So, um, how well can you push Plus-X? (Did I ever screw up!)

I have an OM-1. I had just finished off a roll of Fuji Neopan 1600, and threw

the camera in the car and went off to the restaurant. When we got there, I

loaded a roll of Plus-X and, you bet, I forgot to set the ISO speed dial because

my sister from North Carolina was up visiting and I wasn't really paying

attention to what I was doing.

 

I normally bring my light meter because I've been having a lot of fun with it

but I was already carrying four cameras and I didn't want to carry a light meter

too (20D because I was going to be shooting in a dim restaurant, OM-1 for

walking to the restaurant, CoolPix 4500 that I grabbed so my sister could take

pictures, and my XA because I always carry it with me.)

 

I shot half a roll that way. Now, I think I managed to shoot the first few

frames by using the sunny/16 rule (actually cloudy/8) but I was probably all

over the place and I eventually started using the meter. So half my roll was

shot at an EI somewhere between 125 and 1600.

 

I feel silly even asking this but is there some compromise development settings

I could use to try to save as much of this roll as I can? Keep in mind I

currently scan negs as I don't have a darkroom, but I aspire to set up a

darkroom some day. I have Ilfotec DD-X, Caffinol and Technidol at my disposal.

I'll consider purchasing and using any other developer at this point. Would

Diafine work?

 

Did I mention that the Plus-X is 6 years past its expiration date? My friend

Bob kept it in his fridge, mostly.

 

These are priceless negs and I'd do anything to save them blah blah blah.

(Don't ask why I loaded my camera with 6 year old plus-x to shoot priceless negs

when I had perfectly good HP5 with me, because even I don't know the answer to

that!)

 

Oh, and what EI should I shoot the rest of the roll at?

 

Thanks, and I hope you're having a laugh at my expense. Plus-X at ISO 1600! Yeesh.

Don't worry about it buddy; this is what you do. You take your developer, whatever it may be, and develop at its strongest dilution for 30 minutes.

 

I don't know which developers you're using but here is a couple of examples:

 

D-76 1:0 (stock) at 30 minutes

Rodinal 1:25 at 30 minutes.

 

You get the picture; the strongest dilution at 30 minutes.

 

And develop at 75 degrees F., with aggressive agitation. (like 30 seconds a minute.)

 

 

If that doesn't produce images, from 125iso film EI at 1600, I don't know what will.

If these are, "priceless images," who cares what you shoot the rest of the roll at. It is the images you already took that need salvaging.

 

but if you insist on an answer, set your ISO at 1000 for the rest of the roll.

Wrong answer x 2. The rest of your roll is for clip tests.

 

You know you underexposed the first half of the roll by anywhere between zero and 3.7 stops. For your clip tests, find a test subject of normal contrast range, and make test exposures at EI125 (i) normally, (ii) underexposed two stops, and (iii) underexposed four stops. Then repeat the same sequence in sets of three frames, until the end of the roll. (Make a note of the exposure you gave the last frame).

 

Cut off an 11cm length of film from the taped end of the roll and develop it. I don't know what would be the best compromise developer, because I have never underexposed like this, but I'd guess 2.5 times my usual developing time for starts. (Someone with some expertise will have better suggestions.)

 

After fixing and rinsing, have a look, and decide which direction to go. Then try another clip test with the next 11cm. When you've come up with your best estimate of developing conditions, load the important half of the roll on your reel, cross your fingers, and go for it.

I'm sorry to be the one to tell you this, but Plus-X doesn't push very well. Truth be told, I

doubt you'd get anything in the way of a useable image from something that's 5 stops

underexposed, let alone Plus-X. Shoot the rest of the roll normally, and chalk up the mistake

to just that.

You under - exposed your film by five stops. now you need to give it a whole lot of extra development.

Frank (fortunately) and Dave (unfortunately) are right. If Frank's technique seems too time-consuming read the official DD-X and Plus-X documentation carefully and developing for 500ASA at 20?C/68?F might be the second best technique. That's less than 2 stops under for some probably already contrasty scenes. 2 stops under is manageable for a print/scan. I regularly push FP4+ to 250ASA - gorgeous prints, just no zone II. Overdeveloped negs neither work for prints nor scans.

