# Wintereinbruch (onset of winter)



## Fred von den Berg (Dec 8, 2017)




----------



## timor (Dec 8, 2017)

Hi. Is this shot on film ?


----------



## Fred von den Berg (Dec 8, 2017)

timor said:


> Hi. Is this shot on film ?



Yes it is,  with a Minolta Riva on APX 100 and developed in Adonal for five and a half minutes at 23°C.


----------



## timor (Dec 8, 2017)

Looks like something is wrong. Too grainy. Looks like under exposed and over developed. In any case wintery landscape (with snow) needs sun and yellow filter. Otherwise it will be just gray overall.


----------



## terri (Dec 8, 2017)

timor said:


> Los like something is wrong. Too grainy. Looks like under exposed and over developed. In any case wintery landscape (with snow) needs sun and yellow filter. Otherwise it will be just gray overall.


Well, that's one opinion.       If the look the OP was going for was of winter desolation, why try to cheer it up with sun?    I also see tonal range here, so it's not just a grayed-out scene.   I do agree that the grain is a bit pronounced here, and that could be from over-agitation, but I also think there are times when grain becomes an element in and of itself.    This is one of those rare times when I think it's adding to the feel of a rough, harsh cold winter scene.   For me, it works here, and I like it.

So, there's another opinion.       Just my two cents.


----------



## Gary A. (Dec 8, 2017)

Works for me.


----------



## OldManJim (Dec 9, 2017)

We're awaiting our first snowstorm of the season. When I saw this picture, I was totally depressed. If that's what the OP was going for, it works perfectly! Nice use of grain to make the image more "gritty".


----------



## Fred von den Berg (Dec 10, 2017)

timor said:


> Looks like something is wrong. Too grainy. Looks like under exposed and over developed. In any case wintery landscape (with snow) needs sun and yellow filter. Otherwise it will be just gray overall.



The Minolta can't take filters but I've loaded some film in my Spotmatic and will try out your advice when possible.
For this scene, I figured the meter might need a little help so I selected the in-camera option of overexposing by 1.5 stops (which is as much as this P&S allows) to try and avoid too much muddy grey.



terri said:


> timor said:
> 
> 
> > Los like something is wrong. Too grainy. Looks like under exposed and over developed. In any case wintery landscape (with snow) needs sun and yellow filter. Otherwise it will be just gray overall.
> ...



_This could come out a bit rough_ was what went through my mind when taking this shot. The grain might have been exaggerated by over doing the agitation but that wasn't intentional if so: I'm pretty new to developing my own film and have a lot to learn. Any tips would be gratefully received!



Gary A. said:


> Works for me.



Me too. Thanks.



OldManJim said:


> We're awaiting our first snowstorm of the season. When I saw this picture, I was totally depressed. If that's what the OP was going for, it works perfectly! Nice use of grain to make the image more "gritty".



Thanks. Not sure I can claim it came out just the way I wanted: I'm still too much of a novice with DIY film developing for that. However, the bleakness of the scene is what drew my eye and is what I wanted to capture, so I'm quite pleased with the result.


Thanks very much for the feedback everyone.


----------



## timor (Dec 12, 2017)

Tips for developing own film ? I would have some. If you are really interested. About 50% of all writings on b&w photography is devoted to film development. It is that important. And also it is uniquely personal, almost intimate to each photographer with so many possible variables. On the end could be very satisfying.


----------



## Fred von den Berg (Jan 6, 2018)

This second shot was taken shortly before Christmas using a Revue AC-3s. APX 400 pushed to 1600 and developed for 30 minutes at 20°C. It was a very dull day and the mood is what comes through for me here: I think the high amount of grain helps create a certain atmospheric feel. Your milage may vary and I'd bee very interested to get any feedback on this photo.


----------



## timor (Jan 6, 2018)

I like this one. It would be interesting to print it larger, than standard 8×10.


----------



## Fred von den Berg (Jan 6, 2018)

timor said:


> I like this one. It would be interesting to print it larger, than standard 8×10.



Thanks, Timor. On Monday I'll get a 20 x 30 (cm) print, which is the biggest size I can get here at the local drugstore. If it looks half-way decent at that size, I may pay a visit to a place in Augsburg that could print it larger for me.


