First attempt gives disappointing results

[michael_p2]

I have just developed my first B&W film, a roll of Ilford FP4 125 which I used

as a test. While I was thrilled to get usable images on my first attempt, they

are disappointingly grainy and low in contrast. Have I done something wrong or

is that the signature of the developer?

 

I used Ilford chemicals including Ilfotec LC29 developer, Ilfostop and Ilford

Rapid Fixer, all used according to the Ilford instructions ( a 1/19 dilution of

developer for 6.30 minutes at 22 degrees).

 

Some images are here:

 

Would welcome any suggestions ...<div></div>

[lex_jenkins]

Don't compare scanning with traditional printing. They're not remotely the same thing. Each requires a very different technique.

 

Offhand, I'd say your negatives look fine. These should print just fine in the traditional wet darkroom.

 

Most b&w negatives will always present problems with grain when scanned. Read some of the previous discussions in the archives on the issue.

 

If you cannot print conventionally in the wet darkroom, I'd suggest using either T-Max 100 - the finest grain b&w film at this speed - or a chromogenic monochrome C-41 film like Ilford XP2 Super, which will give you the option of conventional printing later.

 

But your exposures look just fine for your first effort. Don't be discouraged, you're off to a good start.

[BernardMiller]

I'm with Lex. Those negs look fine to me. Scanning black & white can be very tricky--you can't use digital ICE, and your scanner (or at least the software, initially) might not be optimised, really, for scanning BW negatives. I think that a bit of judicious use of curves to improve the contrast, deepen the blacks where necessary, etc., will make these look just fine.

 

And, like Lex said, I bet they'll print really well in the darkroom.

[mjferron]

I think it looks pretty good. If you are coming from a late model DSLR then B&W film is going to look grainy in comparison. Tmax 100 one of the finest grained films and shot on 35mm it will probably look like ISO 400 on a DSLR. My new favorite PX 125 looks like 800 on a DSLR. Don't let the 100% peeps in Photoshop scare you. Digital prints won't show all that grain. Especially when you keep the print sensibly sized. Keep up the good work.<div></div>

[rjjackson]

mike,

 

i agree with what others have said. digital editing is completely different. try adjusting contrast in photoshop and learn about layer masks and dodging with a gradient tool.

 

i am curious, did you use a filter? it looks as if maybe you had a light yellow filter and the jerseys were blue (just guessing). perhaps a green filter would have separated the values of the grass from the jerseys a little more?

 

rj

[Uncle Goose]

I'm not suprised you get low contrast using a low contrast developer ( LC stands for Low Contrast). I suggest you try Ilford Delta 100 with Ilfosol S.

[al_divenuti]

Actually, Uncle Goose, the "LC" stands for "Liquid Concentrate" :-)

 

LC29 is a very close cousin of Kodak HC-110.