Don't worry much about the 6 years. OK, fog will be a bit higher. Maybe about as high as any bw film fog was in the 70ies. So what?

And yeah, get your film use strategies straight.

I think I talk for everybody when I say that we hope our Caesar Augustus starts taking his medication again ASAP.

Good luck (developing, finding those eggs, and all)

Pete

I'd use GSD-10 and develop for 2 hours @1:20. What the hell is GSD-10, you might ask? It's an unknown developer based on glycin which is more shrouded in myth and mystery and more difficult to obtain than pyro, and formulated for the near mystical technique of stand development in a bathroom by a guy with no credentials or training in chemistry who seems to have vanished from the face of the earth. There is almost no specific information for development times for specific films, and almost no one has ever used it, but based on my experience with many developers over many years, I would trust precious but massively underexposed film to nothing else. I don't know if it could save your PlusX, but what it does for TMY-2 @ 1600 makes the hairs on the back of my neck stand up.

Hmm, I like the idea of the clip tests. And obviously if I don't have any usable images in the first half of the roll I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

 

One question though. Wouldn't any exposed image in severely underexposed film be developed fairly quickly? I mean, if the film is severely underexposed, only a scant handful of silver grains are going to be chemically changed by the light -- so why wouldn't those develop quickly? What's the use in having it hang out in the developer for so long?

John, unlike photo paper, film is not normally developed to completeion, but halted when the target contrast is acheived. By developing for an extended period the film can be completely developed, or, developed as completely as possible, which can sometimes salvage printable images from severely underexposed films. The downside of development to completion, or gamma infinity, is very high contrast. Ideally, the low values will continue to develop after the high values have exhausted the available developer, producing more shadow detail and less contrast. Stand development in a dilute developer works on this principle, and two bath developers like Diafine work on a similar principle, but by a different mechanism.

Caesar, see that little pen next to Franks name? That means he's a well respected member here. Why the attitude? His advice is right on and I thought he was rather polite about it. Decent images from that film is a pipe dream. We all make mistakes, chalk it up as a learning experience.

Caesar, see that little pen next to Franks name? That means he's a well respected member here. Why the attitude? His advice is right on and I thought he was rather polite about it. Decent images from that film is a pipe dream. We all make mistakes, chalk it up as a learning experience.

Strange double post...completely unintentional

Your frustration is showing.

There's a lot of us out here who are tough to read if you've not got a lot of experience.

But with very few exceptions we're all here to help one another. I myself have learned a

great deal from the old timers here. Ease up please and be as polite as you expect us all

to be.

 

Mr. Wilson.

I'm sure you'll get past this mistake. It is as some are saying, probably not salvageable.

From here all that I can advise is to learn from the mistake. Though some find it an

amateurish read, I recommend Michael Langsford's Darkroom Handbook published by

Knopf. Even if you don't have a darkroom it is good to know what's going on in there.

Good luck!

A

Diafine will give you about 400 with Plus-x that is pushing it too ...pun intended.

Try Acufine. I'll see if I can get times for you.

massive Dev chart has times for xtol at 1000ISO - never tried it, but somebody somewhere has......

Sorry, the MDC only goes up to a 1-stop push for Plus X in Acufine. Can't help you.

Run a clip test in something. I would try diXactol ultra to start. Run it normal and that will give you somewhere to start witrh the rest. Don't pay attention to the guys that insist they know the exact answer, they don't. There is no exact answer in photography.

Not sure about Plus-X - it was my understanding it doesn't push well.

<p>

However, for Tri-X, I've heard of extreme pushing with Rodinal using semi-stand development, such as <a href="http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4441">this</a> - Tri-x at 12,800 ISO, Rodinal 1:50 for 51 min, agitation every 5 min.

<p>

No idea if something like this will work for Plus-X, though - might try it in a clip test if you have Rodinal but none of the others mentioned.

This is a roll of fp4 at 800ISO. Rodinal 1:50 for thirty mintutes.

 

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2112/2172816842_be00d2edbf_o.jpg