Analog film photography and cameras

metro used to do a developer that stained the negs brown, i can't remember the name but it too was a compensating developer like rodinal but was less grainy.

Pyrocat-HD?

pyro. that's the fella

Londons famous Owen Reed, Pinkgottimobbs and Donut on Tri-X 400 pushed 3 stops to 3200 in d76 1:1 for 11 minutes. Indoors at night with just a bit ambient artificial light

Probably not the best film or developer for this scenario, and pushed a bit far judged by the lack of shadow detail and massive grain, but the contrast on the higher values works as it was quite flat in the room.

Have tried it many times, Tri-X @ 1600 & 1250 asa - Rodinal 1:100, gentle swirl for 30 sec, stand 30 mins, 30 secs swirl, stand 30 mins.

I can honestly say I have never got consistent results. Rodinal 1:50 for around 18 mins will give you better results.

If you will be regularly pushing Tri-X up to 1250-1600 then Diafine or any two bath will give more consistent results especially for wet printing.

Take it your doing regular agitation on the 1+50 for 18 minutes?
How's the grain?

Sorry, yes I never agitate in the traditional way - inverting etc. I was taught to swirl the tank much like a brandy glass swirl.

With all the Rodinal dilutions I swirl once every 2 mins. With Rodinal you can control the size/amount of grain by how often you agitate and how rigorous you are. Higher temp will also affect the grain.

Sorry, yes I never agitate in the traditional way - inverting etc. I was taught to swirl the tank much like a brandy glass swirl.

With all the Rodinal dilutions I swirl once every 2 mins. With Rodinal you can control the size/amount of grain by how often you agitate and how rigorous you are. Higher temp will also affect the grain.

Cool, might give that a try then.
Higher temp will = more grain right?

Cool, might give that a try then.
Higher temp will = more grain right?

Yes but go too high - 25C + - and it can get weird and crappy depending on the film. My stock film is Double-X and above 22C it starts looking like Brighton beach!

There is a long running thread on [ame="http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=61643"]Rodinal and stand dev[/ame] on RFF with a lot of info that may help you.

Londons famous Owen Reed, Pinkgottimobbs and Donut on Tri-X 400 pushed 3 stops to 3200 .....

I like this immensely.

Yes but go too high - 25C + - and it can get weird and crappy depending on the film. My stock film is Double-X and above 22C it starts looking like Brighton beach!

There is a long running thread on Rodinal and stand dev on RFF with a lot of info that may help you.

Yeah I want to keep grain minimal.
No offence to Sasmol's image but that's the look I'm really trying to avoid.
Already joined Photo.net and APUG to discuss Rodina, looks like I have another forum to join now too!
Got a new timer thermometer gadget from Ikea and just finished a roll today so gonna have a shot tonight at 1+50, 18minutes, 20C, swirling once every 2 mins and see what I get.

I was wondering if anyone had any comments on using OM to 4/3 adaptors? I have an OM4 that still seems to be falling prey to the normal faults that the OM4 experienced. Locked up mirror, battery drain etc.... I'm thinking of investing in a digitial SLR body, to make the most of the kit i was given recently. The thing is with being an amateur, I thought it best to invest in something like an Olympus PEN EPL-1(sorry for bringing digital talk in here), but a guy in my local Jacobs shop said i should ditch the PEN EPL-1 and buy a canon with the adaptor.... anybody use an adaptor for old lenses to digital body? Cheers in advance.

2 Attachments

since the chip on 4/3 is so small your field of view is half of what you get on a 35mm camera.
so your 35-70mm lens will act like a 70-140mm. you basically lose all wide angle capability.

I have a gf1 4/3 with the pancake lens but mainly because it is light and compact.

I would try and pick up a 2nd hand Canon 5d - full frame so the fov wont change and plenty of cheap OM mount - EF mount adapters around.

Lots of good info here: http://forum.manualfocus.org/

If you can't strech to a 5d then a cheaper Canon will do but you will lose full frame (along with viewfinder size) but would still be less of a crop than u4/3rds

this is good guys..... thanks so much.

Scans of 2 prints I did today.
Both Tri-X @ iso800.
The first one was devved to MetroLandman's directions - 18 minutes in 1+50 R09, swirling every 2 minutes.
The other was (I think) 1+100 R09 for an hour, inversion agitation every 5 minutes for 20 minutes then every minute for the last 5.

I would try and pick up a 2nd hand Canon 5d - full frame so the fov wont change and plenty of cheap OM mount - EF mount adapters around.

Lots of good info here: http://forum.manualfocus.org/

If you can't strech to a 5d then a cheaper Canon will do but you will lose full frame (along with viewfinder size) but would still be less of a crop than u4/3rds

the biggest reason I went for the 5D is simply the through the lens metering, which is a Godsent when using older lens without those electronic jobbies.

it also mean I can use Nikon lenses with an expensive adaptor, but I hasn't find a need to actually get that as the 24-105mm lens served me more than enough for everything.

mechanical vandal.
i'm going to cut to the chase here. those images you have posted don't show any of the benefits of compensating development. maybe you have run out of paper and only have some grade5 left?
the prints are ott cos those negs are thin and contrasty as if there's no long toe and shoulder and the neg is badly exposed.
i think going back to basics and trying tri-x in a 'normal' dev with adjusted times for the asa would be a good place to start.
there's something amiss in the chain of exposure-development-print-scan.

sorry if this sounds harsh but you obviously have an interest and a desire to get it nailed and i don't think working with advanced processing when the exposures are off is the best way forward.

feel free to tell me to fuck off if that's the desired affect in your prints as it's water off a ducks back but i have done plenty of B&W in the past to a reasonably high level (5x4/10x8/cold cathode/lith printing/rodinal and hc110 at funny dilutions/agfa record rapid/oriental seagul/tech-pan/selenium and all that stuff).

maybe post a pic of your negs on the lightbox to give some idea how they are turning out?

