high contrast developer - I'm talking film + chemicals!

jhob

jhob

Suspended / Banned
Messages
557
Name
John
Edit My Images
Yes
I'm preparing for getting my holga next week and I'm intending on developing the film myself and then scanning the negs in. Now it's been ages since I last developed my own film so I've got a lot of re-learning to do!

I'm planning to shoot mostly with kodak tri-x 400 and I'm looking for a developer that will give me nice high-contrasty results. I'm not worried about losing detail. I'm also looking for alternative film suggestions - I'd like lots of harsh grain and good contrast shooting at ISO400.

Anyone, still with a memory of those old film halcyon days, recommend developer/film that would give me this sort of result?
 
John,

I always use Tmax developer with Tri-X and get very good results. They key to contrast, really, is development time, rather than the developer itself. The longer the development time, the greater the apparent contrast. Try increasing your development time by about 10% over the prescribed time as a starting point.
 
Thanks for the advice, I'll give that a whirl. I'm getting quite excited at playing with film and chemicals again! Might even encourage me to start playing with the OM20 again too.
 
Don't forget if you increase the development you get an increase in effective film speed. With that you get increased grain and, if you take it too far (to finality) an increase in fog, which start to nullify the contrast you were after in the first place... :bang:

How high contrast do you want to go? ID 13 (agreed, an Ilford formula,) will do you a nice lift in contrast..... ;)

Dunno whether you can still buy it but the formula is as follows:

ILFORD ID-13

High contrast film developer for line films
Stock Solution A
Water, 125F/52C 750 ml
Hydroquinone 25 g
Potassium Metabisulfite 25 g
Potassium Bromide 25 g
Cold water to make 1L
Stock Solution B
Cold Water 750 ml
Potassium or Sodium Hydroxide 50 g
Cold water to make 1L

Mixing instructions: Add chemicals in specified sequence. Always use cold water when mixing potassium or sodium hydroxide due to risk of heat reaction.

Dilution: Mix equal parts A + B immediately before use.

Starting point development time: 3 mins.

Notes: Poor keeping qualities. Once A + B are mixed together, use immediately and discard.


Kodak's HC110 is also a very good high contrast developer. The formula is a secret (I'll have to kill once I tell you..... just like Kodak, who've never published it)

I used to love mixing my own from scratch..... those were the (chokey) days!
 
high contrast negs are a pain to scan but a joy to print. Are you going to be doing some printing, too? Go oooon!
 
chuckles said:
Don't forget if you increase the development you get an increase in effective film speed. With that you get increased grain and, if you take it too far (to finality) an increase in fog, which start to nullify the contrast you were after in the first place...
Click to expand...

This is true of push processing, but not when we're talking about a 10% increase in developing time. Increase in grain at +10% is virtually nil, and fog doesn't come into play until your development times are very long.

If you're starting with a very contrasty scene, then increasing the development time can cause the highlights to block up -- but you've already said you're not concerned with losing detail.
 
I may do some printing in time. My Dad doesn't use his darkroom equipment any more so I could nick that, although there's the hassle of blacking out the room and we have a shower room that's more like a cupboard so running water could be a problem. Alternatively I could join the Edinburgh Photographic Society and use their kit. I'd like to develop, will just seem if time allows. I'd also have to re-learn everything as it's been that long since I last did any printing.

As regards detail and blocking up, I actually want to lose detail for the results that I am picturing in my head and I'd like to get as close to the final result as I can before I finish it off digitally.

Can anyone recommend a cheap supplier for darkroom chemicals?
 
Hoodi said:
high contrast negs are a pain to scan but a joy to print. Are you going to be doing some printing, too? Go oooon!
Click to expand...

Why do you find high contrast negs hard to scan?
 
cjnicolai said:
This is true of push processing, but not when we're talking about a 10% increase in developing time. Increase in grain at +10% is virtually nil, and fog doesn't come into play until your development times are very long.

If you're starting with a very contrasty scene, then increasing the development time can cause the highlights to block up -- but you've already said you're not concerned with losing detail.
Click to expand...

Ok - I know nothing! ...... You seem very quick to be dismissive of anything I say and I find it insulting. You're not the only one with photographic knowledge. Everything I said is factually accurate..... :bang:

Everything happens by degree and if you look at my words regarding fog I did state ..... to finality! :shrug:
 
Chuckles, I do not understand why you are so offended, but I'm sorry that I offended you. I did not say that you know nothing and didn't claim that I'm the only one with photographic knowledge. I simply added to some of the statements you made, and as you say, everything I said is factually accurate.

I realize everything happens by degree. I was merely pointing out that the 10% increase in development time I suggested would not cause the issues you brought up. The issues you raised are definitely a concern with push processing.

As mentioned, I don't understand why my words pushed such a hot button. Certainly wasn't intentional. Just trying to clarify my advise, which, actually, you called into question indirectly. ;)

- CJ
 
Just look at all your posts in threads where I have posted also..... you always have to have the last word, that infers you seem to be the only one with photographic knowledge!

I didn't say you were factually correct (which you are and that is not in dispute) but I said I, me, ego.... was factually correct.

10% increase WILL cause those problems not by much, admittedly, but they will occur. Is not overdeveloping actually raising sensitivity of the film rating but just giving it a different title/name......? Push-processing is used for underexposure (accidental?) therefore the film sensitivity has been incorrectly rated. What you're talking about here is effectively overexposing which will cause contrast issues, in this case what is required. It doesn't alter the fact ---- increasing development time will increase grain and fog to a lesser or greater degree - ispo-facto! If you over develop a fine grain film by just the 10% you mention will nullify all the advantages the fine grain is supposed to give you ie. grain clumping!

