# The "How I Develop Film" thread



## terri

Thanks to Matt Needham for the thread suggestion. :thumbup: 

Okay, fellow darkroom enthusiasts.we all come into this with varying levels of experience and expertise. Some of us are better at asking questions than answering them.  

In an effort to address everyones style, lets use this thread for *film *developing issues only. How you develop, different developers youve tried, associated times, temperatures  share your knowledge! 

And wed love to see results posted, good or bad. 

Have at it!


----------



## ksmattfish

Diafine 2-bath developer is the most recent addition to my inventory of darkroom chems.  

Pros:  
speed boost for most conventional grain films
makes low contrast negs
fast and easy to use
lasts a very long time
inexpensive to use
okay to use at higher temperatures 

Cons:  
can't alter development to adjust tones, contrast, etc...
when shooting in low contrast lighting the negs can be too low contrast

I like to use it with Tri-X ( TX-400 ) and HP5 for hand held, low light shooting.  I also use it with my Widelux film ( usually FP4 and HP5 ) to help deal with the crazy contrast variations I can get over the entire angle of view.

1)  Get the film on the reels, and in the tank.  I normally use a 64 oz stainless steel developing tank; it holds 4 120 reels plus a 35mm reel, or 8 35mm reels.  I only load 3 of the 120 reels or 6 of the 35mm reels.  I think I get more even development if I leave a little room for the chems to slosh around in, than if I fill the tank to the brim.

2)  Measure out Diafine solution A, Diafine solution B, a water rinse, fixer, wash water, hypo clear ( if you are using it ), and photo-flo.  I temp everything to the room temperature of the Diafine, fixer, etc...

3)  No pre-wet.  Pour Diafine solution A into the tank.  I do 2 tank flips once a minute for agitiation.  4 min total.  Pour Diafine A back into jug.

4)  Pour Diafine solution B into the tank.  Same agitation for 4 minutes.  Pour Diafine B back into jug.

5)  Water rinse with constant agitation for 30 sec.  Dump.

6)  Fix according to your fixer's instructions.  I use TF-4 fixer; 5 min with 5 or 6 wrist twists of agitation every 30 sec or so.  No hypo-clear is recommended with TF-4.  

7)  Wash with water.  Constant agitation for 30 sec.  Dump and refill.  I do 6 or 7 fills.  During one of the last refills I allow the film to sit submerged for about 2 min.  

8)  Photo-flo with constant agitation for 30 sec.  Squeegee film with my fingers (probably not good advice, but it works for me).  Hang to dry with clothes pin for weight.

Diafine isn't right for every project, but it's cheap, easy to use, and long lasting, so it's worth trying out.


----------



## Marctwo

It seems that when people talk about film developing, it should be taken for granted that they are specifically refering to B&W film.

I've only done C-41 colour but it sounds pretty similar to B&W apart from temperature and chemicals.  Is there any degree of cross-compatibillity between chemicals?  No idea!

Anyway, I thought colour should be rep'ed so although I have little experience, here are a few spec's that I've been using (successfully).

I've only used Jessops C-41 kit.  It's a two bath kit - ie. developer (contains diamine???) and a combined bleach/fix solution.

1. Fill a bowl with hot water and put your solution bottles in to warm up.  If you need to mix fresh chemicals then use warm water to do so as they will take less time to come to temperature.  The longer it takes to warm the chemicals, the more the water will cool so to end up with the ideal 40 degrees you'll need to start with warmer water.

2. Load your films, drop the loaded dev tank into the bowl and wait for water/chemicals to come to temperature.  When the temperature is balanced, your developer should be slightly cooler than the water.  Only test the water and developer temperature to avoid cross-contamination with the blix.

Once your at the required temperature, the rest is basically a combination of the above and following the kit instructions.  However, there are a few 'rules of thumb' that I follow:

a. Knock 10 sec's off your developing time.  I allow an extra 5 sec's for pouring the developer and I empty the developer 15 sec's early to allow time for the rinse to go in;  This gives a net adjustment of -10 sec's between starting to fill and starting to empty.

b. Tap the dev tank three times on a hard surface to dislodge any trapped air bubbles when you put the developer in.

c. Don't panic.  Do everything in a smooth, relaxed manner.  This will help to build consistancy.  I agitate with 5 *smooth* turns every minute which takes about 10 sec's.

d. Once you start, you can't stop so make sure you have a planned reaction to any possible interuption.

e. I squeege with my fingers too.  I think my thumb and index finger were designed with this job in mind.


----------



## ksmattfish

Marctwo said:
			
		

> It seems that when people talk about film developing, it should be taken for granted that they are specifically refering to B&W film.
> 
> I've only done C-41 colour but it sounds pretty similar to B&W apart from temperature and chemicals.  Is there any degree of cross-compatibillity between chemicals?  No idea!



I intentionally left out the "BW" in the thread subject because I hoped someone would talk about C41 or E6.  

The chems are different, although once I accidentally processed some C41 BW with the standard BW method and chems; it was bulk rolled, and I forgot to label it properly.    The negs were thin, but printable.


----------



## Marctwo

ksmattfish said:
			
		

> ...The negs were thin, but printable.


Aw shucks! I'm going to have to try that myself now - just to see it.


----------



## Hertz van Rental

Both C41 and E6 films are actually black and white to start with, the colour being put in during processing.
Both film are called 'tri-pack', being 3 b&w films in one.
Each film consists of three b&w film layers, each layer sensitised to either red, blue or green light.
Both films are initially processed using a standard b&w developer to produce a silver mask for each layer.
Other chemicals are included that contain 'colour-couplers' which produce the different colours in each layer.
The silver masks are then bleached out.
E6 differs in that the first development is followed by chemical fogging and a second development to get a 'negative' of the negative (in effect a positive) and this positive acts as the mask for colour development.
Because it works on a positive the colours are reversed to make a colour positive, hence 'colour reversal'.
There is some degree of 'compatibility' between colour films and b&w chemistry in that the silver will be processed but, because of the structure of the film, the 'negs' are very low contrast even though they may appear quite dense.
B&w films may be processed using colour chemicals, but again the results are far from satisfactory (and will be b&w) and are best avoided.
C41 may be succesfully processed as E6 and vice-versa and can produce some interesting results. This is because they share the same basic chemistry and both have colour-couplers present.


----------



## Rob

Cool stuff... keep 'em coming!


----------



## Marctwo

That's great food for thought, Hertz (but I'm bound to cook it wrong  ).

Does this basically mean that slide film processed as C41 will produce negatives and print film processed as E6 will produce positives?


----------



## Hertz van Rental

Processing slide film as C41 produces negs but with slightly odd colours. The effect can be interesting.
To be honest I couldn't tell you what you would get processing colour neg in E6. Theoretically you would get a positive but you must remember that neg film has a dark yellow base. You filter this out when printing but if you process it as tranny then the effect would be like looking at the world through a bottle of Lucozade.
There is no way to remove the dye.
By and large cross-processing is something most people do once out of curiosity and then don't bother again.


----------



## Marctwo

Well, I'll certainly be trying some E6 as C41 - it'll be interesting to see what Vuescan can make of it.


----------



## ksmattfish

doc_in_bc said:
			
		

> Depends now doesn't it ?!



That is sort of the point of this thread.  To show the different ways different photographers develop their film.  One person's methods and techniques may not be right for the next person, but I think it's good to hear how others do it.  We get so many posts asking  "how do I develop film?" that I wanted to demonstrate there is no one right way, and maybe pick up some tidbits of info here and there.  You can't go into too much detail (meaning we want to hear all the details   ).


----------



## duelinthedeep

is the developer for color film any different from b&w film?
when developing color film, does the developer stay in as long as it would with b&w film?
is it a different developer and time with slide?


----------



## Hertz van Rental

B&W film developer reduces the silver halide in the film to silver grains, building up an image.
Colour Neg developer (eg C41) does the same thing _but in addition_ has colour couplers in the dev which work with chemicals released by the dev process to produce a colour image formed with dyes. All the silver is then bleached out to leave the colour negative.
Colour reversal developer (eg E6) again works in the same way _initially_ to produce a b&w neg. The film is then fogged and a second development is carried out. The second dev produces a positive image in a similar way to C41, colour couplers producing dyes in the emulsion. All the silver is then bleached out to leave the colour positive.
As for development times - they vary depending on the film, ISO and chemistry.

This explanation is simplified for clarity.


----------



## duelinthedeep

Hertz van Rental said:
			
		

> B&W film developer reduces the silver halide in the film to silver grains, building up an image.
> Colour Neg developer (eg C41) does the same thing _but in addition_ has colour couplers in the dev which work with chemicals released by the dev process to produce a colour image formed with dyes. All the silver is then bleached out to leave the colour negative.
> Colour reversal developer (eg E6) again works in the same way _initially_ to produce a b&w neg. The film is then fogged and a second development is carried out. The second dev produces a positive image in a similar way to C41, colour couplers producing dyes in the emulsion. All the silver is then bleached out to leave the colour positive.
> As for development times - they vary depending on the film, ISO and chemistry.
> 
> This explanation is simplified for clarity.


 

lol. what i want to do is put my negatives in my computer with a film scanner. the thing is i want to know if color and slide film require the same process as in b&w film,developing process that is.


----------



## Hertz van Rental

I thought I had just explained the developing process.
What exactly are you talking about, then?


----------



## duelinthedeep

i cant quite understand what you said.......kinda slower than usual, sorry.
i just want to be able to develop print,b&w and slide film so i can use the negatives to scan into a computer. my question is, for instance, if i just finished developing a b&w(non c-41)would i be able to pop a slide film in the tank and use the same developer and wait the same amount of time to develop it properly???

dont know if thats very clear.....i'm confusing myself.


----------



## Hertz van Rental

If you process colour film - slide or neg - in b&w dev you get a b&w neg but of such poor quality it's a waste of a film.
Colour film (neg and tranny) is quite different from ordinary black and white film. Colour films have three emulsion layers. Each one is sensitive to one of the three primary colours. To get a colour neg or tranny you need to use the correct  process.
If it was simply a matter of putting all films in the same dev there wouldn't be the need for C41 and E6 colour processes.
So to put it simply the answer to your question is: no, you can't.


