gary_stallsworth

<p>Sounds like a layer of oxidized silver. You can try squeezing/knocking the bottle and see if some of it flakes off. This could be a problem area for contamination. For the cost of a 1L bottle, I would just replace it.</p>

<p>I do this quite often for low light, clubs, events, etc. Stock for 10:00 at 68F. I may adjust up or down depending on lighting--contrasty vs. flat.</p>

<p>Forgot to mention to go with the higher dilutions to keep from having developments from being too short.</p>

<p>I tried Delta 3200 several times and was never satisfied with the results. Pushing HP5+, Delta 400, or TMY2 to 1600 in Microphen all work good.</p>

<p>You can check here http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.php?Film=Delta+400&Developer=Rodinal&mdc=Search<br>

No listing for @100, but you can do some math and get close.</p>

<p>Can't say for sure. An easy way to check is to put in the reels, put on the cover, and then fill the tank with water. Pour the water out into a measuring container and you will have your answer.</p>

<p>Increasing the time will increase the contrast up to a point. It will also increase the grain. If you can cut the roll somewhere in the middle you could experiment. time + 50%, time + 100%, etc., and see if that produces the results you want. You might consider processing the film normally and then use a high contrast grade/filter if you print in the darkroom, or levels/curves adjustments in PS.</p>

<p>100 ml TEA<br /> 9 g ascorbic acid (erytorbic acid, AKA isoascorbic acid works as well)<br /> .225 g phenidone<br /> and I used follwoing fixer (diluted to 1:3) TF-3 neutral:<br /> --------------------------------------------------------<br /> ammonium thiofulfate (60% solution) 200ml<br /> sodium sulfite 15 g<br /> sodium metabisulfite 5 g<br /> water to make 1 liter<br>

Looks to me like the ammonium thiofulfate (60% solution) 200ml is part of the fixer solution. May not be clear due to the line spacing and where he inserted the ----------------------</p>

<p>I agree with Russ. Main thing is using the tools at your disposal that best match your vision. I much prefer an interesting image that has some technical issues, than a technically perfect image that is boring other than appreciating the craftsmanship. I am currently reading "Tao of Photography", by Tom Ang. It is more on the (his Tao based) philosophy of photography than the technical aspects. Matching the tools and techniques to match the situation and your vision.<br>

It's also okay to change what you like. Bill Brandt was a photojournalist in the early part of his career and "printed" low contrast as that worked better for newsprint. Later on he reprinted some of his early work with much higher contrast. He made other changes in his style. You might like to read about him or check images on line. They aren't technically perfect, but many are interesting and have good visual impact.<br>

Well a couple of us jumped in so far and I expect there will be a range of opinions. I do think it will be good to continue to work on the craft side of photography so you can make the best use of the tools available to make the images you want to make.</p>

<p>I'll second what Lex said. Actually got the idea from him. I like to shoot events/performances in low light without flash. I don't use TriX, but have used the modified agitation on Delta 400@1600 and 3200 in Microphen 1+0 and 1+1. I agitate 10 secs each minute for the 1st 50% (approx) of the development time and 10 secs each 2 minutes for the last 50% (approx). I vary a little based on the lighting at the event. Never did thank Lex for the idea--Thanks Lex.</p>

<p>The others have covered film options. Blue Moon Camera still processes black and white film. They are in St. Johns. <a href="http://bluemooncamera.com">http://bluemooncamera.com</a></p>

 

Stefano-I made a comment on your photo just below the one you are discussing. I felt like making a statement about the stupid comment, but decided not to fall into the trap and did not want the discussion on your page. I'm glad you took it up here. I'm new to Photo.net and am still learning about the workings here in. Seems to be like any other community. The good thing is the creative, smart, and considerate folks far out number the stupid and mean ones. I enjoy your work.