I never called into question your advice at all, why should I if it is accurate? I just got the impression you never noticed I used the term 'finality'.

I understand your knowledge and experience is welcomed and appreciated on this friendly forum but, please, don't lose sight of the fact that others here have it in equal measure also.....
 
Chuckles, I have never "lost sight" of the fact that others on this forum have knowledge in equal measure. In fact, I'm sure there are others who have quite a lot more knowledge than me in several areas. Film photography, and specifically film processing, just happens to be an area that I'm very well versed in, and so I'm answering according to that knowledge. No one is required to agree with me, however I will maintain that I have not treated you or anyone else with any disrespect.

That said, I will respectfully disagree with some of your statements in this most recent post.

Is not overdeveloping actually raising sensitivity of the film rating but just giving it a different title/name......? Push-processing is used for underexposure (accidental?) therefore the film sensitivity has been incorrectly rated.
Click to expand...

First, a 10% increase in development is not necessarily overdeveloping. Manufacturer processing times are a guidelines only, and increased processing times (typically in the range of 10 - 25%) in order to achieve the desired negative density are part of the expected process. Equally, a slight decrease in development time will decrease apparent contrast. In fact, it's a cornerstone of the zone system.

Push processing is a perfectly legitimate and well-used method for handling low light and increasing film speed. It is not a typically accepted bail-out for accidental underexposure. Certainly some will use it as a bail-out (just as some people use photoshop as a bail-out) but that is certainly not all it is intended for.

What you're talking about here is effectively overexposing which will cause contrast issues, in this case what is required
Click to expand...

No, I'm not talking about overexposure. Overexposure happens in the camera. Overdevelopment happens in the processing. I'm talking about neither, actually. I'm talking about a very slight increase in development to slightly increase apparent contrast.

I never called into question your advice at all, why should I if it is accurate? I just got the impression you never noticed I used the term 'finality'.
Click to expand...

Actually, I didn't overlook your use of the term "finality." I merely pointed out that a 10% increase in development time is so far from "finality" as to make it a non-issue in this case.

Again, I'm sorry you feel disrespected. I intended nor implied any disrespect, but rather was simply aiming to give John the detailed information he needs to decide his initial course of action. Nobody is required to agree with me whatsoever.

- CJ
 
I rest my case ..... wonderful last words! You've worked hard to get customers for your workshop ....... I'm sure everyone will get value for money! Well done you..... !
 
Alright, Chuckles, I don't understand the nastiness.

I aim to help out in the areas where I can contribute. You'll notice that I don't post in areas where I do not have helpful knowledge. Those areas would include landscapes, digital color, extensive PS work, motorsports, and much more. Yesterday, I made a post that included a silly technical mistake, and was appropriately corrected.

I'm sorry if by answering questions and presenting a differing opinion and/or range of experiences I have somehow offended you. It is unintentional, as I hope and believe most people who have read my posts can see.

As for your comments about the workshop I'm planning, I neither understand nor want to understand your insinuation.

If you have further issues with me and/or my posts, I'm sure you'll feel free to PM either me or the moderators, so as to not interrupt the peace on this board.

Best regards,

CJ
 
Ok, I guess it must be my imagination..... must go - time for my medication..... :cuckoo:
 
Well, I now at least feel more knowledgeable about developers and developing, thanks!

Just trying to find some t-max developer and tri-x film from the same supplier now for a reasonable price. It's proving harder than imagined.

Once I have the developer I think I should be set up for developing, Ive got a dev tank, lightproof bag and film clips (somewhere). Anything else I've forgotten?
 
Thermometer..... ? Fixer....? Stop bath ....? Wetting agent....? Accurate timer....? Sense of humour!
 
so I use the developer, then empty that from the dev tank and use the fixer? After that dry the film? I thought that stop bath was for making prints? And what's wetting agent?

I'll need to a pick up a thermometer anyway.
 
Ok, my list wasn't in 'processing' order just how the things came out in in mind! :(

Develop, stop, fix and wash......

Stop bath is probably more important for films than in printing. It's an acid bath that counters the alkali developer, so immediately arrests any developing activity. If you have a short(ish) developing time then any 'lingering' of the developer activity will affect the film more ..... percentage increases and all that - in effect, increasing the development (and contrast etc, ;) ).

Pour and store the stop bath. (you can use it again as it's only an acid - you can get indicator stop bath to show, via it's colour, it's continued usability). Rinse the stop bath with water, preferably at the same temperature as all your other chemicals. Then pour in the fixer for the requisite amount of time. Pour and drain the fixer then wash in running water - out of preference. You can buy products such as Speedwash to --ahem-- speed up the washing process. Make certain you wash thoroughly as this will determine the permanency of your negatives and reduces the risks of staining.

Wetting agent.... you can leave this out but it reduces the surface tension of the water allowing the film to dry better... it basically 'thins' the water so it runs off smoothly! It will lessen the effect of 'tear-drops' which tends to occurs more in hard water areas.

You can use a pair of 'film wiper' tongs to speed the drying process but these do have a habit of introducing the opportunity to add scratches.....

HTH
 
LOL. Just the thought of all that messing about leaves me cold now, but yep - it can be loads of fun and it's something everyone should have a go at.
 
One day I would like to dabble with film, especialy medium or large format. I would really want access to a proper darkrom first though.
 
I've not done it for a while now, still have all the stuff .... I even used to mix my own E6 chemicals from scratch ..... well, it saved a bit of money :)

I agree Cedric.... everyone should have a go! Twas fun - I can remember the thrill of watching the images 'magically' appearing on the paper in the water under a red light. Well, I was only about 5! My dad has a lot to answer for....!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top