----------



## duelinthedeep

got it! thanks.


----------



## 'Daniel'

Question- 

What is there - if anything - to stop you pulluing the film all out of the canister and cutting it free before winding on?  It's just alot easier to load if it's free of the canister.


----------



## ksmattfish

Daniel said:
			
		

> Question-
> 
> What is there - if anything - to stop you pulluing the film all out of the canister and cutting it free before winding on?  It's just alot easier to load if it's free of the canister.



I just pop the end off the cannister (with a bottle opener if it's not a reloadable cassette), and remove all the film still curled on the spool.  I wouldn't pull it through the felt; that's just increasing the chance to scratch the film.


----------



## ThomThomsk

^^^^ That's what I do too. If you really must pull the film out through the felt, try to leave enough of the leader sticking out when you rewind, so you can get hold of it. I tried using one of those film retrievers once, with a clear plasic blade that slots inside the cassette, and managed to (a) completely fail to retrieve the film and (b) fog the first few frames. You could even see the outline of the blade on the film.

Thomas


----------



## 'Daniel'

Ok thanks alot guys.


----------



## myke zebb

hello everyone, i new here as indicated by  Posts : 1.
Anyway, i've been wanting to try an effect with cracking the emulsion with a really hot or cold stop bath and i was wondering if anyone has tried this.  just looking for pointers if anyone has some.
tanks, a bunch.


----------



## terri

myke zebb said:
			
		

> hello everyone, i new here as indicated by Posts : 1.
> Anyway, i've been wanting to try an effect with cracking the emulsion with a really hot or cold stop bath and i was wondering if anyone has tried this. just looking for pointers if anyone has some.
> tanks, a bunch.


Hi Myke, and welcome to the forum. There was some recent mention of this in this thread but if you want more detailed discussion, just start a brand new thread.


----------



## myke zebb

thanks terri, you are a peach.


----------



## Torus34

Mike Z -

In the good ol' days [20's through 50's], it was rather easy to crackle [reticulate] a film emulsion. In fact, if your weren't paying strict attention, it could happen accidentally. The base was gelatin in those days of long ago.  Then the R&D guys got busy and produced emulsions in bases that were darned hard to crackle. I mean really, really hard.

The best way to get the effect today is to take a high contrast shot of a crackle finish and then sandwich the negatives. Of course, you could also shoot other patterns and get a whole roll of interesting sandwich-able negatives. A trip to your local fabric shop should result in al sorts of 'aha!' experiences. Then, just chummy-up to the salesperson so that she'll cut you short pieces without running up the bill. Stretch the fabric against a high contrast background, focus, shoot, process and you're on your way.


----------



## burtharrris

My birthday is coming up and there is nothing I want.  I was thinking about asking for some developing stuff and give it a shot.  I just want to develop my Tmax 100 (maybe later get chemicals for my E6), and I dont need to make prints right now.  I was assuming I'd need a tank, a reel, and some chemicals.  I've been reading and know I need developer, stop bath, fixer, and wetting agent. When I go on B&H's website, I see a hundred chemicals and don't know what to choose.  Does anyone have favorite brands and types for any/all of these chemicals? Thanks guys!


----------



## terri

burtharrris said:
			
		

> My birthday is coming up and there is nothing I want. I was thinking about asking for some developing stuff and give it a shot. I just want to develop my Tmax 100 (maybe later get chemicals for my E6), and I dont need to make prints right now. I was assuming I'd need a tank, a reel, and some chemicals. I've been reading and know I need developer, stop bath, fixer, and wetting agent. When I go on B&H's website, I see a hundred chemicals and don't know what to choose. Does anyone have favorite brands and types for any/all of these chemicals? Thanks guys!


Hi there, and welcome to the forum! You'll get better answers to your question here if you start a new thread. To post your question in this one leaves it kind of buried. Try again, ok? Lots of people available to help.


----------



## Majik Imaje

I learned how by looking and reading the TIME/LIFE series on photography

color photography to be specific.. USE THESE tricks.. on B&W also

So many many many people have said.. color is too hard..!

exactly the opposite of what is TRUE.

BLACK & WHITE as an art form.. IS EXTREMELY DIFFICULT and there are very few.. that can ever achieve this! 
wow.! I bet you never expected to hear that!

let me give the reasons!!

Black and white photograhy has a wide temperature range 68 - 75 degrees

color film processing (Kodak method) has a 1/4 degree range or tolerance!

each way.. so it is actually a 1/2 degree range

NOW IN processing black and white film, by what ever method you use.

if your OFF buy a few degrees.. you still get GREAT RESULTS or so you tend to believe!

which tends to START a habit. a bad habit, a sloppy habit!

and if you try and switch over to color you will FAIL! the results will be terrible, all because of your habits.!!

I always advise people.. start by learning how to correctly develop color film, it is very easy.. but exacting, demanding, and precise.

now your STARTING good habits, disclipined habits precise habits

Take a dish pan that is used in the sink to wash dishes

this is how you control the temperature. EXACTLLY! to keep that 1/4 degree range. precisely!

I am assuming you have the film rolled up on the reels in the tank

that is stainless steel -=DO NOT USE PLASTIC=-

WHY? cause one of the most important aspects of the process is the intial SLAM of that container on the surface of the table.. one slam
WHACK! one only.. for the sole purpose of disloging any air bubbles that might rest on the film surface. If your using plastic.. some day.. that tank is going to crack and leak! I have done it and learned the hard way.

Invest in stainless steel only, I like Kiniderman!

fill the tub with water at about 120 degrees

the temp doesn't really matter one bit. we have to heat up the chemicals

get them moving UP!

C-41 process is as follows

Developer 3:15

stop

bleach

fix

wash

photo flo

Now I just gotta tell you the truth here.. I haven't developed color film since 1985

BUT.. ..I HAVE processed thousands of rolls and I have / had it down pat

The entire process takes 24 minutes!

http://majikimaje.com/drkrm15.jpg

Lets use visual aid for this ok?

I am going to refer to this photo to sorta explan things easier

your chemicals ?? what are they stored in ?? yours not mine

you need something that can hold 16 ounces of solution. What are you going to use.? they make plastic brown bottles w/red caps they will do.. but I don't like plastic because it is porus. and difficlut to clean properly

I don't want to ever take the chance of cross containmiation

that is the reason I have "colored dots" on the bottles and on the cap cover.. 

I like glass.. it responds FASTER. than plastic can!

bottom shelf left side.see the stianless steel tank (tall) to the right
are glass one quart bottles

I used to purchase Microdol X and throw the solution away.. I want the bottle not the solution.

now I have four of these bottles in the dish tray. heating up.
develper bottle is open and a GOOD accurate thermometer is inserted

we are trying to achieve a temp of 101 degrees exactly

you can't have just one thermometer and expect accurate results

several of them have to be used to find out which is TRUE OR TRUEST

once THAT is determined.. then you may use ONLY ONE but first you have to know what is true.. now we have digital and I am sure that is more accurate!


As the temperature starts to rise and get closer to the 101 we are headed for. start to run water into the bath at 101 ( get that hotter water out of there) maintain 101 using a hose or attachement to the sink your using.

see image left side. of the sink. these are easily attached to any existing sink in your home.Using a hose makes things just so much easier

and building your own sink is ten times better than any snk in your house.

if you have the room to do so!

the temp is exactly 101 time to start

water is running off to the side.. now FILL THAT TANK RAPIDLY .. 

WITH WATER !!!!!!!!!!!! you forgot.. we have to heat up the film and the tank itself.. especially the FILM..if you were to pour develper into that dry tank.. at 101 it will drop to 98.xxx you just blew it.
dump it all out after about 30 seconds
lower temp to 100.25 or 100.5 in the tub in Your sink


precise habits.. disclipined habits..exacting habits..


water is dumped out and it is all blue/green!!! the coating on the color film comes off a bit. .good. 
pour the develper into your tank and START THE TIMER. slam that tank on something solid ONCE ONLY. and place into the tub that still should be 101 

AGITATION is very very important. critical even.

too much, and your going to get much higher contrast and you don't want that.
The tank has been place into the water bath the timer is started

EVERY 13 SECONDS AGITATE FOR TWO SECONDS ONLY in this manner
the top of your hand goes over the tank and you pick it up and turn it over once, twice and put it back...watch that timer.

Make good firm movements hard and fast. place the tank into the water don't slam it

10 seconds before the 3:15 time is up, pour out the developer and get the stop bath in quickly and agitate for 30 seconds to one minute.
go though the rest of the steps and relax.. you just did the IMOSSIBLE.

THE REST OF THE CHEMICLAS have a range of 75 - 101

but you will be automatically keeping them well within the desired range.. 

the critical step is the developer.

Now when you learn to do this method.. AND THEN you go into black and white. your going to get comlelty different results. because your now doing things precisely.

creating a black and white image I can be 10 degress off and still get a good image using black and white. sorta.. 

but you will NEVER get decent results if you try to do that in color!

I am talking about taking a photograph and then placing it beside the object you took the image of and HAVEING IT MATCH PERFECTLY!

THAT IS WHAT VERICOLOR FILM IS ALL ABOUT!! EXACT MATCH !!!

GET SOME!!

1973.. Well I have to tell this story later. Kodak had ten million on the table.. for ME!!!


I hope this post helped some.. if I didnt explain anything clear enough feel free to ask. I wll give more details and if I left out something you want to know about.. majik@gci.net i am always here. and you will get a swift response.!!


----------



## Majik Imaje

I have re-read the thread. and I want to share with you some important tips.

Yes !!
use photo flo always and 
yes use your fingers only to wipe the film

Photowipes ARE A MUST.. they have a million uses!

