what is the last thing you developed or printed

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Two rolls of Fuji Neopan 1600 in Harvey's Panthermic 777 (only one roll of this beautiful film left now).
Along with it three rolls of Kodak Tri-X 35mm, and one roll of Ilford HP5+ 35mm.
Two rolls of Fuji Acros 120 in good old D76.
Two rolls of Ilford Delta 3200 120 (EI 800) in TMax developer (first time using this developer, and it reminds me a lot of Ilfotec DD-X).
Two rolls of Fuji Reala 35mm and three rolls of Fuji 800 NPZ 35mm in home C-41.
Lots of film...

 

[removed account4]

48 sheets of 4x5 film
various brands/speeds
( forte/kodak )
split and back
sumatranol / ansco 130
processed all at the same time in a tray

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

I got married recently over a month ago and I photographed my wife's wedding bouquet. Processed the film a few weeks back and over the weekend, I was able to do a 5x7 contact print. I was shot on an Ansco 5x7 camera with a 330mm BL Petzval lens. I got some amazing results with Fuji HRT xray film souped in XTOL.

 

[frank]

This afternoon.

 

[Nige]

48 sheets of 4x5 film
sumatranol / ansco 130
processed all at the same time in a tray

the mind boggles!

development time?

I recently did 28 sheets over a week.. 4 per day! (2 taco's per tank) reusing the 900ml of 1:1 diluted XTOL for the second tank in the interests of economy and planet conversation

 

[nosmok]

A roll of Panatomic-X that expired in 1958, shot this past Saturday. Exposed it for 20asa, it did fine in Caffenol C for 7 minutes. My film handling, not so much. 828 is half the thickness of regular 135, I beat it up pretty good getting it threaded on a metal reel after failing utterly on a Paterson style plastic. As a result, a few backing spots failed to clear, ruining some shots. One of those mixed days-- it's a miracle this analog stuff lasts for so long/ if I had shot digital I wouldn't have these problems.

Any tips on film handling for all-thumbs me? Even a lot of practice on metal reels doesn't stop me from botching up reels when it counts. I'm better on 120, maybe I should stick to that.

--nosmok

 

[frank]

A roll of Panatomic-X that expired in 1958, shot this past Saturday. Exposed it for 20asa, it did fine in Caffenol C for 7 minutes. My film handling, not so much. 828 is half the thickness of regular 135, I beat it up pretty good getting it threaded on a metal reel after failing utterly on a Paterson style plastic. As a result, a few backing spots failed to clear, ruining some shots. One of those mixed days-- it's a miracle this analog stuff lasts for so long/ if I had shot digital I wouldn't have these problems.

Any tips on film handling for all-thumbs me? Even a lot of practice on metal reels doesn't stop me from botching up reels when it counts. I'm better on 120, maybe I should stick to that.

--nosmok

Try plastic reels.

 

[StoneNYC]

6 sheets Ilford WT Gloss
4 sheets Ilford CT Gloss

 

[Bill Burk]

I got married recently over a month ago and I photographed my wife's wedding bouquet. Processed the film a few weeks back and over the weekend, I was able to do a 5x7 contact print. I was shot on an Ansco 5x7 camera with a 330mm BL Petzval lens. I got some amazing results with Fuji HRT xray film souped in XTOL.

View attachment 96852

Congratulations!

And the bouquet shot is beautiful, it looks great as a contact print! I think you will cherish it many years from now.

 

[MrBrowning]

A roll of Tri-x, 2 Rolls Shanghai 100,a roll of Copex Rapid, a roll of Rollei Retro 80's and a couple of test sheets of Kodalith that I shot in my 4x5. All developed in TFX-2. The Tri-x was developed withagitation every 3 minutes, and the Shanghai / Retro 80s was developed semi-stand for 40 minutes. The Copex was developed Semi-Stand in Tmax dev (negs look a little thin). For the Kodalith I tried Technidol and and then for some reason I used the TFX-2 that I had mixed for stand. Can't wait for everything to dry so I can have a good look. Both developers are new to me and so far I'm happy with the results.

 

[sagai]

19 frames ( ) of Ilford Pan 400

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

A roll of Panatomic-X that expired in 1958, shot this past Saturday. Exposed it for 20asa, it did fine in Caffenol C for 7 minutes. My film handling, not so much. 828 is half the thickness of regular 135, I beat it up pretty good getting it threaded on a metal reel after failing utterly on a Paterson style plastic. As a result, a few backing spots failed to clear, ruining some shots. One of those mixed days-- it's a miracle this analog stuff lasts for so long/ if I had shot digital I wouldn't have these problems.

