Fuji Acros in D76 1:1. Overexposed negatives

Discussion in 'Black and White' started by jack_the_hat, Sep 5, 2011.

  1. Hi,
    I ran a couple of rolls of Acros through a newly acquired Canon AE-1 Program and developed the negs last night in D76 1:1. Unfortunately most of the shots look overexposed. At first I thought it was the camera at fault but I have checked its meter readings against a few of my other cameras and it seems to tally up OK. I also thought it may have been due to the lens aperture not closing down properly but I used 5 different lenses so it can't be that.
    Anyway, I am now thinking it may have been my developing technique. This is the first time I have used Acros. I know my developing solution is good and I followed the Acros data sheet to the letter. I developed in D76 1:1 at 20 celcius for 10.5 minutes. Continuous agitation for the first minute followed by 5 seconds every minute.
    Any ideas what the problem could be? I suppose I could run a slide film through my camera to rule out the camera's meter once and for all.
     
  2. Shutter speeds may be off.
     
  3. Thanks Larry, yeah that's about the only thing I can think of. Strange thing is that this camera is in the best condition I have ever seen. It looks like it's just come out of the box and had probably never had a roll through it.
     
  4. Usually if I'm testing a camera I will process a second roll shot in a camera known to have accurate shutter speeds as a control. I just do both rolls in tank at same time. Sometimes, it's not shutter speeds, but differences in metering patterns can also cause negatives to be dense or thin.
     
  5. Good idea Mike. Like I said, I think the only sure way to test this camera's meter is to put a roll of E6 through it. Such a pain.
     
  6. lwg

    lwg

    You could also test the shutter speeds. There are instructions on this site and others to use a microphone and some sound editing software. I use a calumet shutter speed tester since I own it, but I wouldn't go and buy a new one if it dies.
    http://www.photo.net/large-format-photography-forum/0044cW
    http://www.flickr.com/groups/largeformat/discuss/72157624689242495/
     
  7. Could aso be a sticky shutter mechanism. If the edge markings are not over-developed, but the images are, then it is a camera problem. If both are over-developed/exposed, then it is a processing problem. D76 and Acros tend to make the negatives a little dense, so check the edge markings.
     
  8. You could also test the shutter speeds.​
    Whoah, that's ingenious (but I don't have the time or patience for those methods). Nevertheless, very interesting.
    Could aso be a sticky shutter mechanism. If the edge markings are not over-developed, but the images are, then it is a camera problem. If both are over-developed/exposed, then it is a processing problem. D76 and Acros tend to make the negatives a little dense, so check the edge markings.​
    Thanks Michael. Stupid question... how do I know if the edge markings are over-exposed? If they were underexposed they would be faint but over-exposed would just make the text and numbers darker and even easier to read wouldn't it? The markings on my two films look nice and black and are very clear.
     
  9. Jack, have you tried printing or scanning the negs? I've only ever used Acros a couple of times and I developed mine in Rodinal. I was struck by how dark the negs looked but they printed perfectly.
     
  10. Hi Paul,
    Yes, I've scanned in all 72 frames and managed to salvage 99% of them. It could well be just the nature of Acros. Looks like I have a lot of testing to do. I have a roll of my favourite Tri-X in the same camera at the moment. If that comes out fine then it's got to be Acros that's giving me the trouble.
     
  11. When I use Acros it looks normal to me. If I did not read the edge I would knot know at a glance it from Tri-X.
     
  12. Thanks Larry. I'm going to finish this roll of Tri-X and see what happens. If it also looks dodgy I will have to send the camera in for repair.
     
  13. Jack, when this happened to me it was a sticky iris. The proof was that shots taken wide open were properly exposed, the shots stopped down were over-exposed. A look into the lens while dry-firing confirmed the problem.
    Good luck with the camera.
     
  14. Before sending it out for repair, try cycling the shutter a couple hundred times and see if it limbers up. Then test again.
     
  15. I thought about that but I have said it so many times I quit saying it..... I have fixed so many dead cameras with exercise it is not funny.
     