Color ? oh.. here.. http://majikimaje.com/eatsnow3.jpg http://majikimaje.com/dellafay.jpg

go to google C-41  too many changes siince 85  but same sorta




go to the drug stores in your area ask if they have empty brown bottles

that is how I always get a huge collection for free! Ask at hospitals also
they only throw them out! get em!


----------



## ully

Both stainless tank and plastic can be used. I use the Nikors and Paterson.
The stainless absorbs temp changes fast and the plastic stores the temp better. I prefer the Nikor stainless. 

For a bath, I use a big foam plastic tub full of water at the temp I want. I put a wire basket in it to just submerge my tanks. I add a aquarium stirrer in to circulate the water and turn off and on a coffee cup heater if I need a little heat. Normally I can keep the temp within a degree quite easily for the time I need.

Two and three part mixes for C41 is about as easy as for B&W film. Its really easy to develop a roll or two at less cost than a lab. I normally store up enough film to use most of my mixed batch within a short time. Storage is a problem if you don't do much film.

There used to be a lot more selection for C41 chemistry than there is now. But B&H has several kits. I like Tetenal the best.


----------



## Majik Imaje

ALWAYS USE KODAK PRODUCTS
They are the oldest(company) & still the best.

STICK with ONE FILM..learn how to use it and that is going to take ?

much practice !


KODAK'S ABOSLUTE BEST EVER COLOR FILM (negative)

Is STILL Vericolor! get some.. it is the only film made... .. for exact match EXACTING RESULTS!

If you do purchase vericolor film.. make sure you purchase it out of the freezer.. NOT OFF THE SHELF!

My philosiphy is this.. CHEMICALS, FILM, PAPER, ( I learned the hard way)
IF YOU WANT THE BEST.. ... ..  then use the best! - simple!


----------



## Fate

Is there a good website for buying B&W chemicals from? Based in the uk.


----------



## burtharrris

It might be just me, but I'd prefer to buy in a store.  The owner of the shop usually knows a lot, and can make some good recommendations as well.  Plus that fact that most mail-order companies aren't allowed to ship/mail Stop Bath (acetic acid).  I only know of Ritz, B&H, Adorama, and Calumet, they are all US companies.

Contrary to the previous post, you don't have to get all Kodak.  You don't have to buy all Ilford.  It all works, and when you just start you really can't tell the difference anyway.


----------



## ThomThomsk

burtharrris said:


> It might be just me, but I'd prefer to buy in a store



Me too, but then I have the luxury of passing close to this place a few times a week:

http://www.silverprint.co.uk/

I've never tried Silverprint's mail order service, but I have used these people and they were fine:

http://www.retrophotographic.com/


----------



## Early

ksmattfish said:


> ... although once I accidentally processed some C41 BW with the standard BW method and chems; it was bulk rolled, and I forgot to label it properly.    The negs were thin, but printable.


I always wanted to try that.  How was the grain?


----------



## yellowjeep

I have been looking at B&H and else where and I am sorry if I missed, but where is the best place to get a starter kit for B+W?


----------



## christopher walrath

This is for TMX-120 roll film in HC110 Dil'B', Indicator Stop Bath and Kodafix in a downstairs half bathroom

16 oz Stainless Steel Tank and reels. (With reels with the bent around wire clips, I suggest bending the ends of the clips a little further around with a small pair of needle nose pliers to allow the film to load into the clip a little deeper.)

First I mix my chems form the stock solutions for one-shot use.

HC110 Dilution B (1:31) (0.5 ounces HC110 to 15.5 ounces 68F water)
Kodak Indicator Stop Bath (1:63) (0.25 ounces Bath to 15.75 ounces 68F water)
Kodafix Fixing Agent (1:3) (4 ounces Kodafix to 12 ounces 68F water)
For water I use tap as long as I don't taste the monthly chemical dump from a test drink I take first.

Seal your door edges so that no light comes into the room.  Then I load the film in the dark.  (If you're new at this, ppractice this in the light with a practice roll, first looking at it, then with eyes closed.)  First, TURN OUT THE LIGHTS.  (OOOOOOHHHHHH, SCARY!!!!!!)  Then I seperate the film from the paper backing until I get to the tape on the inner end.  I pull the tape off the paper and fold it over the end of the film.  Then I feed the taped end into the clip and load the film into the reel, checking for slack every half turn (1/4 inch or so).  If the film moves then keep going.  If not, you skipped a loop, go back, fix it and then proceed.  The end will want to curl so take your time and make sure that the film is settled into both spools on the reel so that there is a seperation between the edge of the film and the inner loop.  Put the film into the tank, close the lid and then turn on your lights.

Get out your timer, your thermometer (to maintain temp of running water), a towel to wipe up chems or splashed water.

WATER PRESOAK ONE MINUTE
Fill the tank with 68F water for a one minute presoak.  I agitate once initially during the presoak.

DEVELOP SIX MINUTES
Dump water in sink, fill the tank with developer.  Agitate continuously first 30 seconds then 5 seconds for every thirty through the six minute development time.

(Note: When filling the tank, a. fill near the edge of the sink so if you get an air bubble you don't have to move far to tap it loose and b. hold tank at an angle to prevent air bubble from forming in the first place.)

STOP BATH THIRTY SECONDS
Dump developer into sink.  Fill tank with stop bath.  Agitate once initailly.

FIXER FOR FIVE MINUTES
Dump stop bath into sink.  Fill tank with fixer.  I agitate once every twenty seconds for duration of fixing.

WATER RINSE
TWENTY MINUTES
I began rinsing for twenty minutes with the water running very slowly, enough to fill the tank every five minutes, for twenty minutes.
5-10-20
But then I did this which takes less time and water.  Fill tank with water and agitate five times.  Pour out.  Refill and agitate ten times.  Pour out and refill.  Agitate twenty times.  Pour out.

PHOTO FLO DRYING AGENT ONE MINUTE.
Lift the reel out of the tank, pour a wee little bit of the Photo FLo or a drop of dishsoap into the bottom of the tank and fill, replacing the reel into the tank and let water run for one minute.  Then turn off water, remove film from reel, run between index and middle finger to 'squeegee' water from the negative strip and hang dry.  I use wood clothespins, one on top, one on bottom.  Rinse sink and gear THOROUGHLY, turn on fan and leave film to dry for about an hour.  Then cut and store in archive sheets.

Upcoming details for Fuji Neopan 400 and Efke 25 for this chemistry.  Please forward any questions to flash19901@comcast.net or post them here.


----------



## Smilemon

I run 2 pints of water through my hot shot to get it warm. Then I take the nalgeen bottle (that is taped to stop light from getting in) and open the top and put the thermometer in. I get the temp to about 20 C (I don't know how accurate my thermometer is) and I fill my tank.
I use a single tank. Its Stainless steel with a nice stainless steel reel and cap and lid. Its 8 oz and I just single shot the dev.

11 min of dev.
30 sec - 1 min of rinse
5 min of fix
Remove lid
30 sec - 1 min of rinse
1 min of hypo clear
4 min of rinse
1 min of Photoflo
Then I wrap it up in a towel and dry it. I'm thinking of taking a Quaker oats tube and an old fan to make a film dryer. Think it would work?


----------



## nanny32

Coooool !


----------



## ToddLange

sorry for the post in the old thread, but i think all you darkroom folks round the forums will be seeing a lot of me in the darkroom parts. lol so.

i normally develop my photos in sun light(whats the darkroom for???). works pretty good, but they all come out dark as night! what am i doing wrong?!?! :lmao: haha jk.

from the somewhat little experience in the darkroom at school I know what im doing, but dont really know what im doin at the same time but i have a great time doin it! and i like my prints! lol.

i know how to do the test strips and how long its suppose to be in the developer and stop bath and fixer then the wash and dryer

and we are only doing b&w's so i dont know anything about color. but i actually rather keep it that way, b&w seems to have that art technique thing goin on with it.(not saying color doesnt, i just have yet to mess with color and dont know if i want to. i like b&w)



so is there any special techniques yall use in the darkroom that you think makes your prints turn out better?


----------



## Kirep

Hi reviving an old thread :

I rutinously develop C41 films (Kodak Gold & Fuji Superia) as B&W using caffenol chemicals. Its extremely simple!
And the results are good, as long as you are able to follow simple instructions.  Just do a search on this forum for Kafenol 327R.............


----------



## waderr

Am not well experienced in tis but i think ur way not bad


----------



## waderr

I dont think so try it in us... I can assure u ucan get there


----------



## KCHRIZTIAM

i like this post : Thumbup:


----------



## Cruzingoose

Time to revive the thread again

Here are some commercial chemicals, dilutions and usage from my notebook.................NOTE: These dilutions are my own and are tested and still used. 

*Champion RA4 Developer 1 Liter Mix
*
Water 900mL
Part A 25mL
Part B 20mL
Part C 50mL
---------------------------------------------------------
*Russel Neocolor C-41 Developer* *500 mL Mix*

Water 460mL
Part A 34mL
Part B 4mL
Part C 6mL
----------------------------------------------------------
*Champion RA4 Blix 1 Liter Mix*

Water 675mL
Part A 150mL
Part B 190ml
---------------------------------------------------------
*Kodak RA4 1 Liter Mix*

Water 875mL
Part A 50mL
Part B 25mL
Part C 50mL
---------------------------------------------------------
*Fuji-Hunt C41 Developer 1 Liter Mix*
Do not exceed 2.5 minutes for 800+ iso film unless pushing. Excellent for increasing the effective ISO for night or high speed photography.

