What film and developer combination for hard light (medium format)?

[1kgcoffee]

Assuming development with pyrocat, d76 or rodinal, the end goal a fine print what is the best choice of B&W film and developer combination for mid day hard light situation?

(Not a big fan of HP5)

 

[Gerald C Koch]

A soft working developer like D-23 will reduce contrast. You could also use Microdol-X or Perceptol.

 

[Slixtiesix]

Perceptol 1+3. I had good results with FP4+ and Acros.

 

[nworth]

Mid-day light is always a problem. It is not so much that it is harsh than that it does not model the subject well. In contrasty situations use a low contrast film - Tri-X works much better than Pan-F+. Using a low contrast developer may help, but Pyrocat-HD and diluted D-76 should work OK. Further developer dilution may help, but you would have to experiment to find a good dilution and its corresponding development time. What you need to do depends a lot on the subject. First, know what your lighting situation really is. Measure the highlights vs. the shadow content of the scene. If you really have high contrast scenes, minus development (shorter development, possibly with compensating changes to exposure) may help. For moderately contrasty scenes, 15 to 20 percent shorter development time can help control the situation. Adams discusses this in detail in his Zone System books.

 

[Anon Ymous]

Overexpose by a stop and develop for about 20% less time. In other words, pull process. D76 is ok for the job.

 

[Jarin Blaschke]

Assuming development with pyrocat, d76 or rodinal, the end goal a fine print what is the best choice of B&W film and developer combination for mid day hard light situation?

(Not a big fan of HP5)

What is the subject?

 

[JensH]

Overexpose by a stop and develop for about 20% less time. In other words, pull process. D76 is ok for the job.

+1
Yes, TriX @EI 200 works very well this way.
I love to use Moersch MZB two bath developer for TriX, but here hardly anyone uses it, why ever...

Best
Jens

 

[Sirius Glass]

You can use this to choose your developer:

 

[Jarin Blaschke]

It seems absurd for any of us to recommend anything without knowing what he/she is shooting and what they want it to look like.

 

[jim10219]

Overexpose by a stop and develop for about 20% less time. In other words, pull process. D76 is ok for the job.

That’s what I do.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I do none of the above if high contrast scenes are what you have in mind. I pick a film that can handle the range without resorting to minus development or compensating developers which compress tonality. If you can still find any Efke 25, that would be great. But either TMax film will also do it, provided you carefully meter deep shadow values and control the highlights with pyro stain. I do 12 stop range subjects all the time.

 

[Jarin Blaschke]

I do none of the above if high contrast scenes are what you have in mind. I pick a film that can handle the range without resorting to minus development or compensating developers which compress tonality. If you can still find any Efke 25, that would be great. But either TMax film will also do it, provided you carefully meter deep shadow values and control the highlights with pyro stain. I do 12 stop range subjects all the time.

Again, none of us knows what the OP wants it to look like, but personally I too don't like to skimp on texture or micro contrast either, and never compress more than -1/2 (and yes, pyro makes this possible). Old glamor photographers routinely used carefully angled hard light but partnered it with with lens diffusion/"portrait" lenses and softer development. It all depends on the look you're after.

J

 

[BradS]

My choice in harsh light is always Ilford HP5 but I supposed that if that were not available I'd go with Kodak Tmax 100 or 400. D-76 and D-23 and minor variations on these are the only film devs I use anymore.

 

[1kgcoffee]

Thanks for the responses

Subject mountains most likely, but it was snowy landscapes in the winter that got me thinking about this initially.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Thanks for the responses

Subject mountains most likely, but it was snowy landscapes in the winter that got me thinking about this initially.

I get the best exposures that result in prints with nice white snow when I use an incident meter. Otherwise I use a reflectance meter and either open the exposure two stops or use the Zone System to get the middle grays where I want them.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Brad, either TMax will handle far more contrast range with full gradation than HP5. This doesn't mean I never used HP5 in full sun; but it won't handle the same shadow gradation. Bergger 200 could take the range even further, but it's long gone. I printed some of all the above last week, plus FP4. But I gave up on TMax 100 in the mtns because the edge acutance is deficient, despite extreme detail capacity. Still, I bagged some wonderful high country shots with it. I did shoot a lot of 8X10 HP5 down in the hills of the Mother Lode. The contrast scale there, esp with a pinch of clearing fog, was ideal. Nice on a rainy day too.

