Getting pushy

Whilst on holiday I ended up having to push my Fuji Reala 100 to ASA 400

which I have never has to do before. So... I loaded the film normally and then

changed the ISO setting on the camera from ISO100 to ISO400 and then

carried on as normal.

 

Secondly :

When I went into my local photo store who normally send away to a Kodak

lab, they said that the Kodak lab can�t push process and now I have checked

some of the online places which cost about the same (e.g. Dlab7) this seems

to be a norm. 36 glossy prints at 5�x7� normally cost me about 7 GB pounds.

 

I have 4 films, all Fuji 100 (3 are Reala, 1 is Superia) all pushed to ASA400

and I don�t want to pay mega bucks. Additionally, I don�t want to send to a lab

with �digital machines�, I prefer those who print using �optical machines� as I

do not like the grainy finish you get from �digital machines�.

 

So questions are -

Did I push the film properly ?

and

Does anybody know anywhere reputable in the UK who can push process

using �optical machines� that won�t cost in excess of say 10 pounds per roll ?

 

Alternatively you may have other suggestions...

 

Thanks in advance....

Nicholas, you do need a two stop push. And I�m sorry to hear that ones options are diminishing more everyday.

Raising the temperature is supposed to be more advantageous than extending the time. Hearsay only.

I have just discovered the answer to my own question.

 

Apparently, Jessops do a diamond laser service which incorporates

adjustment of contrast, exposure etc. Hence for an extra 1 GB pound for this

service they can effectively "push" my film 2 stops.

 

Apparently their lab machines are all optical as well unless specifically

requested.

 

Anyone know any horror stories trying this out ??

What you did was under exposed two stops,not "pushing".Pushing is extended development.This is commonly done with B&W films & color slide films to some degree.Unfortunately it is almost never done with C41 color negative films.There are several newer films on the market that now claim they can be pushed.(Fuji 800 press film).Send a roll thru normal & see what you get.You might not need pushing.

"<I>Apparently, Jessops do a diamond laser service which incorporates adjustment of contrast, exposure etc. Hence for an extra 1 GB pound for this service they can effectively "push" my film 2 stops. </I>"

 

<P> It sounds to me like they are just adjusting the printing. Your negative will still be two stops underexposed, a very thin negative. Pushing, giving longer development, gets you a close to normally dense negative.

<I>Unfortunately it is almost never done with C41 color negative films</i><P>And Steve Levine never keeps repeating this same line, over, and over, and over, and over again even though we keep telling him to can it. I push C-41 film quite a bit, all the pro labs I work with offer it as a standard service, and Kodak and Fuji promote it on their web-sites. So please, stuff a cork in it.

.....And "diamond laser service" sounds a lot like digital printing to me.<P>How the heck else are you going to "automatically adjust contrast" with an optical printer? Pretty darn good trick with a conventional mini-lab. Maybe it's that new variable contrast RA-4 paper I've been hearing about.

Steve Levine , dec 09, 2003; 02:39 p.m.

"What you did was under exposed two stops,not "pushing".Pushing is extended development. This is commonly done with B&W films & color slide films to some degree. Unfortunately it is almost never done with C41 color negative films."

 

Make that 'fortunately'....

Scott Eaton:

 

Color negative films, unlike reversal films and of course black and white film, perform the color coulping at the same time the image is being developed. In a slide film, the negative is being developed in the first developer and the color development is separate step which is normally left unaltered.

 

The color balance is achieved only at one time and temperature for color development. Changing color development causes crossover and other color distortions. Color negative films should never be pushed for that reason. If you don't understand what color development is, and why it matters, you should read up on it.

The time & temp are "the" time & temp with color negs.This is color sensitometry 101.Your color will almost always end up "off the scale" trying to print pushed C41.If I saw Elvis & JFK with Jim Morrison in a dimly lit place and all I had was ISO 100 film,Id push it.Otherwise forgetaboutit.

For whatever technical and chemical reasons we shouldn�t push film, it works. It may not be as favourable as normal development, but we have a two stop under exposure on this thread, and a two stop push is needed to salvage it.

 

Steve, C41 is pushed frequently, you look at published results repeatedly.

I think we can agree that push development degrades quality, to what degree in which film is a matter of debate.

 

But the guy who asked the question exposed 100 ISO film @ 400 ISO.

 

So should he develop normally and deal with thin negs or push develop 2 stops and and have some density in the negs to work with even though grain, contrast and color will take a hit?

 

In my book this is quite clear: I´d rather have these rolls pushed 2 stops than trying to print a very thin neg with no information in it to work with and that will look more grainy than a pushed neg with better density.

 

And next time have some 400 speed film in your bag.

Glad others think the same about Jessops laser service, I thought

underexposed negatives too but as I am a very inexperienced amateur I

was�nt too sure.

 

If I had known how much trouble C41 push processing was then I would have

gone to the Kelly Tarlton Underwater World / Aucland War Memorial Museum

Shop / Disneyland store and bought some ASA 400. BUT because I had 40

rolls of Reala 100 and I did�nt know how difficult it is to persuade labs to push

process, I did�nt know any better..... Unfortunately the book I read before we

went on holiday says pushing is dead easy, you �just tell the developers

before submitting film for processing�. The book did�nt bother to mention that

most Kodak approved labs (Kodak being the worlds best known

phototographic film and processing company) are not capable or carrying out

a �simple alteration to the development process�.

 

With regard to some posts above I am confused as to whether I am asking for

the right service. Do I need to ask for 2 stop puch processing or not.

 

Surely there must be some UK forum users on this site who know a lab that

can push process without having to spend 20 to 30 GB pounds per roll ?