----------



## timor (Jan 6, 2018)

Fred von den Berg said:


> timor said:
> 
> 
> > I like this one. It would be interesting to print it larger, than standard 8×10.
> ...


Digital print ? Or real silver-gelatine ?


----------



## jcdeboever (Jan 6, 2018)

I like these images. I am still finding my way developing and does make a difference.


----------



## Fred von den Berg (Jan 7, 2018)

timor said:


> Fred von den Berg said:
> 
> 
> > timor said:
> ...



Digital in Friedberg, possibly silver-gelatine in Augsburg. Excuse my ignorance (I'm quite new at DIY photo developing) but would there be a big difference?


----------



## Fred von den Berg (Jan 7, 2018)

jcdeboever said:


> I like these images. I am still finding my way developing and does make a difference.



Thanks, JC. Me too regarding DIY developing.

My workflow is a Patterson tank with Adonal developer (very like Rodinal) + distilled water stop bath + rapid fixer + anti smear agent, then I scan and make adjustments where necessary in iPhoto. I don't have a darkroom so all my prints have been digital up to now. So it's sorta hybrid that I do, but I like the "unknown" experimental part of the process. 

Timor gave me the tip of using HC-110, which I think you use sometimes.  Do you also add the Borax that he advised? I haven't got hold of any of this developer yet but will look into it in the coming weeks.


----------



## jcdeboever (Jan 7, 2018)

Fred von den Berg said:


> jcdeboever said:
> 
> 
> > I like these images. I am still finding my way developing and does make a difference.
> ...


I use HC110 when I push, which is almost every roll now. D76 for box speed stuff. I have not done the borax. I have access to a darkroom but it's a pain. I'd rather not bother anyone.


----------



## timor (Jan 7, 2018)

Gentlemen,  there is no "black magic" in b&w film developing. Or it seems so. It is a borax in D76 which gives the special look to the pictures some people see. And there are other "magical" substances like glycine or amidol. Borax does not develop, it controls the process. Glycin, amidol, metol and others do the developing. Here comes the personal part which great AA described as art of juggling many variables at the same time. Let see: 1.developer, mix of number of chemicals (2 and up). Important is the proportion, well, it is critical. We can divide them in two groups: developing agents and environment setters. But there is third group which influences image after development. Borax controls environment, it is creating conditions for the developing agent to work, setting pH and buffer it for the time of development. There are other buffers, sodium carbonate is most popular but the list is very long. Basically any high pH chemical may fulfill  that role. The pH is important as even small variations may change the way developing agent works. Why ? MAGIC ! Than come developing agents. Seemingly one task, to reduce excited particles of silver halide to silver and than cause the same in other silver halide particles surrounding the excited speck. Now this part different agents do in somewhat different way. Why ?  Maybe quantum mechanics will explanation it in the future, but in the future nobody gonna care about that. Lol.  The third group of chemicals comes to work now, after there is silver in the emulsion. Most famous is sodium sulfite. Used in large quantities in D23 or D76 the task is to dissolve  metal silver developed in emulsion in order to make the grain smaller. Both developers are old formulas from times, when emulsions didn't have fine grain like today. Both are in use today, but usually diluted 2 or 3 times to weaken the solving action on silver. But now this extends the time of development what with film like Tmax is not a good idea. And than some of this silver dossolving developers, usually commercial, secret formulas, contain sequestrants. (?) Chemicals dedicated to intercept free silver so it can not be replated back on emulsion. (Less fog, better shapes as replating is random.) Of course the question here is why to have free silver at all. And here comes something called divided developer. Idea is to first soak emulsion in developing agent and than to move it to the proper environment of high pH. When developing agent is exhausted  development of latent image stops (fogging continue). Very good, almost automatic way with one timing for all films in normal range of temperatures. But for nowadays, thin emulsion films maybe not so good, they can't absorb enough developer for full process. So, here comes method of continous development. Not my idea. AA already "discovered", that 1 minute in water bath before stop bath gives him better defined shadows. It was Barry Thornton who mention use of activator like borax after regular developer with proper reduction of time. I started with cutting 3 min from developer and adding 3 min in borax. Still do with small variations. How this works you can see in this thread
Few from metering practice (attn. Timor)
When Judy after 10 min of instructions about use of modern spot meter shot and developed this pictures.


----------

