Adjacency Effects

I like to shoot monochromatic landscapes and am always trying

to achieve high definition images (good grain sructure, resolving

power, and sharpness). The Adjacency Effect seems to be key

in getting "sharpness." Does anyone have some favorite

film/developer combination that has crated interesting Adjacency

Effects?

Hi Joe,

 

Many people talk fervently about adjacency effects (it is one of Mike's/Hans'/Ladislav's pet pieces of dogma), however, when asked to show microscopic examples of it, like Mike/Hans/Ladislav, they fail. Take a look at this thread:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=001KBr

 

Especially this part of Roger Hicks' post:

 

For more than you ever wanted to know about the effects of agitation, the lack of effects of agitation and the myths and magic involved, see _Controls in Black and White Photography_ by Dr. Richard J. Henry.

 

And this post:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=002Z74

 

Especially the info by Ed Buffaloe.

 

Remember, Hicks and Buffaloe really know their science and testing--whereas I wouldn't trust someone like Ladislav who under several other names (he changes names because he gets kicked off photo.net) refuses to actually post any REAL evidence--however, the dogma is never ending.

 

I process 35mm and 4x5 HP5 (amongst others) in Unicolor rotary drums because I tired of the other methods and really like the consistency you can get. There is no difference between my earlier negs and the newer rotary processed ones. If there is adjacency effects they are much to small to make any visual difference.

 

Personally, I really like 4x5 HP5 in HC110. Read here for some great info:

 

http://covingtoninnovations.com/hc110/index.html

 

I have been shooting Neopan 400 and 1600 and souping in HC110--I'm not sure it is the best for this film--I'm not saying it is bad, I just haven't done enough to know. I have a bottle of DD-X to try next. Interestingly enough, Delta 400 looks great in HC110, but I dislike Delta 3200 in it.

 

But, unlike others, I'm not dogmatic. You can get very good results with most all combinations. What you need to do is find a combo the you find appealing. Get some suggestions, do some tests, and also, go see work in galleries and look for combos you like. I just don't try to test forever... this film/dev work is only a means to making photographs.

There are lots of ways to do this. A slow or mdium speed film helps as does the developer used with it. Efke 25 might be a good one film, but I have not used it due to the large amount of Agfa 25 I still have in the freezer. Lots of folks like APX 100 film. For developers, D-76 diluted 1+3 is one way to go. Rodinal 1+50 or more works for me.

 

And now for something completely different... FP4 in Acutol! All kidding aside, this is a good combo.

Funny how we haven't heard from Hans in a few days?

There's a lot of discussion of edge/adjacency effects with minimal, extreme minimal and stand development on the Azo forum. Apparently Efke PL100 and Pyrocat HD is a favorite combination for the technique. I've never tried it, as I don't think it would suit my work. Good luck.

For some recent experiments and discussion on adjacency effects have a

look at the following two thread on the AZO forum.

 

http://www.michaelandpaula.com/mp/AzoForum/one.asp?ID=3508&PgNo=&

GID=3508&CID=2

 

http://www.michaelandpaula.com/mp/AzoForum/one.asp?ID=3264&PgNo=&

GID=3264&CID=2

 

Sandy King

Here's my experience. It only applies to me, my water, my process, and Ilford FP4+. YMMV. I haven't been able to conclusively demonstrate obvious edge effects even using stand development. I can get them on the negative, but not at contrast levels useful for normal prints. Stand development isn't really suitable for 35mm roll film due to streaking, even with FX2. Agitation every couple minutes may be practical, but I haven't tried it. OTOH, FP4+ and FX2 (or Formulary TFX2) is a high acutance and very good looking combination. Interestingly, I'd rate Rodinal and D-76 1:1 about the same for acutance *if developed to the same contrast*. FX2 is only ever so slightly better, and you can only see it if you shoot the same subject, cut the roll and do a direct comparison. Rodinal, IMHO, is too grainy and doesn't possess any magical properties if compared to other developers at the same C.I. Bottom line- use D-76 1:1 or FX2. Lately I've been experimenting with PPD developers. They can deliver finer grain than anything you've ever seen, but the acutance can be terrible. There may be ways to beat this- more to follow someday. Xtol and Pat Gainer's ascorbate formulas are also very good in the acutance department. IMHO, the film has more to do with acutance than anything. Though it has higher resolution than almost anything, I don't find TMX pleasing for fine detailed landscapes at all. FP4+ probably has lower resolution and coarser grain, but it just looks better to me. BTW, I find the quality of the grain produced by FX2 more pleasing than most other developers, but then, I haven't tried Acutol.

"jim appleyard , apr 01, 2004; 10:34 p.m.<p>

Funny how we haven't heard from Hans in a few days?"<p>

<p>

He was banned by photo.net administration. I didn't ask them to ban him and nobody from photo.net admin consulted me on this decision. Since Hans participated on the Leica and other forums the decision could have been influenced by complaints from any number of moderators or forum participants.<p>

<p>

I suspect he was banned not so much for his behavior under the Hans Beckert moniker as for surreptiously rejoining photo.net after having been banned before as Mike Scarpitti, under which name his behavior was insufferable (including some outrageous allegations of racism in a critique of a photo). As "Hans Beckert" I found his behavior generally more tolerable and his contributions occasionally interesting - at least they challenged the status quo.<p>

<p>

I don't know about any connection between Mike/Hans and Ladislav Lowenstein, III, who was banned almost immediately after joining photo.net this week. I've been busy tending to family matters and, again, no one from photo.net administration consulted me about this matter (not that they're obligated to).<p>

