Cloudscientist

Hello,

What can make my prints more brilliant and add clarity to them?

I'm looking for techniques that would add extra white, but also ways of darkening the black tones. So adding overall contrast. This in post production, after the print has been developed.

The reason for this is that although I get reasonably good prints, they all still look a bit too greyish. 

I think a way to do so is to use bleacher. But please come up with other, better ideas.

Hi,

Would it be a good idea to underexpose with exposure compensations for let’s say 2 stops ?

I am using a canon A1 film camera.

What I’m trying to avoid is a film that is too contrasty because of the heavy light.

Please feel free to advice me on the settings to use.

thank you.

Hi all

Imagine a pretty dark background with a pretty white subject on the foreground. For example an animal.

My aim during development of photo, is to generate very dark spots now only on the subject which is already light.

But these spots should have the character of being grainy. So not by adding a liquid on that moment, because liquid is not grainy and rough and could even create small drops which i don't like.

It should make a grainy inversion of white to black. So i thought it should be a chemical in powder , not liquid..?

Any ideas welcome.

Thank you.

Thx a lot Rodeo_Joe.

I will take some time to fully grasp the info you provided. But I will come back on it.

I'm reading " The Zone System Craftbook" by John Charles Woods. Hope things will clarify. I 'm new to the zone system.

Hi all,

I'm reading "the negative" from Ansel Adams. On page 90 , where characteristic curves are compared, he talks about the SEPARATION of values.

"Most films today have very long straight-line regions, but if a

shoulder is present, you should observe at what zone the separation

of values begins to diminish." A. Adams

What does he mean by that?

Thank you

You've just described how most of us learned film photography long ago, before the internet. I never had that many books, though I have quite a few now, and the most valuable "books" were the various Kodak publications. That was back when they'd often send them for free if you wrote in with a question. That defines the bottom for me, but some of their stuff was quite advanced. Then the advanced amateur might read Neblette, Hollis & Todd and the Ansel Adams three book series. Today I'd also suggest Post Exposure by Ctein, which is currently a free download. Less well known in the US was the BJP, British Journal of Photography. Great stuff in there. Really, you just have to shoot some film, process it, and modify your procedure to address whatever shortcomings you find. Do a ring-a-round. Understand the Zone System, even if you don't use it.

Thx for your input Conrad...I will read Post Exposure by Ctein. What was important to you ..

You'll speed up the process of learning the basics of exposure, focus, etc. by using a digital camera that offers a full manual mode.

 

No processing or film costs or waiting to see results, and any mistakes will be entirely your own, rather than due to some careless 'lab' worker.

 

And before the usual bleating about 'instant gratification' gets trotted out. It's instant feedback.

 

Try learning to juggle blindfold and while somebody else randomly interferes with the juggling balls!

 

All the basics of ISO, shutter speed, aperture and composition are identical, regardless of using film or digital.

 

And beware those YouTube videos showing how to develop a film. Most of them appear to be made by people without a clue. And certainly no more than 5 minutes experience!

Hi Joel,

thx for your reaction. I have a digital basis what i sure can use. I want to focus basically on exposing the film right in the camera, developing the negatives and the the print.

Thats my learning objective...

Assuming you want a books recommendation: Ansel Adams' trilogy (Camera) Positive Negative. - Somewhere between great & overkill for B&W.

I don't recommend film for DIY color.

Hi Jochen,

I know the 3 books of Ansel Adams. Have read the negative. Is pretty good. I will summarise this book, cause i forgot lots of it.

Hello. I am a new photographer and still trying to learn everything. I was wondering when you would want to show motion versus motion being frozen. When does showing motion work?

Hi Anamedina,

For blurred photos you can look at the work of Michael ackerman.

How to learn film photography on your own?

I'm struggling with this question a lot. I would like to learn how proper expose my film in the camera and then develop film and photo.

All I need for this I have. A camera, darkroom, and film photography books. I find books about analog photography more

interesting then what I can find on the internet.

But i have more than 100 books on the subject of film photography. What would yu suggest is a good way to start

Have already a little experience but i want to go to the bottom.

Thx

Lieven

Review this, paying attention to the agitation section.

Hi Moving on,

Thanks a lot. I learned a lot from that movie.

If you look at the top edge of the film, you will see that it is fogged. This fogging likely happened when you were loading the film onto the developing reel. It also could be fogged from X-ray exposure at the airport or the camera back has faulty seals around the seams. Anyway, this film was fogged. The film was rolled up when fogged. The sprocket holes, being void of film allowed the light to fog the rolled up film. The sprocket holes of the top layer of roll of film of film do not exactly overlay the sprocket holes of the film beneath it. Thus you see some fogging between the sprocket holes. This defect has nothing to do with agitation or time in any of the solutions of the process.