Water 950mL
Part A 57mL
Part B 14mL
Part C 14mL
------------------------------------------------------------
*Russell RAP4 Developer 1 Liter Mix*
Solid blacks and contrast like EP2 process
Water 900mL
Part A 50mL
Part B 20mL
Part C 50mL
--------------------------------------------------------------
*Kodak RA4 Ektacolor Prime Blix 1 LIter Mix*
For film and paper
Water 500mL
Part A 200mL
Part B 300mL
---------------------------------------------------------------
*Champion SP VR RA4 Developer  1 Liter Mix*
Single component developer
Water 880mL
Solution 120mL
---------------------------------------------------------------
*Kodak Flexicolor C-41 Developer 1 Liter Mix*

Water 924mL
Part A 60mL
Part B 8mL
Part C 8mL
---------------------------------------------------------------


----------



## gsgary

ksmattfish said:


> Marctwo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It seems that when people talk about film developing, it should be taken for granted that they are specifically refering to B&W film.
> 
> I've only done C-41 colour but it sounds pretty similar to B&W apart from temperature and chemicals.  Is there any degree of cross-compatibillity between chemicals?  No idea!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I intentionally left out the "BW" in the thread subject because I hoped someone would talk about C41 or E6.
> 
> The chems are different, although once I accidentally processed some C41 BW with the standard BW method and chems; it was bulk rolled, and I forgot to label it properly.    The negs were thin, but printable.
Click to expand...



Rodinal is great for B+W C41 my tried and tested is, Rodinal 1+25 20degs for 19 minutes 7 invertions every minute

XP2







Kodak  T400CN


----------



## gsgary

Fate said:


> Is there a good website for buying B&W chemicals from? Based in the uk.



Silverprint - Home - News - Photographic Materials and more -

http://www.theimagingwarehouse.com/Products/Chemicals

And RK on ebay


----------



## timor

gsgary said:


> Fate said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is there a good website for buying B&W chemicals from? Based in the uk.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Silverprint - Home - News - Photographic Materials and more -
> 
> http://www.theimagingwarehouse.com/Products/Chemicals
> 
> And RK on ebay
Click to expand...

What's RK ?


----------



## gsgary

timor said:


> What's RK ?



A seller of Ro9 and other chemicals i will find a link


----------



## gsgary

gsgary said:


> timor said:
> 
> 
> 
> What's RK ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A seller of Ro9 and other chemicals i will find a link
Click to expand...


RK RK Photographic Film Developers - Chemicals - Black and White - Traditional


----------



## timor

Thanks. Total lack of Kodak films, interesting.


----------



## gsgary

timor said:


> Thanks. Total lack of Kodak films, interesting.



Ive just ordered some speedibrew Resofine 2 bath


----------



## gsgary

timor said:


> Thanks. Total lack of Kodak films, interesting.



Ilford is much easier to get hold of not sure any of the camera shops near me stock Kodak B+W


----------



## timor

Is Kodak condemned already in GB ?


----------



## gsgary

timor said:


> Is Kodak condemned already in GB ?




Don't think so just don't see it in the shops much, plenty on ebay


----------



## timor

gsgary said:


> timor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is Kodak condemned already in GB ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't think so just don't see it in the shops much, plenty on ebay
Click to expand...

Silverprint has Kodak films. IDK what is going on, but Kodak is still almost half the price of Ilford in GB. Here (NA) Kodak prices rose to almost match Ilfords.
 I never used Resofine as it is not available here. In any case to make two bath developer for classic grain films is not a brainer, only a box of 20 Mule Team Borax is needed. I am very curious how are you going to like Resofine, I heard opinions that it is soft on HP5, good for portraits.


----------



## gsgary

timor said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> timor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is Kodak condemned already in GB ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't think so just don't see it in the shops much, plenty on ebay
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Silverprint has Kodak films. IDK what is going on, but Kodak is still almost half the price of Ilford in GB. Here (NA) Kodak prices rose to almost match Ilfords.
> I never used Resofine as it is not available here. In any case to make two bath developer for classic grain films is not a brainer, only a box of 20 Mule Team Borax is needed. I am very curious how are you going to like Resofine, I heard opinions that it is soft on HP5, good for portraits.
Click to expand...


Had an email from RK today all the Resofine has gone and there are no plans to make any more so it looks like i will have to try Ilfosol 3


----------



## timor

gsgary said:


> Had an email from RK today all the Resofine has gone and there are no plans to make any more so it looks like i will have to try Ilfosol 3


You are heading for disaster. D76 would be much, much better. Still it is not a 2 bath. Garry, I know, the money is always a factor but consider this: what you are doing is so called "fine photography", it is not commercial, it is for your pleasure and satisfaction you get from the quality of your creation. How much value will you place on that ? Very few people shooting 35 mm is doing 2-bath dev yet the idea is in use as long as Leica. Little history from another English photographer (whom I like very much):
2-bath developer « Darkroom User
I guess Barry Thornton you know well:
barrythornton.com
Silverprint has all needed bulk (or *raw* how they say) chemicals, mixing is as simple as it gets and the price is not that much.
However the whole idea of two bath could be extended further, with regular, ready to use developers like HC110, Tmax Dev or LC29 for that matter. All you need is just a regular, laundry grade borax or sodium metaborate in a case of tabular grain films. This way I concluded works even better, than classic two bath, as it is much easier to control contrast and density of the neg. as opposite to 2-bath which is an automatic development, no controls. Stoecler, Diafine and the others have tendency to be soft, the other method usually is razor sharp, easily competes with Beutler.


----------



## ceeboy14

Majik Imaje said:


> I have re-read the thread. and I want to share with you some important tips.
> 
> Yes !!
> *use photo flo always* and
> yes use your fingers only to wipe the film
> 
> Photowipes ARE A MUST.. they have a million uses!
> 
> Color ? oh.. here.. http://majikimaje.com/eatsnow3.jpg http://majikimaje.com/dellafay.jpg
> 
> go to google C-41  too many changes siince 85  but same sorta
> 
> 
> 
> 
> go to the drug stores in your area ask if they have empty brown bottles
> 
> that is how I always get a huge collection for free! Ask at hospitals also
> they only throw them out! get em!



I never use Photo-Flo and consider it to be one of the worst menaces of B&W photography for students. Wash as you are set by the film's processing requirements then rinse for one minute in distilled water. You will get a much cleaner negative and will not need to "wipe" between your fingers or the ever so dreaded squegee to get off the excess liquid which for my students was the number one scratch making technique. Always discard the distilled water at the end of the rinse. I do like photo wipes but not on film.


----------



## timor

ceeboy14 said:


> I never use Photo-Flo and consider it to be one of the worst menaces of B&W photography.


Similar feelings here.


----------



## amolitor

Hmm? What are the negative effects of photoflo? You perceive it as making squeegeeing (either with fingers or squeegee) necessary? I use it, because without it I get water spots (which I agree distilled water would help with) but I don't squeegee or otherwise let anything whatsoever touch the film's surface.


----------



## ceeboy14

Many people have suggested using their fingers to rid the excess water which I never advocate for the obvious reasons. Photo-flo leaves a residue on the film's surface which if dried in an uneven drying environment can cause uneven exposure in the enlarger. Under ideal circumstances it can have its use but with students, I soon learned their are no ideal situations after the first fifteen minutes of the darkroom in operation. Distilled water works everytime. Try to envision a 25 enlarger/four film loading rooms/four film development /two alternative darkroom stations maxxed to capacity for 6 hours a day and then you will understand why I went back to my first photography teacher's advice and learned not to use Photo-Flo. I simply could not afford excess use of paper and chemicals due to uneven negatives.

Hey, but if it works for you, I'd certainly not change. It actually costs less than distilled water over the course of a year's operation. Another reason to use distilled water is to rid any of your local water's impurities from the film surface such as lime, iron, sulphur, etc.


----------



## timor

I don't really know, it works for some people, doesn't for others. For me if used in light dilution still lives water spots on the film, if used in stronger dilution it leaves own gunk on the film. It seems that photoflo does not provide enough sheeting action to carry itself out of the film. I prefer distilled water mix with some alcohol, clean and no potentially smudging soaps and detergents.


----------



## gsgary

ceeboy14 said:


> Many people have suggested using their fingers to rid the excess water which I never advocate for the obvious reasons. Photo-flo leaves a residue on the film's surface which if dried in an uneven drying environment can cause uneven exposure in the enlarger. Under ideal circumstances it can have its use but with students, I soon learned their are no ideal situations after the first fifteen minutes of the darkroom in operation. Distilled water works everytime. Try to envision a 25 enlarger/four film loading rooms/four film development /two alternative darkroom stations maxxed to capacity for 6 hours a day and then you will understand why I went back to my first photography teacher's advice and learned not to use Photo-Flo. I simply could not afford excess use of paper and chemicals due to uneven negatives.
> 
> Hey, but if it works for you, I'd certainly not change. It actually costs less than distilled water over the course of a year's operation. Another reason to use distilled water is to rid any of your local water's impurities from the film surface such as lime, iron, sulphur, etc.



All i do is hold each end of the film and pull my hands apart quickly 7 times and it flicks most of the water off i was taught this years ago when i was about 10 from an old photographer that lived next door and worked for a national newspaper


----------



## timor

gsgary said:


> All i do is hold each end of the film and pull my hands apart quickly 7 times and it flicks most of the water off i was taught this years ago when i was about 10 from an old photographer that lived next door and worked for a national newspaper


You must be a tall guy. 6'6" ?


----------



## gsgary

timor said:


> You must be a tall guy. 6'6" ?



not that tall but my arms are long enough couldnt do it when i was 10


----------



## timor

gsgary said:


> timor said:
> 
> 
> 
> You must be a tall guy. 6'6" ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> not that tall but my arms are long enough couldnt do it when i was 10
Click to expand...

I will keep my distance. On the other hand I quit using 36 frames films long time ago, now only 12 to 18 max. Sure, I am loosing some film but I can develop my film with more precision as usually I use about 12 frames on one subject.


----------



## smerchant

I'm going to revive this thread a bit with an E-6 question. I've been reading a bit about the archival properties of E-6 with Fujichrome vs. Kodachrome and how formaldehyde is important for making slides last longer and is something that you don't get with the 3-bath kits such as the Arista and Tetenal kits and that also heated drying is also necessary. I'm hoping that I'm on the right track. Does this mean that in order to have slides that will last longer I would be better off having them sent off to be developed? I've read a lot about a Kodak at home developing kit that is no longer in production but found online documentation and created this wishlist of products: Wish List | B&H Photo Video 

If I was able to get these products from my local shop, would this allow me to develop E-6 at home that would have optimal archival properties or would the 3-bath kits work and I'm just getting information wrong? (I hope this question makes sense). Thanks!