 

[Jarin Blaschke]

Ok. A staining developer will be particularly beneficial with bright snow, as they are generally excellent at highlight retention and continued separation. Traditional technique is to place mid-sized areas of sunlit snow on zone 7, although you can place it higher if patches are small.

J

 

[DREW WILEY]

Sparkly highlights in fresh snow can warrant a slightly different placement. A lot depends on the degree of familiarity with any given film/Dev combo. With roll film you can also bracket exp when in doubt.

 

[BradS]

Brad, either TMax will handle far more contrast range with full gradation than HP5. This doesn't mean I never used HP5 in full sun; but it won't handle the same shadow gradation. Bergger 200 could take the range even further, but it's long gone. I printed some of all the above last week, plus FP4. But I gave up on TMax 100 in the mtns because the edge acutance is deficient, despite extreme detail capacity. Still, I bagged some wonderful high country shots with it. I did shoot a lot of 8X10 HP5 down in the hills of the Mother Lode. The contrast scale there, esp with a pinch of clearing fog, was ideal. Nice on a rainy day too.

Oh, no doubt. TMY2 is an amazing film! When, a few years ago, it looked like the end of the road for Kodak, I switched almost entirely to and stocked up on Ilford product....and found I really like FP4+, HP5+ and Delta 100....

If Kodak can get thier shit together and it looks like they may, if they survive to my next film buy, I may get a few boxes of TMY2....

 

[Jarin Blaschke]

Brad, either TMax will handle far more contrast range with full gradation than HP5. This doesn't mean I never used HP5 in full sun; but it won't handle the same shadow gradation. Bergger 200 could take the range even further, but it's long gone. I printed some of all the above last week, plus FP4. But I gave up on TMax 100 in the mtns because the edge acutance is deficient, despite extreme detail capacity. Still, I bagged some wonderful high country shots with it. I did shoot a lot of 8X10 HP5 down in the hills of the Mother Lode. The contrast scale there, esp with a pinch of clearing fog, was ideal. Nice on a rainy day too.

I hope this isn't too much of a tangent, but is it fair to say that tabular films generally have higher resolution but lower acutance than traditional grain films?

J

 

[esearing]

You can use this to choose your developer:

View attachment 194629​

I wish people would stop publishing this chart. It even says right above it that your process will not repeat the results. See "Factors such as ...."

Pick two developers, study their formulas. Why does one contain more of an ingredient than another. What happens if you agitate more/less ? And what do you consider Hard Light 8 stops, 10 stops? would it require compensating development or would normal be ok as long as you do not expect too much shadow detail? Have you tested how your film responds to over/under exposure for your normal development?

 

[Sirius Glass]

I wish people would stop publishing this chart. It even says right above it that your process will not repeat the results. See "Factors such as ...."

Pick two developers, study their formulas. Why does one contain more of an ingredient than another. What happens if you agitate more/less ? And what do you consider Hard Light 8 stops, 10 stops? would it require compensating development or would normal be ok as long as you do not expect too much shadow detail? Have you tested how your film responds to over/under exposure for your normal development?

I do not do endless meaningless testing. I am not interested in the detailed chemistry even though I have a background in organic, inorganic and biochemistry. I have learned over six decades that I can get great results shooting box speed and normal development. The chart is a starting place for someone interested in a developer with their film of choice based on their own interest in grain, sharpness, and shadow detail. If one does not like the results of the development, they can vary the development time or choose another developer. If one wants fine grain and a staining developer than they should consider one of the pyro developers.

 

[Jarin Blaschke]

And what do you consider Hard Light 8 stops, 10 stops? would it require compensating development or would normal be ok as long as you do not expect too much shadow detail? Have you tested how your film responds to over/under exposure for your normal development?

Just for clarity, “hard” light or “soft light” has nothing to do with brightness range.

J

 

[DREW WILEY]

TMax 100 has very fine grain and tremendous capacity for detail, but often fails to look sharp due to poor edge acutance. TMax 400, which does have excellent edge effect, can actually look sharper up to a certain degree of magnification. Lots of variables. Surprisingly, even the edges of details enlarged from 120 Delta 3200 can look crisp, even when grain itself is quite apparent.

 

[Jarin Blaschke]

TMax 100 has very fine grain and tremendous capacity for detail, but often fails to look sharp due to poor edge acutance. TMax 400, which does have excellent edge effect, can actually look sharper up to a certain degree of magnification. Lots of variables. Surprisingly, even the edges of details enlarged from 120 Delta 3200 can look crisp, even when grain itself is quite apparent.

Drew:

What developer/s are you using to arrive at these observations?

J