<p>

Frankly, I dislike seeing people banned simply for strongly expressing opinions that differ from the majority. It dilutes the value of the forums by potentially discouraging healthy debate and exchanges of information of, if unproven, at least interesting experimental value.<p>

<p>

I'd prefer to see temporary suspensions used as a means of allowing a cooling off period when site policy has been violated. Unfortunately I have very limited authority in this regard and it's limited strictly to the three B&W forums - I don't have the ability to suspend or ban participants for their behavior on other forums or in the photo critique section.<p>

Try TMax 100 at 50 ASA in Rodinal, 1:50, 20 C, 8.5 minutes (diffuser head). But you might also try a pyrocat/carbonate formulation. Pyrocatechin in carbonate is quite sensitive to bromide restraint so should give good adjacency effects. To maxiumise adjacnecy effects aim for the least amount of agitation while avoiding bromide streamers.

Edge effects are subtle, at best. I�ve even stared at prints by people who tell me what to look for, and I can�t see them.

 

For a high-resolution look, try Beutler�s. You have to mix it yourself, since no one makes it. It even looks good with some high-speed films (APX 400) despite conventional wisdom to the contrary.

Joe, I've never seen "adjacency effects" in my life. I do think that the impression of "sharpness," as mentioned by others here, is enhanced by sharp, tight grain structure, otherwise known as "high acutancy." Highly diluted, and low sulfite developers seem to be the way to go. Recently experimenting with Pat Gainer's simple formulas with vitamin c and no sulfite have convinced me that these are excellent fine grain, high acutance developers.

 

Its been demonstrated many times that a coarser but sharply grained photo "appears" sharper to the eye than a finer grained, "smoother" photo with actually better resolved detail.

 

Also, all things being equal, the bigger the neg, the more detail you get, mainly because you are enlarging the image much less than a smaller negative. So, for maximum resolution make 11x14 contact prints! heh heh

Adjacency effects can range from extreme to very subtle, much like the

unsharp mask feature in Photoshop. But for most kinds of images they should

be very subtle because otherwise they become development artifacts that call

attention to themselves and detract from the pictorial quality of the image. The

objective is to create just enough adjacency effects so that local contrast or

micro-contrast is enhanced and apparent sharpness is increased.

 

Regardless of what anyone else may have written or said about the subject

you will definitely get adjacency effects with stand and very minimal agitation

procedures when used in combination with appropriate developers, i.e. high

dilution non-solvent (low sulfite) types that have a very low amount of reducer

per liter of working solution. Note that most developers designed for 35mm

films are not good candidates for producing adjacency effects because the

requirements of this format are such that solvent type developers are required

to minimize grain size.

 

Sandy King

Adjacency effects are only a part of the approach to high sharpness and detail. Some developers produce pronounced adjacency effects and great sharpness but provide poor tonality (Beutler). Others produce good tonality but offer poor speed or excessive graininess on some films (Rodinal). Others provide good speed but poor sharpness (low acutance) (many Phenidone-based types). For Delta films, FX-39 is a superior product, and for conventional films many have found success with Acutol. Both are Paterson products.

I photographed a light grey card on a dark grey card lit by off camera flash. Films were developed in FX-1 ( 10s/min agitation ) and 16x enlargements of the edge made on grade 3 paper. With Efke KB 50 film no effect was detected but with Tri X 400 a lighter line 1mm wide was just visible on the light grey (border effect).I am also interested to hear of developers giving the effect.

Glycin based developers such as FX-2 have traditionally been recommended

for stand and very minimal agitation development and many people have

reported good success with high dilution solutions of Rodinal. And many

people (see the threads mentioned earlier on the AZO forum and comments

made by Patrick Gainer at apug.org) are getting very good results in terms of

both sharpness and even development with Pyrocat-HD, which seems odd on

the face of it because pyro developers have not traditionally been

recommended for stand development. And even more, Pyrocat-HD contains

in addition to pyrocatechin a small amount of phenidone, which some claim

reduces sharpness. But experience always trumps theory and the proof is in

the pudding as they say.

 

Sandy King

Sorry for error in my previous post.The developer used was actually Tetenal Neofin blue.Havent tried this with FX-1 yet.

OK, but in theory FX-1 should be an excellent candidate for creating

adjacency effects with stand and minimal agitation. It is a very dilute extremely

high definition developer with no sulfite.

 

Personally I would not bother with any of the proprietary name developers

(everything that ends in -ol) since you don't know what they contain and you

really want to avoid sulfite if the objective is to create adjacency effects. As I

mentioned earlier most successful 35mm developers contain sulfite and are

to some degree solvent developers. Solvent developers etch film grain

clusters and create amorphous filaments, both of which generally reduce

sharpness.

 

Sandy King

Sandy:

 

Acutol and FX-39 developers are lilely the sharpest available, proprietary or not.

Hans, are we supposed to guess which old B&W movie your current user name is borrowed from?

This is a real name. Look it uo if you doubt me.

It might be a real name, it just isn't yours.

Heh.

Try FP4 in Acutol. If you have superb results, thnak Mr Crawley, not me...

FP4 in Acutol, eh? I kinda' feel sorry for 'Mike Scarpitti,' having to skulk around with fake

names time and time again.

At least maybe now we'll be spared all of the german he used to insert into his posts. Maybe he'll switch to some slavic dialect.