This is one of the threads I was reading if it helps: Tetenal E6 Chemistry? [Archive] - APUG


----------



## vintagesnaps

I'm wondering if the home processing chemistry and kits may not have the same formulas as what labs use. Isn't formaldehyde uh, not the best thing to have around the house maybe?? or possibly toxic/hazardous to use at home?? or not used as much anymore because of safety concerns?? seems like I've read somethng about it but I'm not sure what. 

I suppose you might ask at your local camera shop that carries these supplies and see what they can tell you. I think  Freestyle Photographic Supplies - Traditional Black & White Film, Paper, Chemicals, Holgas and ULF  carries the kits for C41 etc. but are probably the ones you're talking about that may not preserve slides as well. Maybe using a lab would be the way to have slides processed to make sure they'll be better preserved, if they still use different chemistry than the home kits.


----------



## smerchant

I just asked someone at my local camera shop today while I was in having some C-41 processed and the guy I spoke had no doubt that the at home stuff was any different than the photo lab chemicals. He only was familiar with the Kodak kit that is no longer in production and said that in that particular shop they don't sell any E-6 or C-41 processing chemicals since there just isn't the demand and the cost for shipping is too much to justify even special ordering. They charge $16 a roll for send-out processing but I have seen other services that look reputable charge half that and take less time. I think I'm going to do some research on some send-out services and probably stick with those since what I am going to use slides mostly for is travel and I don't want to risk those and I'd also like to have them last as long as possible.


----------



## matt_89

Hi, 

I'm completely new to home processing and due to my local developer not being able to develop B&W (seems ridiculous I know) I am going to attempt to develop my 120 B&W myself.

My sister already has a processing drum and she's developed film before but she was always given the chemicals without knowing brand names and things like that. So she's fairly knowledgeable when it comes to the process of development but we're completely lost at which chemicals to get and things like that.

From my knowledge, what we'll need is some developer, stop bath and fixer. And also a timer and maybe even a thermometer to ensure consistent results.

It would be much appreciated if somebody could point me in the right direction in terms of the equipment/chemicals needed. As I said before, we'll be processing this through a development drum.

Thanks in advance.

Edit: Also, will there be any differences between processing standard film like Ilford and lomography film?


----------



## Josh66

matt_89 said:


> Edit: Also, will there be any differences between processing standard film like Ilford and lomography film?



The steps will be the same, but the times will be different.

B&W Film Developing Times | The Massive Dev Chart

The Massive Dev Chart is a good starting point.  The packaging the film came in should also have times for common developers on it.


If you have the tank and reels already, then all you need is storage containers of the appropriate capacity, and a graduated cylinder or two for measuring chemicals.  And the thermometer.  And the timer...  But you could use your phone or watch for that.  I use the chronograph on my watch.


You're right though - developer, stop bath, and fixer is what you need.  Photo Flo, or some other wetting agent would be good to have as well.


----------



## matt_89

I was thinking of getting this as it seems to come with all the chemicals you need except the wetting agent. Although some people seem happy enough just using water to clean their film but I'll decide on that later.

RK Photographic B&W Film Processing Kit

It comes with a rapid fixer though. What are people's experience of this? Are they more or less the same as traditional fixer or are there variations in results to consider?

Furthermore, I'd like t achieve a warm tone on my B&W films. Is there a way this can be achieved whilst developing the films?


Ok, so everything kind of seems simple enough. It's just seems to be about learning the timings which is the most important thing. But how to people load their film. Just do it blind in the dark?

Edit:

http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.php?Film=Lady+Grey&Developer=Ilfosol+3&mdc=Search&TempUnits=C

There isn't a reading for 120 film under my likely choice of developer on this chart. Will there be much difference with the 35mm timing of 6.5 minutes?

Double Edit:

http://www.thedarkroom.co.uk/tradit...accessories/paterson-film-processing-kit.html

This kit seems to contain all the equipment I need...


----------



## Josh66

Provided that the developer it comes with will work for both films you plan to develop, it should be as good as anything else.  Not what I use, personally, but there's nothing wrong with it.  Typically, you will use different developers for fast and slow films.  Not sure which films you will be using it on...

For fixer, I have always used Kodak Kodafix - that is the only thing I have ever used, so I can't really make recommendations about anything else.


For loading the film into the reel (and then the reel into the tank), either a darkroom or a changing bag will work.  You'll have more freedom of movement in a darkroom (or a 'dark room' - just make sure it's actually dark, no light at all) but a changing bag is very convenient if you don't have a dedicated darkroom.  Once it's in the closed tank, you can bring it into the light.


For a 'warm tone', I think you'd have to use a staining developer - there are a few.  I haven't used them though, so won't comment on them other to say that they exist.


----------



## matt_89

I will be developing Lady Grey ISO 400 film (120). The problem I have with looking for chemicals is distinguishing between machine chemicals and chemicals to pour into a drum...or is there no difference?


----------



## Josh66

Only the times will be different.  Machine times will be much shorter.

Pretty much anything you buy will need to be diluted with (distilled) water though.  "One Shot" is when you mix what you need, then discard it.  Some developers can be reused for many (how many varies) rolls.  Fixer and stop bath, you use until it's spent, maybe 50 or 60 rolls.


----------



## matt_89

Ok.

I think I can get all the chemicals I need separately for cheaper from here: Silverprint - Store

I'll probably go with the Kodak D-76 as that seems to be a reliable developer. I assume that stop baths and fixers are all more or less the same. Are hardening agents necessary and what role do they play?


----------



## gsgary

matt_89 said:


> I will be developing Lady Grey ISO 400 film (120). The problem I have with looking for chemicals is distinguishing between machine chemicals and chemicals to pour into a drum...or is there no difference?



Chemicals are very easy to buy in the UK, this is a very good supplier, the link will get you started  RK Photographic B&W Film Processing Kit


----------



## Josh66

matt_89 said:


> Are hardening agents necessary and what role do they play?


As far as I know, very few films require it.  Efke (now out of production) being the more common one that does require it.

You're probably safe to go without a hardening fixer, but I always used one just because I shot a lot of Efke film.


----------



## matt_89

Thanks for the information guys. I guess the best thing to do really is to buy some stuff and develop some film.

If anybody knows how to get a warm tone out of Lady grey ISO 400 film, then that would be awesome.

Also, it'd be nice if people could recommend chemicals and explain their results.

At the moment, I'm probably going to go Kodak D-76 dev, Ilfostop bath stop and Ilford Rapid Fixer.

------

The next questions really are to do with development itself.

So once the films loaded, you pour in the developer and agitate it for however long it might take. I'm guessing the chart provided earlier will tell me the required dilution ratio.

Then tip of dev chemical and pour in bath stop. Again, required time varies but what about dilution ratio? 1:1?

Then tip that out and pour in fixer. What's the best way to find out how long fixer needs to go in for because this part is clearly just as important as the developer timing? And ratios too?

Then pour out and clean film with either water or water+wetting agent then dry.

Anyone got good tips to ensure all bubbles are eradicated?


----------



## Josh66

Stop bath and fixer will more or less be the same every time.  Developer is the main thing where dilutions and times can be all over the place.

I haven't used the film you're using, so I can't really give any advice other than just repeating whatever I can find after a search or two - but you could find that just as easily as me.

For the bubbles, the general rule is to tap the bottom of the tank on the counter a few times after agitation.  I do that, and I have never had an issue with bubbles...


----------



## timor

O|||||||O said:


> For a 'warm tone', I think you'd have to use a staining developer - there are a few.  I haven't used them though, so won't comment on them other to say that they exist.


Warm tone film ? There is no such a thing. Staining developers are made for different purpose. Term "warm tone" refers to a print and this is made on warm tone paper with warm tone paper developer for stronger result. You can also add sodium bromide in large quantities to regular paper developer (1g/0.5 l of working solution of let say Dektol) .
Josh, 30 sec of stop bath is not sufficient ? With fixing film will need about 4 min. in a fresh fixer.


----------



## Josh66

timor said:


> O|||||||O said:
> 
> 
> 
> For a 'warm tone', I think you'd have to use a staining developer - there are a few.  I haven't used them though, so won't comment on them other to say that they exist.
> 
> 
> 
> Warm tone film ? There is no such a thing. Staining developers are made for different purpose. Term "warm tone" refers to a print and this is made on warm tone paper with warm tone paper developer for stronger result. You can also add sodium bromide in large quantities to regular paper developer (1g/0.5 l of working solution of let say Dektol) .
Click to expand...


Well, like I said, I have never used them.


----------



## timor

O|||||||O said:


> timor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> O|||||||O said:
> 
> 
> 
> For a 'warm tone', I think you'd have to use a staining developer - there are a few.  I haven't used them though, so won't comment on them other to say that they exist.
> 
> 
> 
> Warm tone film ? There is no such a thing. Staining developers are made for different purpose. Term "warm tone" refers to a print and this is made on warm tone paper with warm tone paper developer for stronger result. You can also add sodium bromide in large quantities to regular paper developer (1g/0.5 l of working solution of let say Dektol) .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, like I said, I have never used them.
Click to expand...

I don't use staining developers either.
There was a question about Lady Gray origin... scuttlebutt says it's Tmax 400 which I doubt. I know, that Ilford is repackaging HP5 and Delta 400 (good for them) but it might be also Fomapan 400. Process will tell it, if the film base is blueish - Foma, if after 4 min. of fixing film will come out reddish - Tmax ( just put it back into fixer for another 4 min and pink will be gone), if no any hue then the rest of the world, but there is not many possibilities: HP5, Delta and maybe Fuji Neopan. Anyone else id making ISO 400 in 120 ?


----------



## Josh66

I have never shot any Lomo B&W films (the only Lomo branded films I have used were redscale C-41 film), but I think if it were Tmax, it'd be fairly easy to identify.