  16. Before I send it off for repair, I'd just run a roll of slide film through it. Much easier and cheaper.
     
  17. are you sure its over exposed (denser shadows) not over development (denser highlights)..? one probably notices the 2nd one by eye.
    dark shadows grey highlights....underexposed underdeveloped
    acceptable shadow grey highlights.. exposed well under developed
    bright shadows and off white highlights...over exposed developed good
    bright shadows and too bright highlights...too much for both
    agitation is fine. havent used the film, it could look dense to the eye and print/scan perfect like someone said.
     
  18. I was tempted to suggest the 'sticky diaphragm' problem too, but since you used 5 different lenses that seems unlikely.
    Another possibility - if the mirror damper foam has turned to gloop ,it may hang up the action somewhat.
    That process time seems a bit generous too, for Acros. Try a 25% reduction in duration.
     
  19. Jack, when this happened to me it was a sticky iris. The proof was that shots taken wide open were properly exposed, the shots stopped down were over-exposed. A look into the lens while dry-firing confirmed the problem.
    Good luck with the camera.​
    Thanks, but these two rolls were shot using 5 different lenses. Like you, my initial thought was a sticky aperture.
    Before sending it out for repair, try cycling the shutter a couple hundred times and see if it limbers up. Then test again.​
    Already done that. Not sure if it is actually the shutter at fault but I cycled it alot before shooting the last roll of Acros.
    are you sure its over exposed (denser shadows) not over development (denser highlights)..? one probably notices the 2nd one by eye.
    dark shadows grey highlights....underexposed underdeveloped
    acceptable shadow grey highlights.. exposed well under developed
    bright shadows and off white highlights...over exposed developed good
    bright shadows and too bright highlights...too much for both
    agitation is fine. havent used the film, it could look dense to the eye and print/scan perfect like someone said.
    Now I'm really confused. Looking at the negs the highlights are very black, the blacks and dark shadows look grey (normally these dark areas are very bright on my negatives).
     
  20. I think we may be tending toward a conclusion here - a bright shadow on a negative means "I will print as a hard black,with no detail".
    A very black highlight will print as "close to,or the same as, white".
    This is not normally desirable - as Mr Hat describes -"over exposed,and overdeveloped too ".
     
  21. I was tempted to suggest the 'sticky diaphragm' problem too, but since you used 5 different lenses that seems unlikely.
    Another possibility - if the mirror damper foam has turned to gloop ,it may hang up the action somewhat.
    That process time seems a bit generous too, for Acros. Try a 25% reduction in duration.​
    Already checked the mirror foam damper. It's in pristine condition just like the rest of the camera. The thing really is like new, quite remarkable in fact.
    The developing process I used was exactly as recommended on the official Fuji data sheet, not sure if it's normal for people to use as much as a 25% reduction in duration. Worth a try though if I can prove the camera isn't at fault.
     
  22. You need to run a camera test for personal IE. Start by shooting the same subject under the same lighting at one full stop over exposed, then move to box speed by 1/3 stop increments, and end up one stop under exposed by 1/3 stop increments. Develope as you normally would. The frame that suits your expectations is the speed you need to shoot that film. Keep a record of that and shoot all your Acros at that speed.
     
  23. Without seeing a good scan, I think we are making a lot of assumptions about a sticky shutter, etc.
    My own personal experience with Acros (which I love) in D-76 is that it tends to be contrasty with stock or 1:1. I think Acros performs better in compensating developers, such as D-76 1:3 or dilute Rodinal (I like the 1:100 recipe in the MDC).
    Before I would do anything drastic, I would first try running one or two test rolls of Acros in a compensating developer. I'd take a variety of different scenes (contrasty & non-contrasty), and then bracket exposures +/- 2 stops. I'd verify my thermometer was accurate and also triple-check my concentrations. I might even try different development times (+/- 2 minutes). If the negatives still appear dense, then that might suggest a camera problem.
     
  24. new technology films like Acros tend to have a dark base that needs to be washed out when processing. this could be your "over exposed look". What does the negative area around the frames look like? Is it clear or does it also have a slight purple cast? I'm sure you noticed a purple color when you dumped out the D76. I would not be so quick to blame the camera. Make a print and see how they look. I shoot BW film because I like making BW prints in the darkroom. People who scan negatives seem to say great things about Acros, T-Max and Delta films, but as a dark room printer I find these films to be very problematic. I'm sticking with to HP5, D76 1:1 which produces beautiful prints.
     

Share This Page