 

We must always guard against the film being fogged. Most times we see this when the dark room is not truly dark. It takes fully an hour for the human eye to dark adapt. If we are in a lights out situation for just a few minutes, we can’t be sure of the light tightness of our dark room.

Hi Alan,

Suddenly i remember have tried to open the camera by accident. I underestimated it because i only opened it maybe for 1 millimetre. Now i think i might have caused some fogging as you said...

I will try develop one more film and come back with what i find.

Improper fixing can also be a cause. I have had it happen when reusing fixers. Since the film is not looking good anyway try re-fixing the film and see if the banding goes away. Despite it being possible I have never caused banding by any agitation method.

Hi mjferron,

What you mean by improper fixing? I did more then 60 seconds of fixing and little bit of agitation in beginning.

Should i agitate more or less.. Or is the banding the result of even agitation. Too much in the same direction?

Also tried to do the fixing again in hope of banding going away. But there was only a slight improvement.

Maybe 20 percent improved...

hi,

I developed my first film with Rodinal. The images on the film appeared, but with strange vertical banding.

I read somewhere is possible because of no constant agitation of the Fixer? I used ilford Rapid Fixer.

But agitated not constantly for 1 minute..

Here you can see the film.

The vertical banding appear on each photo more or less.

I should use an ND filter by: Cyan= Magenta= Yellow

Equal amounts of each filter.. is ND filter.

Will try it later

hi all

I did the test with the coin.

I put a coin on the RC paper and turned off the light even de safelight for 90 seconds. The paper i developed was complete white.

So this proves there's no extra light coming into the darkroom. It is now completely dark.

But i did a nomal test (60 sec exposure with test strips)and with paper and developed it.

20,40 and 60 seconds bands.

Why are the whites , after certain time getting black as well??

You can see the image is still very dark.

The exposure must have been too strong.

Also used the magenta filter on my Enlarger . Did put it to 100/of the max of 130.

Dustin McAmera,

I read the Ilford text and noticed that my developing temperature was a little higher then it should have.

Ilford recommends 20 degrees celsius fo Multigrade developer. My temperature was 23 or even 24. Maybe t caused it far a part. I will try again and lower the temperature with ice cubes.

hi,

i just did some exposures in the darkroom and found all my exposures too dark. Overexposed.

Did an exposure of 1 minute light with the enlarger.

Developed the photo in Ilford Multigrade developer for 1 minute on Ilford RC `Multigrade paper.

The enlargers lens was on f8.

Here under you can find aphoto of what i did.

Hi,

I want to expose Ilford RC Multigrade paper.

In order to do so, what are correct exposure times in relation to Fstop of the enlargers lens?

Also in relation to the distance of the light source of the enlarger to the exposed paper?

How to measure this?

thanks

hello everyone,

Thx a lot for your reactions. It helped me. What i was really looking for ways of getting pictures like Michael Ackerman.

You can see a screen shot. This photographer uses rather large grain as you can see.

hi all,

I'm looking for overview of developers and their use and effect on all film types.

Film developers and print or photo developers.

Does there exist a guide for that?

Thx

Try TMZ exposed at EI 25,000 and processed in TMax for 34 minutes.

The TMAX P3200 film you mean ??

Hi,

I'm looking to find ways to get more amount of grain , but also larger grain than usual you would get or want to get.

Before i did digital photography. But for the better grain capabilities i started Film photography.

As far i have read you can accomplish this with an amount of tricks and techniques.

• Developper: use of Rodinal ? Also for high contrast.
  
• developing temperature must be higher then indicated.
  
• Faster films such as ASA 3200
  
• pushing the film in film development
  
• ...
  
• ...
  

If you know other interesting developers, please let me know.

Also if there exist other techniques...

hi Dustin McAmera,

Setting the camera to rate the film above its 'box speed', you're telling the camera to under-expose the film.

To understand you better.

What is actually going on in the camera, if you Set the camera to rate the film above its 'box speed

i think i don't understand well.

hi Dustin and Paul,

thx for your help.

-

Setting the speed only has an effect on exposure if the camera has a lightmeter.

I really am not sure about this.

I can say i have a Canon AE1-program camera. Inside there's no such thing as a meter that would indicate over or under exposure. What there is indeed , is a "diafragma indication" given my shutter speed that i choose.

So i assume there must be something of a meter??

-

Setting the camera to rate the film above its 'box speed',

To understand better what you say. What you mean by 'box speed'??

thx