There are a few Agfa films that can be had under the Rollei name, but I have not heard of them being used by Lomo...


----------



## Josh66

Compare the listed times for Lady Grey to other films of the same speed and format (massive dev chart), and I bet one film will stand out as having mostly the same times.


----------



## Josh66

It probably actually is T-Max 400.  The times seem to match.  And Lady Grey is made in the USA, so that means it's made by Kodak.


----------



## matt_89

I'm confused now. So I should be using TMax 400 as my guideline for Lady Grey film?

Edit: Change of mind. Think I'll develop my Lady Grey with Ilfosol 3. Apparently it produces quite grainy results which could work well with this particular roll of film. Anybody have experience with this developer?

Some other places suggest using a 1+14 dilution for rookies just so the margin for error is larger. Does that mean I would increase the timings by about 50%? So instead of 6.5 min, I would time it for about 10 min...

Also, would it be wise to practise first with a test film? Does this literally just mean, waste a roll of film with random pictures and then practise developing with it?


----------



## Josh66

From what I see, you could.  I think it's pretty safe to say that it is in fact T-Max 400.

Lomography does not make film, they just repackage it.  How much is a roll of Lady Grey compared to a roll of T-Max 400?    Use whichever is cheaper.

It's made in the US, so it can only be T-Max or Tri-X.  With those two as the only options, it is definitely T-Max 400.


----------



## matt_89

But the dev chart shows timings for Lomo film including Lady Grey and Earl Grey...


----------



## Josh66

It shows the same times for both films?  I can't remember what Earl Grey is, but I believe it's Chinese...

Anyway, one is ISO 400, the other is ISO 100.  They're not going to have the same times.  If they do, I would question the accuracy of the chart you're looking at.


----------



## gsgary

matt_89 said:


> Thanks for the information guys. I guess the best thing to do really is to buy some stuff and develop some film.
> 
> If anybody knows how to get a warm tone out of Lady grey ISO 400 film, then that would be awesome.
> 
> Also, it'd be nice if people could recommend chemicals and explain their results.
> 
> At the moment, I'm probably going to go Kodak D-76 dev, Ilfostop bath stop and Ilford Rapid Fixer.
> 
> ------
> 
> The next questions really are to do with development itself.
> 
> So once the films loaded, you pour in the developer and agitate it for however long it might take. I'm guessing the chart provided earlier will tell me the required dilution ratio.
> 
> Then tip of dev chemical and pour in bath stop. Again, required time varies but what about dilution ratio? 1:1?
> 
> Then tip that out and pour in fixer. What's the best way to find out how long fixer needs to go in for because this part is clearly just as important as the developer timing? And ratios too?
> 
> Then pour out and clean film with either water or water+wetting agent then dry.
> 
> Anyone got good tips to ensure all bubbles are eradicated?



Take a look here they list both your films The Comprehensive Development Times Chart


----------



## matt_89

With the same ISO, there is a 30s difference between TMax 400 and Lady Grey 400. Minimal but still a difference.

That other dev chart is quite comprehensive but unfortunately doesn't have the timings for Ilfosol 3 but it does give timings for another Ilfosol dev and saying that it needs to be developed for 7.
Therefore, the 6.5 min mark sounds about right. That's all with a 1+9 dilution. I'm guessing if I diluted it 1+14, I should develop it for 10min.

Was I correct how the test roll (just use any old roll of film and practice with)?


----------



## gsgary

matt_89 said:


> With the same ISO, there is a 30s difference between TMax 400 and Lady Grey 400. Minimal but still a difference.
> 
> That other dev chart is quite comprehensive but unfortunately doesn't have the timings for Ilfosol 3 but it does give timings for another Ilfosol dev and saying that it needs to be developed for 7.
> Therefore, the 6.5 min mark sounds about right. That's all with a 1+9 dilution. I'm guessing if I diluted it 1+14, I should develop it for 10min.
> 
> Was I correct how the test roll (just use any old roll of film and practice with)?



Ilfotec DDX would be better with 400 film, Rodinal (RO9) could look nice with a bit of grain


----------



## Rollei12

I recently started developing my own film.  I'm curious how I can improve.  Here's my flickr page: Flickr Sketches on Film s Photostream

Looking for critiques here on the photos with chemicals listed.  (Scanned prints from lab otherwise).

Why I bring this up is because I recently bough Ansel Adam's three book series (camera, negative and print) and seen what the possibilities are with what you can do with negatives.  The rolls I've developed so far have been shot at box speed and were developed according to the company's suggested times.  Adams brings up an interesting tidbit on page 227 of The Negative on his photo, "Forest, Garland Regional Park, California": "....I used Kodak Tri-X Professional roll film developed in HC-110 diluted 1:30 from _stock_ (not from concentrate).  My intention was to convey the impression of soft, enveloping light."

Also this about a two-solution development:

"The principle is to allow developer to soak into the emulsion and then transfer the negative to a bath of water or mild alkali where it is allowed to rest without agitation.  The developer within the high-value areas of the negative quickly becomes exhausted while the developer continues to work in the lower values."

Some questions,

How does one know how long it takes to develop with techniques like the above?  If Ilford says it takes 6:30 min to develop such and such at 1+9, how can one figure out ultra diluted solution like the above: 1:30 from _stock_!  Is there a math formula?

Has anyone tried ultra diluted solution?  Can one get a "cleaner" image?  I've learned somewhere that the more diluted you go, the worse the outcome.

Also, has anyone tried the two-solution method?  Is it the better way to go?  What do you recommend: water or alkali?


----------



## 480sparky

I've tried stand developing with ultra-diluted DDX, but didn't like the grain that resulted.


----------



## timor

Congrats on shooting film. This is quite something different from digital capture. Basically is all you, no automated help of computer. However that implies all the credits for good or bad belong to you, it implies, that it will be not easy to get to to the point of real satisfaction. Are you ready to get "your fingers wet" ? It's gonna take some work to get impressed with real capabilities of photographic emulsion. The magic of b&w film lays in big numbers of possibilities, work is in eliminating the bad ones.
Yes, your question about "cleaner" image is very much in place. I looked at your's Sketches On Film and I am glad you see that it is not perfect, I am glad, that you are willing to fight instead of very popular "dropping of the idea" to shoot film. 
AA books are helpful, read them, it is amazing, what he could do with quite primitive materials of his days. However his remarks about film developing regards mostly stuff, which is out of production for many years plus usually it regards large format. He never work with 35 mm. 
Read this:
barrythornton.com
This guy understood more about film developing, than AA.
Clean your mind from any bias towards any film or chemical. Every film currently in production has good sides, any chemical has a purpose. Work out your own opinion, which ones are useful for you. It is a matter of understanding them.
Two bath development is an exciting proposition. I am big fun of it, 90% of my film is developed this way. Very few single bath developers will get your negatives to a place, where two bath takes them with ease. But of course it doesn't happen "automatically", there is no math formula, there is too many variables for that, what works for me might be not that perfect for you. For many reasons. Tweaking is always needed to fit your local conditions. In Ilford or Kodak instructions you will find a sentence, that all times for development given there are only a starting point and no guarantee of perfect development.
Enough for starters. If you are interested...


----------



## Rollei12

timor said:


> ....
> Enough for starters. If you are interested...



Thanks for your reply.  I'll check that site out!  I would like some feedback on my photos, if possible.  Do you see anything I could change to do it better?  Shadows are bad?  Photo too dark?  Too light?


----------



## timor

Rollei12 said:


> timor said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....
> Enough for starters. If you are interested...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for your reply.  I'll check that site out!  I would like some feedback on my photos, if possible.  Do you see anything I could change to do it better?  Shadows are bad?  Photo too dark?  Too light?
Click to expand...

What I can I tell you. Like for the first film development done by yourself, without guidance except for the text books not bad. However far from good. What is important you went through the whole process and ended up with some images. Let say it is your benchmark for the next time. I suspect, that your photodtream contain pictures from few rolls as they are shot across longer period of time. Correct me, if I am wrong.
Some pictures have good exposure, some don't. Some are over developed, some have very bad shadows, some are muddy, most has too much grain and lost sharpness. There are visible mistakes in development process and film handling. Uneven development, over agitation, over development, water spots and just dust. 
However nothing to worry about, as long as there is will, there is a way. In the course of the next 4-6 rolls you will see a great improvement. If you will read remarks from Barry Thornton you will notice his first fundamental : negative should be as delicate as possible. Such a negative will produce fine image. What's involved ? Well calculated exposure and well conducted development. Such a negative will have good shadows and highlights, will have tamed grain , good micro contrast and very good sharpness. First problems you may have will be with exposure. How do you arrive at yours ? Built in camera light meter ? What camera do you have ?


----------



## Rollei12

timor said:


> Rollei12 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> timor said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....
> Enough for starters. If you are interested...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for your reply.  I'll check that site out!  I would like some feedback on my photos, if possible.  Do you see anything I could change to do it better?  Shadows are bad?  Photo too dark?  Too light?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> First problems you may have will be with exposure. How do you arrive at yours ? Built in camera light meter ? What camera do you have ?
Click to expand...

Thank you again!  The only light meters I'm using are the ones in my cameras.  Worth while to buy a light meter then eh?  I didn't think the light meters in them were that bad!  Yikes.

I have: Nikon Fm2 and a  Nikon FM10.  Also a Canon AE-1 Program that has color film in it right now.  Those two Nikons though are what I have been using for black and white.

The large grain (which, at the time I was wanting and kind of expecting) perhaps came from both the film and the developer: 3200 speed film plus DDX, which apparently adds to the grain?  

What do you recommend for a good light meter?  What brand?  Say around for $300...no more.  Or is that too cheap?


