B&W Film Technic To Get Higher Contrast

[neleen]

In general, what would one do to get higher contrast for B&W MF film?

<br>Film proccessing is standard (not adjested).

<br>Any examples, please?

[jeffrey moore]

Generally speaking, more development=higher contrast.

[alexis_neel]

Actually more agitation will give you more contrast. The general rule is agitation affects contrast, time affects density. Of course the 2 intertwine, but if you have an optimal time already, and you want to increase contrast, just agitate more. With just more time, there comes a point when contrast is actually reduced.

 

Alexis

 

www.alexisneel.com

[janne1]

Maybe you should just keep everything the same and just extend the

development time, simpler this way.

[joe_harrigan]

You can also selenium tone the negs or use chromium intensifier to crank up the contrast of the negs after dev is done. Chromium intensifier will add more contrast then selenium but I don't know if you can get it anymore.

[neleen]

I plan to develop in lab. And probably cannot ask them to do any adjustments to the development proccess.

[richard_ilomaki]

Vlad

 

There is really no such thing as a high or low contrast film, but rather adjustments to processing that can modify the contrast. There are several specialized exceptions to this but most normal photographic films are of this type.

 

Extending the development time or more agitation will increase contrast . Often, the addition of hydroquinone to a developer can increase the contrast. Most professional labs will extend processing time but often for additional charges.

 

Cheers

[rickvivian]

You might like to try using a red filter, Vladimir. In combination with Tri-X film this gives outstanding contrast with standard lab processing.

[lex_jenkins]

I discovered simply through experimentation that stand development of normally exposed Tri-X can boost midrange contrast. (I think some folks call this "microcontrast" but I've never been comfortable with that term since it's also used rather loosely to describe the characteristics of certain lenses.)

 

Expose Tri-X Pan (not Tri-X 320) at EI 200-400 (don't "push" or underexpose it). Mix Rodinal at 1:200 (or is it 1+200? At that dilution I suppose it isn't really critical.). Agitate gently and continuously for 60 seconds. Then simply let the tank sit undisturbed for two hours - no additional agitation. At the end of two hours drain, use stop bath or plain water rinse, fix and finish as usual.

 

I strongly recommend a stainless tank/reel system for this. Plastic reels have higher, square section film guide flanges that can interfere with development and lead to unevenly developed edges.

 

Grain will be more pronounced that with Rodinal at 1:25 or 1:50. But I find the contrast is often more pleasing and shadow detail is retained as long as the exposure is kept at or below the rated ISO.

 

Try it first on a couple of experimental rolls, nothing critical until you've determined whether development is consistent and even.

[neleen]

Thanks you guys for great help on this. I do plan to develop myself, just not in near future...

<br>

So, do I have two options?

<li>Overexpose

<li>Ask lab to add more time to the proccessing?

<p>

If I overexpose:: how much with? with what film?

Thanks!

[ole_tjugen]

If your lab can develop any BW film, they can easily extend development a little. Just about all BW films need different development, it's not like C41 where everything goes through the same machine and the same chemicals at the same speed!

 

But if your lab does use some "magical brew" and gives every film the same treatment, the slower the film the higher the contrast. Try EFKE R25...

 

But like everyone else I'll urge you to get a tank and do your own processing. It costs less than 5 rolls of film, and gives you the results you want (or maybe what you deserv, but in that case you know hwo to blame: The man who did your processing). :)

[troyammons]

What are you looking for ?? Extreme contrast or just a bump. Are you going to scan your negatives or wet print.

 

Beyond what has been mentioned above, try some Arista ortho film for extreme contrast. Its pretty easy to handle and you can use it under a safelight and develop it in dektol. Its really a super thin based film though.

 

Also J+C sells copex copy film and ortho film, I think it is really imagelink, but at any rate its high contrast. You can develop it in spur developer for better tonality.

 

http://jandcphotography.com/

[alexis_neel]

If its a good lab, they will change their agitation for you, provided your run fits into one tank. Extending the dev, maybe 10 to 15%, will help with contrast too, but to get the most contrast during development, agitation is the way to go. It really depends on what you have now, and what you want to get. Without seeing where your negs are now, it is difficult to say exactly.

 

Alexis

 

www.alexisneel.com

[lex_jenkins]

If you don't process your own film or make your own prints your options are limited. You'll have to find a lab that can and will work with you to produce the results you want.

 

During the past 20 years or so I've noticed that most labs tend to overdevelop film slightly and print very flat. So I wouldn't ask them to increase development.

 

However you might ask them to increase contrast during printing. Unless you specify otherwise (and pay more) they're almost certainly using some sort of variable contrast or multigrade RC paper. Chances are they're printing at Grade 2, which in effect means no yellow or magenta filtration. Ask them to print at Grade 3 (increased magenta filtration) and see whether you like the results.

