How can pushing work in really dark scenes?

<p>I pushed my first rolls of Tri-x 400 film for thanksgiving. I rated it as a 1600 film, and developed it at 65 degrees for 15 minutes. <br>

Almost the entire roll had no details in the shadows or midtones, but highlights (details through the windows, highlighted faces) were lustrous and clear. <br>

This leaves me with a question - if pushing is effectively underexposing and overdeveloping a negative, is it humanly possibly to properly expose those dark, indoor overcast days if there are no highlights in a scene? Overdeveloping ensures that highlights are retrievable, but the shadows are determined by exposure. <br>

Clearly I would have to change the exposure to get indoor shots, but pushing will only underexposue the neg and lose the shadow detail...so dont I need some highlights for pushing to actually work? </p>

 

<p>Many situations are hard to meter, and so darker than you think.</p>

<p>Kodak recommends no additional development for 800, believing it has enough latitude to do that. Point your spot meter into the shadows to see how dark they really are. Then set your meter to EI 1600.</p>

<p>Otherwise, try printing the negatives at grade 4 (paper or VC filter) and see what comes out.</p>

<p>Thanks glen. I also used D76, which I heard, for some reason, isnt that great for pushing? It sort proves the maxim that you should try anything radical on anything important. And thus my family thanksgiving pics turned into mush! </p>

<p>65 degrees is pretty cool for developing. If you used D76 straight the time I use is 9.5 to 10 minutes for 1600 and 14 minutes for 1-1. at 20C or 68F.</p>

<p>Sounds like you have a metering/exposure issue rather than a development issue.<br /><br />One of the maxims of B&W photography is to exposure for the shadows and let the highlights fall where they may. Highlights don't quickly "burn out" the way they do with slide film or digital, and you can always burn them in if they're a couple of stops overexposed. But underexposed shadow detail is information that never got recorded on the film.<br /><br />So, regardless of whether you're pushing film or using it at box speed, meter the shadows and base your exposure on that, at least when shadows dominate the scene. There are execptions of course; as you build up experience, you'll know more what to do in specific situations.<br /><br />As for developing, I've used D-76 for 90 percent of my developing over 40 years whether pushing or not. But I usually run it at 72-75F, never at 65. If there are any advantages to a lower temperature, I haven't seen them.</p>

Pushing, extended development, works on the highlights but not on the shadows. Extended development has no effect on the shadows. If you underexpose the shadows, extended development will not change them at all. If you have highlights, extended development will raise the highlights, the shadows will stay where they are. If you don't have any highlights, there are no highlights to be effected and the shadows stay where they are.

 

Expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights.

<p>Thank you all! I am sure this information will be useful for my next series of pushing film - I will have to push my Xmas photos as well, but I will practice before hand this time :)<br /> I used a 1+1 dilution of D76, which I always do. I use that particular dilution because I hear that it has a "compensating effect" which lowers the contrast of the image, and I usually shoot high contrast scenes and that squishes the image back into place. I have not yet deviated from that dilution for any purposes. <br /> It seems abundantly clear that the lower temperatures are not helping, and I will experiment at 68 for 14 minutes, combined with getting a better exposure...I set my ISO to 1600 and used center weighted metering on subjects in front of me.<br /> BUT the confusing thing is that the outside shots look normal - but the inside shots..oh no! Attached are the proofs.<br /> Any more help or insight is greatly appreciated !<br /> <img src="/photo/18136396" alt="" /><img src="/photo/18136395" alt="" /></p>

<p>http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/f4017/f4017.pdf</p>

<p>says 11.25min for D76 stock, and 14.75min for 1:1. at EI 1600. This is for newer than 2007 Tri-X, there is a different page for old.</p>

<p>Pushing does have some effect on the not-so-dark shadows, the graphs are in the above PDF, but mush less than the highlights. Anything that is really black will stay black with any exposure. What exposure did you use?</p>

<p>For many scenes that you want to push, it is easy to fool the light meter. If a light bulb is in the frame, it can easily affect the meter reading. </p>

<p>In many dark situations you have very few shadows to worry about and the subject is mostly in the brighter end of the lighting. There are Compensating developers like Acufine and Diafine along with Xtol that is seasoned that will help here but if it was never recorded it can't be seen. </p>

<p> I have pushed film many stops in my life some years ago in the 70's that held up in court because they showed the person in the act of a crime or even in the area. Street signs were readable. </p>

 

<p > Glenn and Larry, </p>

<p >I know I was shooting mostly at f2 and 30, sometimes 60 in dimly lit indoors. MAYBE once I shot at f2 and 15. Theres a smattering of pictures that turned out ok, but most were faces of shadows!</p>

<p >Also - It is a good point that meters dont work very well in low light - and I forgot that!</p>

<p >Plus, everything I shot outside of the home was fine- high contrast, but midtones, shadows, and highlights were plainly visible. </p>

<p >What is extra worrisome is that, indeed, pictures with a spare kitchen light or outdoor window do seem to be much darker. I think I made a noob mistake, and that exposure is the issue.... </p>

<p >I guess thats the issue..because according to your pdf dev times were acceptable. </p>

<p>But in some scenes with only milky darkness, Im getting jet back shadow and a lot of grain (see pic below). This was taken at night indoors...<br>

<a href="/photo/18136417&size=lg">http://www.photo.net/photo/18136417&size=lg</a><br /><br /><br>

And Btw Larry thats awesome. You were a crime scene photographer? </p>

<p> </p><div></div>

<p>Btw that pic was very much edited in light room so as to be usable...thanks all!</p>

<p> Yes I was and learned a few things in those days. And yes that shot was very underexposed but saved.. you showed there.. low light photography is not a on shot roll. You have to understand and try. 65 is way to cool for D-76 in my opinion. </p>

<p>Push-processing is most effective with scenes which is dimly lit AND low contrast. If you meter a scene which is dim but has a normal brightness range, push-processing will get you excess contrast - to prevent highlights from blocking up, you will need to bias exposure towards the highlights rather than the shadows. Old-time press photographers would meter the highlights in low-light situations, give 2 stops more exposure and let the shadows fall where they may. You may be interested to read about stand development, which is a recognised technique for taming contrast during push processing and basically consists of giving little or no agitation for much of the film development time so that development by-products restrain highlight density while allowing shadow detail to continue to build. </p>

<p>Many situations are hard to meter, and so darker than you think.<br /><br />However - You don't want to meter it as if it was a normal 18% daylight scene which is what the meter will try to compensate for.<br /><br />In most cases, you actually want it to look dark, so a stop or two less than the suggested exposure would be closer to correct.</p>

<p>I very much like the available light look.</p>

<p>For subjects that aren't moving, or aren't moving much, I will often handhold down 15 or 8, especially with a 35mm lens. If I can find something to brace myself, or even the camera,<br /> such as setting the camera down on a table, or against a wall, even better.<br>

The the usual, hold your breath, press the shutter release as carefully and slowly as you can.</p>

<p>But then my favorite Tri-X developer has been Diafine for 47 years, which specifies EI 1200 or 1600. I did lots of available light yearbook photography in 7th and 8th grade with Tri-X and Diafine. </p>

<p>set meter to 1600 then exposure compensation to +2... develop normally :-)</p>