----------



## timor

I would trust only FM2 light meter, FM10 is not even a Nikon (but Cosina, good, but not the same). All this meters measure reflected light and do averaging. Notting more erroneous. System in which small blob of very bright light may lead to under exposure and larger area of shadow to over expose. Modern DSLR meter is dealing with this in totally different way to get exposure right, but DSLR is a very powerful digital computer and film cameras are not. If you can have only one meter I would recommend sekonic 398, but 308 or 346 are also in yours price range. 398 is an analog meter, the others are digital. I personally use 398 and 758 as I wanted spot meter. The advetage of external meter is steady metering for any camera you might own. 
DDX, never used this one, is supposed to be fine grain developer, better in this matter, than Tmax Dev. Looking at my prints from negs developed in Tmax Dev ddx must be really good, but then again, if you shoot at ISO 3200 you did some pushing what increased the grain.


----------



## Rollei12

timor said:


> Looking at my prints from negs developed in Tmax Dev ddx must be really good, but then again, if you shoot at ISO 3200 you did some pushing what increased the grain.


The film was already at 3200   Kodak P3200 film.  I didn't push a thing.  Looking at the photos I can see it's not an easy film to use.  I certainly won't be using it for landscapes (not good for keeping detail in shadows -- grain is about as big as the trees!).  But for close ups of different things, it should be okay.


----------



## timor

Rollei12 said:


> timor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looking at my prints from negs developed in Tmax Dev ddx must be really good, but then again, if you shoot at ISO 3200 you did some pushing what increased the grain.
> 
> 
> 
> The film was already at 3200   Kodak P3200 film.  I didn't push a thing.  Looking at the photos I can see it's not an easy film to use.  I certainly won't be using it for landscapes (not good for keeping detail in shadows -- grain is about as big as the trees!).  But for close ups of different things, it should be okay.
Click to expand...

 Kodak P3200 or Ilford Delta 3200 are around ISO 1000. Kodak P3200 or TMZ is described as multispeed with EI 800 to 25000 so it is technically ISO 800. EI 3200 is the optimal push. If you look at the box you won't find ISO only EI. It stands for Exposure Index, it is not the same as ISO. This films are made to be pushed to that index or more, but the effects you can see for yourself. It requires some experimenting to develop them right. 
Off course for landscape slower films are better. Tmax 100 or Delta 100 are excellent and hard to beat in most applications, but than again it is also matter of processing.


----------



## Derrel

Rollei12 said:
			
		

> I recently started developing my own film.  I'm curious how I can improve.  Here's my flickr page: Flickr Sketches on Film s Photostream
> Looking for critiques here on the photos with chemicals listed.  (Scanned prints from lab otherwise)



I looked through the images. What stands out to me is 1) a general tendency toward under-exposed images, which will show up in the negative, the print the lab makes from the negative, and then the scan you make of the print. There are many images where the darker tones and what should be the lower-middle tones are just way too dark, too devoid of any detail. The underexposure makes the color images less-saturated, paler, and worse in appearance. The use of a "3200 film", which is not a real 3,300 ISO film, but a stock that "pushes well" exacerbates the under-exposure and also, the coarse grain the B&W shots show. Pushing ALWAYS kills the shadows!!! There is, in fact, usually almost no shadow detail in pushed film negs...it's an extreme measure, and the results have a "look" which I'm not fond of.

How can you improve? I think move to a standard film, like Tri-X 400. Immediately. And do a few things. First, drop from 400 to 250 or 200 on the camera's ISO dial, and do a close-up meter reading of a mid-tone value object that is in shadow. Do not meter the highlights, but meter the DARKER parts of your scenes. Using the lower ISO value of 250 or 200 will give you a generous exposure. Develop the film in something exactly like HC-110 Dilution B, OR D-76 diluted 1:1 with plain water, and use agitation of 10 seconds, every minute. The idea here is to get generous exposure in the shadows, and to get a slight compensating developer effect (not as much as the 2-bath system, but some), and to create a negative that has real, actual shadow detail. Development times maybe 20% less than "standard" will probably be about right.

You need to work on the dust issues on the negs when scanning. But back to that "standard" development time: that is something each person needs to work out!!! The published times are just starting points. MANY factors affect the "standard" time, like what grade of paper the negative is envisioned to be matched to: is it 2,3,4? What ISO was the film metered for, and how, exactly? Agitation length and interval, thermometer accuracy,water pH,  water pre-soak or none? When do the times "begin" and end"? At the start of the pour-in or the end of the pour-in? Stop bath or none? Shutter accuracy? Meter accuracy? Darkroom temperature trending up or down? Plastic tanks or metal tanks/vis a vis cold darkoom,hot darkroom, water-bath or none? BIG tank with four rolls x 36 or small tank and 1 roll x24? I think the real root of the issue again, is the deep, inherent UNDER-exposing, especially of the shadow and lower tones, due to this 800>pseudo 3200 film, and in general, not metering and exposing for the shadows, which is very important with negative film. You need to expose for the shadows, and develop for the highlights when using negative film. Pushing, or deliberately using the wrong ISO setting, and thus under-exposing, then over-developing just yields awful negatives, with very,very weak shadows and massively increased grain, and lowered dynamic range. I would immediately move to a Traditional 400-speed film by Kodak: Tri-X. These are my suggestions: different B&W film, shadow-based exposures, lowered ISO rating, gentle developing.


----------



## timor

Very well said ^^^, just maybe too rapidly. I think also, that for "training" purposes Kodak TX (there is no more Tri-X) might be a bit too pricey.


----------



## Derrel

I dunno...I think one needs to "train" the way he wants to work "for real"...same gear, same film, same chemicals. This is the Tri-X I was suggesting: Kodak Professional Tri-X 400 Black and White Negative 8667073   It's $4.89 per 36-shot roll. Considering what a great film it is, In think it's worth the price of just under five dollars per roll, and since they increased the bulk roll prices, it's just as economical to buy it factory-loaded.

And timor--what do you think: should this new shooter use a yellow filter as his baseline filter for panchromatic film? Should he go the old "proper way"? I had forgot about mentioning the use of a filter, but my feeling is, yes, get a few filters; a yellow, for SURE, an orange, a red, and a green.


----------



## timor

Hey, I am big fan of filters. Use them all the time. But I think we should move slower, from one issue to another. Inconsistency with exposure we already discussed and Rollei is already looking into possibility of buying hand held meter. The rest really depends on where he is located. Photo Warehouse sells cheap, but still good quality ISO 400 film for half the cost of TX. (I think it is Ilford Pan.) Whatever anyone can learn on this film could be applied to TX with even better results. And there is many things, big and small, to learn before results gonna come. Like finding good, dust free space to dry the film. And so on...


----------



## Rollei12

Derrel said:


> Rollei12 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I recently started developing my own film.  I'm curious how I can improve.  Here's my flickr page: Flickr Sketches on Film s Photostream
> Looking for critiques here on the photos with chemicals listed.  (Scanned prints from lab otherwise)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> These are my suggestions: different B&W film, shadow-based exposures, lowered ISO rating, gentle developing.
Click to expand...


Thank you as well for all that!

Well here's how I'm currently working.  As a side note, despite the photos, I've done no pushing yet.  I've only developed as Ilford says on their website.  I thought that would be the best place to start.  7 min for such and such?  Let's start with that.  Anyways, that's how I've been developing so far.  So here's how I work...

1) Put film in camera: 400 iso?  Turn the dial to 400.  Film says 3200?  Turn the dial to 3200.  (I thought 3200 was the film iso I was _supposed_ to let my camera know).

2) Shoot a scene making sure the landscape has a green dot or a red dot from my camera meter.  This I was thinking was giving me a good exposure.  The land with the exposure dot, not the sky.

3) Develop it as Ilford's website says.

Now, I can see my photos have an underexposed look going on.  I want to fix that and try the two bath development.  How do I go about that?  For instance, if Ilford says 4 min on such and such a film, do I develop the film in, say, Ilfosol 3 for 4 min, dump that out, add water for 3 min, dump that out, put in stop bath for 1 min, dump that out then fix for 4 min?

Or, if I'm going to do the two bath way, do I develop the film completely different with the development chemicals doing this 20% thing I've seen both in that Ansel Adams book and now here?  How critical is 20%

Also, if the film says 400 isn't that what you're supposed to put in your camera's iso?  That's taking into consideration you're not going to push or pull though.  That's what I've learned so far...


edit: I have some filters: red, orange and yellow, polariser and ND filter.

another edit: I do have Kodak Tri-X 400 film.  For developer chemicals right now I have Ilford Ilfosol 3 and Ilfotec DDX.  I want to finish what I have before buying another one.


----------



## timor

I understand you totally, I went thru very similar motions in my early days of shooting and developing b&w film. I know the itch. That's why I am trying to slow you down a bit and explain, that film is much more personal, than you think. Film manufacturer info is only good enough to, in average conditions, get a printable negative. Printable doesn't mean good. Even, if they know better than that, they will not go into specifics as "specifics" might be different for everyone. Beside they know, that every serious photographer has own ways anyway. So do I.
To understand the action of two bath developing method will be good, if you know something about developer composition and what each part has to achieve.
Photographic developer - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
Wiki is good. With a lot of sublinks.
Download and have look at this books by Henry Horenstein. This is much better for you, than AA books at the moment. Beside being an excellent photographer, Horenstein is a teacher. 
(This PDFs seems to be in public domain)
http://lit.lzicka.eu/Black.and.White.Photography.(2005),.3Ed.(036373052).LotB.pdf
http://kimmosley.com/workbook/BWWorkbook022705.pdf

In meantime, sure, try some two bath system. In this thread you will find pics made by total newbe following my system. 
Few from metering practice attn. Timor Photography Forum


----------



## gsgary

The best way to use your camera meter when metering a scene is to angle the camera down slightly


----------



## Rollei12

timor said:


> In meantime, sure, try some two bath system. In this thread you will find pics made by total newbe following my system.
> Few from metering practice attn. Timor Photography Forum



Thanks Timor for the info!  I'm just starting here.  I've only developed...5-6 rolls so far or so.  Thanks for those books too   Please let me know, if you want and have the time, anything else too as you see it.

What are your thoughts on pre-soaking the film?  Worth it or just something some people do?