Just had another thought... rather than paying for hand developing / printing

by a professional, perhaps instead I could get push developing to negs only

plus scanned onto CD. Then I can check which prints are keepers and

chuckers and re-print from negs keepers only. This should save me a bit

presuming that push develop and scan 4 films of 36 will cost say 10 GB

pounds per film.

 

I may even consider buying my own Minolta 6400 neg-scanner which I have

been threatening to do for the past year.

 

Thoughts please......

Basically, the film is a loss.

Kodak films are set up for a specific LAD(laboratory aim density).Extra time in the soup will "skew develope" the upper layers of the film and send the sensitometry off scale in terms of LAD.This doesnt mean that somebody,somewhere cant push C41 & manipulate a decent print out of it.Maybe some drug store minis push C41 for their customers?Most labs catering to "professional shooters only",dont mess with this.Color negative films do have a lot of exposure latitude,mostly on the over exposure side.But depending on the brightness range of the scenes,they can also tolerate 1-2 stops under.(The lower the brightness range,the higher the film's latitude for under exposure errors.)If I were Nicholas,I would send a roll through normal & see what comes out.He will either be pleasantly surprised,or slightly disappointed at grainy dark prints.

A total loss? You're a piece of work Hans.

 

Nicholas, do you know what a troll is? Where in the UK are you? This film may need to be mailed to a major city. It should only cost two or three quid per push. do not take it anywhere for hand processing. And I would post in the Leica Forum, be precise on your wording, don't mention the under exposure, just ask where to get pro services and push processing, other wise, you'll end up creating a thread of arguments by grumpy old men who talk more than they can walk and just sit around trolling everywhere.

�He will either be pleasantly surprised, or slightly disappointed at grainy dark prints.�

 

Grainy dark prints�Well, at least the peanut gallery summed it up for himself.

Now I'm starting to get really pi**ed off.

 

It goes like this :

A pro photographer who, (according to the foreward in the book), used to be

quite senior within a very highly respected photo agency wrote the section in

the book through which I learned about "pushing".

 

I have followed the book instruction to the word, unless of course I have

misunderstood their writing, which is something along the lines of (my

wording is from memory and not exact).... �to push a film simply select the ISO

function on your camera function wheel and change from (in this case

ISO100) the auto selected speed from the film DX code to (in this case

ISO400) the speed at which your film / lens can handle your speed / aperture

requirement�. Then later on...... �make sure you advise the processing

laboratory of the push when arranging processing�.

 

From what some people have posted on this site, the instructions in this book

could quite easilly lead to lawsuits.

 

One of my clients in the USA has now filled me in on what a troll is, although I

am now confused over who is right and who is wrong............

 

I know that I can process and end up with underexposed (by 2 clicks) prints,

but if I can get better prints through doing something else slightly more

expensive.... then surely it makes sense ?

 

By the way, I have found a lab which can do what I believe needs to be done

at what I regard as affordable but I am now really worried that some of my

shots of reasonably special occasions (it's not every day us limeys get to see

Mickey Mouse and Buzz Lightyear) are �donald ducked�. http://www.peak-

imaging.com/

Nicholas, I don�t understand what the confusion is about. You have under exposed your negatives by two stops, in order to achieve workable negs, in my opinion, you have to compensate in your developing time, by extending it. The confusion in this thread is by some people that think you will have better printing results with a thin neg from a normal developing time than with Scott, Bernhard, and myself who know you will have a better result from an extended developing time.

 

I don�t know what book you read, but it must have given some advice about loosing quality with pushing film. Like anything in life and the universe, in order to gain something, you must give up something. Most of us have had, meaning without choice, needed to push film for certain situations, and there isn�t a hope in developing hell that we wouldn�t compensate with extending developing time to get a workable neg. Start a new thread with a different subject heading, get more opinions. I put too much time into helping others that don�t get pi**ed off.

If you want to save money then have one roll developed normaly at any lab and no prints made and visually check neg density. If they are fine then you are too. If they are too thin, then you might develop a second roll with a one or 2 stop push.

 

If you want to save as much of the exposures as possible (and pay more money), go to a pro lab and ask for a snip test.

The film is essentially a loss. There is nothing you can do to the film in processing that will improve the situation over basically just processing it normally. You may have some options in scanning and manipulating. You cannot make a silk purse from a sow's ear, and you are dealing with half an ear here.

 

No 100 speed film will tolerate a 2-stop underexposure and come out alive....

 

The situation is different with color slide films, where the color development is a separate step.

Nicholas:

 

The book was probably referring to transparency films. Color negative films CANNOT, bold, underline, italic, be pushed. Not ever, not no way, not no how.

<i>Hans Beckert wrote:<br>

"The film is essentially a loss. There is nothing you can do to the film in processing that will improve the situation over basically just processing it normally. "<br><br>

"Color negative films CANNOT, bold, underline, italic, be pushed. Not ever, not no way, not no how." </i><br><br>

Would anyone be so kind and show this gentleman the way to a pro lab, the staff in there will tell him that push processing is something they do everyday. <br><br>

Or will someone point him to this page on the Kodak website: http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/f2350/f2350.jhtml#007 where one can read: <br><i> T400 CN Film can be rated at higher than normal exposure indexes for photography in dim light or where fast shutter speeds must be maintained. Push processing in Process C-41 results in acceptable negatives from exposure indexes as high as 3200.</I><br><br>

Or what about this: <br><i>KODAK PROFESSIONAL PORTRA 400UC and PORTRA 800 Films are designed so that you can push process them to higher exposure indexes. You can push process PORTRA 400UC Film to an exposure index of 800, and PORTRA 800 film to exposure indexes of 1600 and 3200, and produce negatives that yield good-quality prints.</I><br>from http://www.kodak.com/global/plugins/acrobat/en/service/Zmanuals/z131_03.pdf

<br><br>

If you guys don't believe it now, maybe you should just try it?