mark bridges

I use the r72 filter and shoot in color, then convert in ps.

my panasonic lx2 does.

How about trying the gum bichromate proces?

get some "pictorico" premium ohp transparency film, an ink jet media. b&h has it and print it

at 360dpi. This is what we use to make digital negatives on. Or you could borrow a projector

that projects images from your computer, like they use in meetings and classrooms.

scanners produce a shorter scale length (slide film scale length) than what you can wet print with, using the same neg. Side by side, silver prints look much richer.

mark

To coat the paper, dip the brush in the solution then paint it on. Some print times are 30 mins. If this helps any.

 

mark

fyi We at the college print out digital negs on an epson 2200. onto pictorico trans film at 300 dpi. the pictorico.com film is 8.5x11

 

mark

FWIW Maybe The College of the Atlantic in Bar Harbor has something to offer. George DeWolfe is in Southwest Harbor and might know of some darkroom locations.

 

mark

FWIW I processed my FP4+ @EI64 D-76 1:1 8.5 min 68 deg. the highlights ( 30 min. from sunset.) were spot on.

pan f minutes- tri-x seconds

I think two part developers ( diafine )give more acutance. I think your reasoning is that a water stop dilutes the reamaining surface developer and that little amount of developer left in the emulsion is giving you your acutance. Remember that the pH. is brought back up by the water and this is effecting development also. I think you're trying for acutance the hardest way. Try divided development.

A. Adams said he dried some test prints for dry down effect.

I think that Diafine works best on high contrast scenes. It's the foggy scenes that just don't work, because those scenes seem to need N+ expansion.

The print shop here in Dallas charged 12.50 per sqft (48x72 inch for our prints) so you're looking at 400+ and the file size was 1gig.

freestyle has them, however just use a can opener

FWIW One lady at our college makes the digital negs and then makes contact prints. She makes a custom curve for the neg but this takes about 5-10 test swatches, printed and run through the wet line before the final print.It's good we have the computers out side the dark room. The final prints look fantastic.

mark

look down 5-6 posts and in it is the link

 

# Canon EOS1Ds-MII vs. Digital medium format cameras

luinous landscape review states that the wide Zooms for the DSLR are it's greatest downfall, however the long prime lenses are right on. But that's a Pro's take on glass.

Well a few guesses. Fist, you might NOT have wound the film tight enough on the take up spool. a little loose and light leaked just under the edge, maybe. But it also looks like too soft of adgitation there at the bottom, which you can get when doing it on reels in tanks like at school. I guess they did it on a machine though. And it also looks like wicked reticulation. I would say this was the first roll of the day through the machine, it wasn't calibrated yet and the NEW GUY ran it. Sorry for your lose, i would put most blame on the lab.

Well I did see a student do something like this. He rewound the film back into the cassette and kept winding until it bound up, somehow. He processed two rolls like this and it made streaks all the way across then neg. every 5or6 mm. and they didn't line up with the sprocket holes. (you didn't mention a stop and fix step)

We used these in the Beginner BW class to let the students learn the process steps and get printable negs. They were used in the 8 oz.SS tanks. After this first walk through, they had to use reels. It was claimed that development wasn't as good as reels. Freestyle has them called New arista e-z developing tanks 35 & 120

Ansel Adams suggests making hc-110 diluted 1-30 from stock solution.agitation intervals 15 sec. every 3-4 mins. going upwards of 18-20 mins. Your asking for specialized development which should be tested before hand, and using a densitometor. You can seek highly dilute developers and semi-compensating techniques or you might just give Diafine a try.

I process fp4 in diafine and IF i don't agitate properly i get droopping drag at the top towards the bottom. But not like your evenly spaced lines per each frame. Maybe your take up spool didn't wind up the film tight enough and some light leaked in at the top end????

It looks like UNDERagitation. I've done this trying to be too gentle. If a lab processed this then i have no guess.

Looks like a loose spooling since it starts right at the edge. I had some x-ray fog on a bunch of rolls(35mm,120) that looked like an elf shined his pen light on a few frames. Angular bloom looking thing.