What chemical can i use to slightly decrease density build up ID68?

[MingMingPhoto]

hi guys!
so I love the results of id68 with my black and white films. but when I shoot at box speed I get wayyyyy too much density on my negatives. wayyy too much contrast.

I have been under exposing to try to compensate - but I'd like to know if there's more or less of a chemical I can put in my developer to reduce this intense build up.

I'm guessing less phenidone since I learned it's the most powerful developer in the the mix.

please lmk!

 

[koraks]

Just develop shorter; it'll build less density. If you want a chemical solution, just add water. Dilute your ID68 further down with water. E.g. if you're now using it full-strength, try it 1+1 or even 1+2.

I'm guessing less phenidone

That will throw off the phenidone:hydroquinone ratio. It will slow down the developer, so it'll kind of work. But why try to improve on a tried & tested formula? If you have too much density, just develop shorter, that's all there is to it!

PS: underexposure will mostly affect the shadows, so you end up with little or no shadow detail. I.e....underexposure (surprising, eh!) It will only marginally affect the highlights, at least within a range where you don't end up in problematic underexposure territory. So the real solution to too much development, is just less development. It's really that simple.

PPS: I suspect that the solution you tried, i.e. underexposure, just made matters worse. What happens is that as you reduce exposure, you lose shadow detail. Since overall contrast in the negative will drop only a little, and you end up compensating for this in digital post processing or enlarger printing anyway, what you end up with is large black shadows and the same highlights. I.e. the general impression of the same image/scene will be of higher contrast.

PPPS: all of the above is in the assumption that you have already determined for sure that the highlight density in your negatives really is too high. Please verify if this is truly the case. I have my doubts, given the nature of your question.

 

[Craig]

You can also process at a lower temperature, and/or a shorter time as Koraks mentioned.

What is the final use of the negatives? Are you scanning or printing optically? I have found that some scanners can't deal will with dense highlights, but they are easily printable in the darkroom.

Be careful about judging the quality of negatives from scans, rather than from the negatives themselves.

 

[ags2mikon]

If you reduce your development time 15-20% and shoot at box speed you may be spot on.

 

[mshchem]

Double check your thermometer. Seriously

 

[Lachlan Young]

As others have said: process controls!

ID-68/ Microphen are capable of delivering a very broad range of aim contrast indices. With some materials and some aim densities it can overshoot relatively quickly, but only if your process is majorly out of control.

A sufficiently accurate thermometer and timer (and if needed, densitometer), not messing up the formulation are what you need to be referring to as a matter of first principle in order to resolve a suitable development time.

 

[Ian Grant]

ID-68/Microphen gives an effective increase in film speed roughly two thirds of a stop, so a slight reduction in exposure and dev time should solve the problem.

From memory older Ilford's older datasheets suggested 200 ISO for FP4 developed in Microphen compared to the 125 ISO box speed, and 640 ISO for HP5.

Ian

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

What film?

 

[Doremus Scudder]

If your negatives are consistently overexposed, i.e., too dense shadows, then rate your film faster and vice versa.

If your negatives are consistently too contrasty, reduce development time and vice versa.

That's about all you need. Just juggle those two variables till you get results you like. Don't mess with the formula to try and achieve this.

Best,

Doremus

 

[Donald Qualls]

If your negatives are consistently overexposed, i.e., too dense shadows, then rate your film faster and vice versa.

If your negatives are consistently too contrasty, reduce development time and vice versa.

This. Since I learned developing the second time, in high school (1975 or so).