending on the developer. Last how accurate is the shutter on the lens?

Yeah I shot it at 400 and incident metered for the shadows. The shutter is pretty accurate as far as I know. Good to know about shooting at 200 - thankyou.

 

[loccdor]

Much better! Congrats on your first 4x5.

 

[lbrown29]

Much better! Congrats on your first 4x5.

Thankyou!

 

[Horatio]

Much better than my first 4x5 attempt!