YouTube - Vivian Maier, street photographer and nanny

great story, and from the little of those photos shown, they look really good.

I'm going to have to support what Mr.Smyth has said I'm afraid. I thought the first image showed bags of promise, but was developed and printed in a way that I couldn't understand at all. Because it confused me, I said nothing, but I did think it was an image that had promise, but had been somewhat ruined. Maybe it was actually the effect you were going for..........which as an image with such extremely blownout highlights, was everything to me that a good image isn't. I wished the end of the street had at least been visible, instead of being whited out. The image needed to move the eye away from the great expanse of blownout street and moved onto something more viewable. The second image for as little it shows, may as well have been all black. If it was actually what you wanted to achieve, in photographic terms, they're not successful. There should be some detail in the shadows and some detail visible in the highlights. This would remain true even if taking astronomic images of the sun. I may be all wrong, and I confess to having zero practical experience in labs......as I was lazy and farmed out all my work to Joe's Basement, Metro, and others all around London, and passed the costs onto clients. I sometimes made up to £3000.for a weekends work, and rarely less than £1000 a day. I don't work as a photographer anymore, but still think I know a little bit about the game. Pardon my input if it appears rude.

mechanical vandal.
i'm going to cut to the chase here. those images you have posted don't show any of the benefits of compensating development. maybe you have run out of paper and only have some grade5 left?
the prints are ott cos those negs are thin and contrasty as if there's no long toe and shoulder and the neg is badly exposed.
i think going back to basics and trying tri-x in a 'normal' dev with adjusted times for the asa would be a good place to start.
there's something amiss in the chain of exposure-development-print-scan.

sorry if this sounds harsh but you obviously have an interest and a desire to get it nailed and i don't think working with advanced processing when the exposures are off is the best way forward.

feel free to tell me to fuck off if that's the desired affect in your prints as it's water off a ducks back but i have done plenty of B&W in the past to a reasonably high level (5x4/10x8/cold cathode/lith printing/rodinal and hc110 at funny dilutions/agfa record rapid/oriental seagul/tech-pan/selenium and all that stuff).

maybe post a pic of your negs on the lightbox to give some idea how they are turning out?

I'm going to have to support what Mr.Smyth has said I'm afraid. I thought the first image showed bags of promise, but was developed and printed in a way that I couldn't understand at all. Because it confused me, I said nothing, but I did think it was an image that had promise, but had been somewhat ruined. Maybe it was actually the effect you were going for..........which as an image with such extremely blownout highlights, was everything to me that a good image isn't. I wished the end of the street had at least been visible, instead of being whited out. The image needed to move the eye away from the great expanse of blownout street and moved onto something more viewable. The second image for as little it shows, may as well have been all black. If it was actually what you wanted to achieve, in photographic terms, they're not successful. There should be some detail in the shadows and some detail visible in the highlights. This would remain true even if taking astronomic images of the sun. I may be all wrong, and I confess to having zero practical experience in labs......as I was lazy and farmed out all my work to Joe's Basement, Metro, and others all around London, and passed the costs onto clients. I sometimes made up to £3000.for a weekends work, and rarely less than £1000 a day. I don't work as a photographer anymore, but still think I know a little bit about the game. Pardon my input if it appears rude.

Input is much appreciated.
I am aware that pic 1 is blown and 2 is underexposed but I have put this down to my exposure rather than the development of the film of the printing. Well it has been suggested that printing the street scene again and giving a second or 2 at grade 1 after them main exposure might bring the highlights back a bit.
I am now currently reading the Zone VI book mentioned upthread to try and get my exposures better anyway.
Sounds like you both think the images are too contrasty though so maybe the printing is at fault.
What do you think of the levels of grain?
I joined up at a public darkroom yesterday so I will be getting more practice and hopefully can only get better.

OK - hands up - I thought as you were talking about stand-dev etc. that you wanted to go to 1600 and that was the times I gave you. I have shot at 800 and mistakenly developed for 1600 but still got usable negs. That given there is still something wrong here as MrSmyth & GAG2 to noted.

My first question would be how did you meter this: incident or reflective? Was it a single reading reading or several and then averaged? 800 asa is well within Tri-X's latitude of one stop over/under exposure without major adjustment of the developing process.

If you haven't got it have a look here at the Tri-X info:

Kodak B&W film

I would advise that you do a few rolls at box speed with Rodinal/R09 to get to know the characteristics of the film/developer and how it handles different lighting situations.

My times and asa chart:

Metering on both was reflected, on the portrait it's just plain bad! On the street scene it was an average but probably not a very good one.

I reckoned you'd given me 35mm times so I increased slightly to 20minutes actually.

blah blah blah oriental seagul blah blah blah

really?

really?

Wow. Really. Didn't see that one coming.

@ mech_vandal, what camera? (I got a Mamiya c3) Really like how the second one came out.

@ mech_vandal, what camera? (I got a Mamiya c3) Really like how the second one came out.

Mamiya 645j.
Total ebay bargain, £55, it was advertised as body, wlf and winder and came with an 80mm f2.8 which was jammed wide open but I semi fixed it and punted it on ebay for £30 so in reality I got what I thought I was bidding on for £25.
Girlfriend is looking at TLRs, is the C3 a good one to go for?
I quite like how both the images turned out which is why I posted them here but I know tat they aren't "right".