Any tips on film handling for all-thumbs me? Even a lot of practice on metal reels doesn't stop me from botching up reels when it counts. I'm better on 120, maybe I should stick to that.

--nosmok

The Hewes 35mm stainless reels are so easy to load it's almost silly. The first time I used them I got it correct right away. Haven't kinked a single roll since. They are expensive, but so worth it.

 

[analoguey]

Made a set of work prints today - first enlargements, from the earliest negatives(35mm) I shot as an adult. Learnt a couple of things - need for grain magnifier and also on focusing. Had an 'a-ha' moment as well.
Have to get my notes done and make full prints now!
And Delta100 is such a fantastic film! Even when shot indoors and low-light!

Sent from Tap-a-talk

 

[Oscar Carlsson]

I instructed two people in how to develop film (D-76, keeping it simple) today, and all rolls came out without issues. One of the visitors had been given his granddads old Rolleiflex...f2.8. Damn.

Then I developed a roll of RPX 400 (taken with my Texas Leica, Fuji GW690III) in HC-110, 5 minutes. The negs are for a small monthly challenge in another forum I'm a regular visitor of. Printing will be done on Friday.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

Thanks!

Congratulations!

And the bouquet shot is beautiful, it looks great as a contact print! I think you will cherish it many years from now.

Thanks Bill. This is the first time doing large neg contact print. My enlarger only enlarges up to 4x5. But I was thinking of Ed Weston when I was working on them. It's just so simple in terms of gear and technology, but still challenges me like making an enlargement. Still have to dodge and burn.

 

[StoneNYC]

5 sheets of 5x7
4 sheets of 11x14 tests for a 16x20 commissioned print off a 4x5 negative. Looking good!

 

[Wayne]

8 4x5 color negatives and one roll of 35mm color negatives. A couple of RA-4 prints.

 

[RattyMouse]

3 rolls of HP5+, 1 roll of Delta 3200, all 120 size.

 

[darkosaric]

I developed one Kentmere 400 and one Polypan F: since I was lazy I have put them together in Rodinal 1+100 for one hour, it went ok .

 

[pdeeh]

Another roll of my 60+ year old nitrate "120" in D23.

 

[baachitraka]

Two rolls of Premium Arista 400 in Rodinal 1+50 for 11 minutes. Negatives are awesome.

Another four more to go...

 

[analoguey]

Another batch of RC 8x10s with enlargements from 35mm and 120 negatives.

Sent from Tap-a-talk

 

[Newt_on_Swings]

A few sheets of 5x7 printer from negatives found while cleaning up my grandfathers apartment of my mother and brother. A few sheets of 11x14 from 4x5 negs taken this past summer at Coney Island.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

I made six 11x14 prints, two different negatives and three prints from each. One I made on my last remaining stock of matte Ilford MGIV fiber matte, and the other I made on the new MG Classic fiber matte. It's like two completely different papers! The contrast is completely different, and while I like the old MGIV, the shadow separation of the new paper is clearly superior, for better or worse. I kind of like the 'mystery' the old paper's shadows leant.

But the craziest difference laid in how the papers tone. Holy peppers. The new paper is MUCH more prone to take both selenium and sulfide toners. I toned both papers, using Moersch MT-3 vario sulfide toner, and with two minute bleach at 1:100 dilution using MGIV, and one minute bleach using Classic, the Classic toned MUCH more readily. Then I dunked them in Harman selenium toner at 1:7 or 1:8, and the MGIV in usual manner showed small and gradual tone accumulation from the shadows up. After two minutes I had a very nicely toned print. The Classic just exploded with color, and I was lucky I was printing a picture that did well in that type of color. With a portrait I would have been 100% disappointed. So some experimentation is definitely warranted moving forward, to get the paper to tone the way I like it.

Then I also made two 8x10 prints, also on MGIV fiber matte, with a negative that had vexed me for a couple of printing sessions. I was finally able to make it work, which was very happy making!

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Made six more prints last night, of three different negatives. Printed 8x8" on 11x14" Ilford Multigrade Warmtone fiber semimatte, one picture from my 'Woods' series, and another one that was a 6x6 pinhole negative. Way fun, and I'm feeling like I'm really in the zone, churning out good prints.

Then I made one 5x5" print on 8x10" Ilford MGIV matte fiber of my grandfather, who passed away two weeks ago. My family back in Sweden has requested copies, so I made the test print last night. Today I hope to be making the 30 or so copies with the instructions I wrote down yesterday. It'll be a lot of work, but hopefully worth it to everybody.