[jay_de_fehr]

Hi Vladimir.

 

Extending development time, increasing agitation, raising processing temp.,increasing developer concentration, or some combination of the above will increase contrast. Try to ignore confusing advice like:

 

..."if you have an optimal time already, and you want to increase contrast, just agitate more."

 

Clearly, if your development time was optimal, you wouldn't need to increase contrast. Also keep in mind that as contrast is increased, so is film speed. If large adjustments to development time are made, it might be beneficial to reduce exposure, otherwise you might just push the low values up the curve, and limit the useful density range of your negatives, pushing your high values onto the curve's shoulder, where they'll be compressed and lack contrast.

 

Another option that relates to existing negatives, is to print them on a higher grade of paper, or increase contrast in printing with filtration and VC paper. If your negatives show detail throughout their range, this is a viable remedy. If your low contrast negatives also show a lack of shadow detail, then you've underexposed your film, and there's nothing that can be done in printing to recover that detail. So, once you've assessed wether the prob;em rests with your negatives, or your prints, you will have a good idea how to correct the problem. Good luck.

 

Jay

[cosmo_genovese]

Add 1/2 to 1 ounce of 2% solution of benzotriazole to one liter of your developer and develop normally. This works especially well with Tri-X (both ISO 320 and ISO 400) in D76 1:1 or in HC-110.

[cosmo_genovese]

Forgot: Rate the Tri-X at EI 200 (for both ISO 320 and ISO 400).

[alexis_neel]

Vladimir,

 

When developing film, one can reach a proper density level and have a contrast range that is less than optimal, not only between highlights and shadow, but also mid-range contrast. This is easily achieved by not having aggressive enough agitation, pure and simple. Hence, increasing agitation can increase your contrast to a level that best suits your needs and style. It will also increase the density of your highlights, more so than your shadow area (i.e. contrast), and then further adjustment of your dev. time might be needed. Reducing your exposure is the last thing you want to do, since that variable becomes a constant in your lighting and shooting situations. The norm, among professionals, is that you find the exposure index you want for your particular style, tastes and the job/situation at hand. This allows for a more percise control of your negatives thru development for a better end result. Anything else results in a less than benefitial control over your photography.

 

Knowing how you like your images to look in the final result, the print, is essential to knowing how to get a good neg. And for best results...results of the neg. that will give you a wider latitude in printing styles...toning, diffusing, lith, etc., having a neg that prints more in the middle of the multi-contrast range (grade 1 1/2 to 2) is what you want to shoot for. By having a neg that has a good contrast range, not only between highlights and shadow, but mid-range contrast as well, it is easy to print, with much less burning and dodging, bleaching, etc, and have fantastic results. I personally go for a range of grade 1 to 1 1/2, but for most users, the grade 1 1/2 to 2 is better.

 

"If your low contrast negatives also show a lack of shadow detail, then you've underexposed your film". This again is oversimplified, confusing, wrong and shows lack of experience. A way to check for correct development, and exposure is easy. Look at your rebate edge. If the numbers appear dense, and would proof white with a multi-contrast range from 1 to 2, but your shadow detail isn't there and your highlights aren't white (grayish and no contrast), your exposure is off...you are under-exposing. If the numbers are gray, and don't proof white, then your development is off. This is because the film manufacturers expose this in a controled environment, and are meant to proof white with a moderate contrast paper or filter, in the minimal exposure time it takes to produce a black on the proof paper thru the film base/rebate edge (where there is no exposure to the film), when developed properly.

 

For existing negs, there are treatments, selenium and Intensifier, that can help add some contrast and density to them, both in the highlights and shadow areas. Not as much as if done in development, but some can make all the difference compared to none. Even changing the light source can make a difference. Using a cold light head will help hold onto whatever shadow detail you might have. That, in combination with other techniques, might just save an image you would overlook with the above statement. Increasing your paper developer concentration will also help, along with more agitation for contrast (which you might need for the rest of the image due to using a cold light head). Dodging and/or bleaching can further help detail.

 

Its very hard to say what you need and know where you are without seeing first hand what you have. And it takes years of work to know what works and what doesn't. I've been lucky in the fact that I've developed over 100,000 rolls of film, and at least 40,000 sheets of film for about 400 photographers with a wide variety of shooting styles, lighting situations and tastes. And I've had to print from those negatives, and from archives, for a wide variety us uses, so the last thing I want to do is make my printing work harder than it has to be by not developing the film in the best possible manner. Without knowing what to do, and how development works, my demanding photographer, museum and gallery clients surely wouldn't have demanded my services for over 25 years.

 

Alexis

 

www.alexisneel.com