----------



## timor

Rollei12 said:


> timor said:
> 
> 
> 
> In meantime, sure, try some two bath system. In this thread you will find pics made by total newbe following my system.
> Few from metering practice attn. Timor Photography Forum
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks Timor for the info!  I'm just starting here.  I've only developed...5-6 rolls so far or so.  Thanks for those books too   Please let me know, if you want and have the time, anything else too as you see it.
> 
> What are your thoughts on pre-soaking the film?  Worth it or just something some people do?
Click to expand...

I am happy, that you are interested in film photography. IMO it is much more personal art and if you will follow other film dedicated forums you will notice, that there is plethora of opinions, how to work with this medium. History is full of famous photographers and brilliant technician, almost magician of photography. Sometimes both talents came together.  When you look at photographs of AA or HCB or Eugen Smith you will see, how all are brilliant, yet sooo different. However most voices you will hear on forums are proponents of "by the book" photography. No more. Worst, in high school text book for photography the whole subject of developing film was enclosed in one sentence: D76 is satisfactory. This was shocking, but I think author didn't want to go into that territory as schools do not have budget nor time to explore possibilities with film development. But if you look closely you will find out that there are thousands of formulas for film development. This says something.
Quest for balanced negative is very old. It goes in parallel with methods for "automatic" negative development. One of the better know formulas comes from Stoeckler but commercially it is not available. I had to mix it by myself, to see, how it works. Today the best know formula is Diafine, but it is very expensive. In my method I am following advice of Barry Thornton and I am using some commercial, usually fluid concentrate, developer like HC110, Tmax Dev. or Polymax T as a first bath. For second bath I am using dilution of borax, never water alone as my first bath is usually quite diluted. Small changes of time in both baths afford me the contrast control. And yes, I am pre-soaking film for about 1min. That brings film to temperature of developer and ensure equal absorption of developer. Time in developer might be different depend on developer, but for borax 3 min is a standard.
If you live in America borax is very easy to obtain in stores selling chemicals for laundry. But many other alkali will do, photographic or not, like TSP, found on shelves with paints. The only thing you have to remember: higher pH, more contrasty negative will be. Sometimes this is better, sometimes not, depends on subject and effect to be achieved. It is just good to read about this chemicals, to know, what to expect.


----------



## unpopular

The best method I've found is to develop the shadows in rodinol and the hilights in microdol, switching the developer mid-way through the process. It's been forever since I used film, and I've long since lost that notebook. But with experimentation, you can get a good control over grain quality.


----------



## timor

Continuing with OP deliberations about two bath systems.
For that purpose I made a series of shots on film called Eastman Double X Negative, film for motion pictures shooting. Nominal speed is of ISO 250, my exposure was calculated for ISO 200 (just easier) using hand held incident light meter. It was pretty dark, bellow f4 by sunny 16 method, but that's OK, in soft light there is more half tones and in half tones grain is more visible. Film was developed in dedicated print developer; Factor One made by Alta Photographic Inc. (No more produced, sadly.) I used in tank 400 ml of working solution instead of required minimum of 290 ml, there was 10 ml of concentrate in this 400 ml of solution, ratio 1:40. The reel was lifted about 2 cm from the bottom of the tank for better flow of fluid during agitation. Time in developer only 5 min 45 sec. with moderate agitation every minute and the last 30 sec continuous agitation. After that second bath (no rinse inbetween) is solution of borax, minimum 10 g / 1 liter for 3 min. with no agitation. After that rinse with water (3x) but stop bath may be used as well, then regular fixing.
Prints were made using the same developer on neutral tone RC paper.
That is the outcome:






 

 


This are too much reduced images to see the grain. This are cutouts from the full files from scanner:


 

 

 


All prints were made close to 7x9.5.
#3 and #4 is the same image. #3 is a full frame, #4 is a central part of it enlarged to total size of something like 15x19.
All this to show, that despite I used cubical grain and not too slow film and developed it in developer, which under any circumstances can't be called fine grain developer yet I achieved grain usually obtained with ultra fine film developers with good sharpness and detail resolution plus not bad tonal range. All pictures made with #2 filter and no dodging or burning.


----------



## timor

I am not sure if all of this above actually work to show my point. If anyone want to see full files from scanner PM me.


----------



## Derrel

My suggestions for you Rollei, are based on establishing sound fundamentals, so you can learn by experience, repetition, and build a strore of experience in film stock used; ISO/ASA/Exposure Index settings and how those relate to light metering; film developing time and temperature, dilution/strength of developer, and agitation methods and intervals used. In a word: forget two-bath development. Forget Ilford developers with Kodak film. Start over, with some basics, and KEEP the ingredients used consistent for at least six months. Again, leave two-bath developing to the experts like timor,and work on doing the basic, critcal things properly, in a systematic way, so you can see and learn what affects what.

ISO 400 B&W film. PICK ONE stock. ONE. If it is a T-grain film, pick a developer that will work with it. If it is a "traditional" film, pick HC-110 Dilution B or D-76 Diluted 1:1 with water; this is enough compensating action if the development is at 68 degrees, agitate 20 seconds at start, then do 10 second agitations on the minute.

ISO as opposed to Exposure index or E.I.: NO, you do NOT want to stick blindly to the film ISO number on the carton, not necessarily. If, the way YOU do light metering, with your camera, and that lens, with your working methods, and your exposures are as you say underexposed, then you MUST lower the E.I. setting!

The title "*How I Develop FIlm" is entirely misleading in terms of picture results for the beginner*; it is not just about how the film is developed in chemicals, not nearly as much as the entire PROCESS used to get that film ready for the development stage. Choice of film speed and brand and "type"; exposure metering method; Exposure Index set; camera's lens and shutter accuracy/lack thereof; chemical strength; thermometer's accuracy; agitation method and duration; how the negatives will be turned into final images (scanner/condenser enlarger/diffusion enlarger/what paper grade for a normal neg,and so on?).

My feeling, looking at your first works is that you are grossly UNDER-exposing almost all scenes, mostly likely because of the way you are using your metering, but other factors come in too. A camera with a 60/40 in-camera meter with a wide-angle lens can "see" brighter sky enough to inflate the readings; the lens diaphragm might close down a bit too much for the f/stop settings, especially common at smaller apertures!; unless you know how to do close-up readings, many times the in-camera meter will relay wayyyyy to "bright" a light value, and you'll end up, basically, under-exposing the most-critical shadow and lower mid tones, and then the negatives will have no shadow detail; combine that with these delicate, 2-bath developing processes, and your negatives look thin, and poor. Again....you're putting the cart before the horse with this two-bath development and skipping around from 400 to 3200 film, and so on.

Try ONE film, one fairly mild developer (HC-110 Dilution B), at 68 degrees, agitate 20 seconds at start, rap the tank hard, then start agitating gently 10 second every 1 minute, water rinse or stop bath: fixer: wash: photoflo: dry. Chart your development times. Number the rolls, and keep the records. It seems extremely likely to me that your fundamental issue is using too high of an E.I. for *your *metering methods and *your* developing. The ISO rating is only a starting point. but you MUST realize that you need to get some shadow exposure, and I can almost guarantee that you are not getting that with the "green dot, overall scene" light metering procedure you mentioned. Lowering the "ISO" is a starting point to getting more shadow exposure.

You would probably do far better metering the palm of your hand, and then over-exposing 1 to 1.5 stops for light-toned objects or 2 to 2.5 stops for the purest white scenes like snow, or UNDER-exposing by 2 full stops for a black dog in sunlight, 3 stops for a black dog in open shade. *Your ISO and exposure settings need to be tailored to your working methods*. Pick one film, one developer, and stick with it and work out how to get some visible information in the shadows by lowering the E.I. or by metering in a very different manner.


----------



## timor

Ha ha, Maybe I really overextended the topic. My point was to show, that whatever the old wisdom is telling, it is old and actually hurting the possible quality of the image. Modern films long time ago got forward  of still prevailing ideas with roots in 20-ties. In this case: fine grain developers are not needed anymore and things like D76 should be put in coffin long, long time ago.


----------



## Rollei12

Derrel said:


> My suggestions for you Rollei, are based on establishing sound fundamentals, so you can learn by experience, repetition, and build a strore of experience in film stock used;



Thanks for that.  I do like Ilford.  I'll stick with their stuff. 

So you're thinking I could get away with "over exposing" and then "under developing" correct?  If it takes such and such a film 4:30 min to develop (what it says on the box) I could go perhaps 3:00 or 3:30 to get a better exposure, no?  That way I can get a good exposure for the lower tones and the shorter developing time won't harm the upper tones -- they won't "over expose".  I remember that whole "expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights".

I'll keep trying this out.

Be kind though.  I haven't even been at this for a year.  Still, I'd like to keep learning!


----------



## Derrel

Yes, Ilford makes much sense...they make everything you could need in film, developers and fixer, as well as B&W printing paper. You are right about the old idea of, "Expose for the shadows and develop for the highlights," based on using a lower-than-factory-suggested Exposure Index for the film, such as E.I. of 250 on a 400 ISO film, making SURE that the exposure will create actual detail in the shadowed areas, and then developing the film with what would be called "*Minus development*". The overall effect of this is a delicate negative that has less grain, and also less-dense highlights, and which is not so salt-and-peppery as a film that has been developed more traditionally.

I would like to make a comment here though about short development times, like the 4 min 30 second time you mentioned; my experience is that any developer that is that strong, and that works in that short a time frame, is a BAD developer choice. That is such a short time that even minor variations and minor variables can have a big impact on results; a development time of a baseline of 8 minutes or so is a much better starting point. When development times are really short, like 4:30, the developer is obviously, quite vigorous, quite strong, and results can easily be inconsistent, so standardize on a developer with a standard time of at LEAST 7 minutes at 68 degrees Farenheit.

It's possible to fry a couple eggs on medium-low heat and not botch the job, even with kind of lax attention to the process; try and cook the same two eggs on High heat, and the most minor of timing errors, and the eggs are simply awful.


----------



## timor

HC-110
Something to read and consider regarding film development.
Yes, method of exposing for sbhadows and developing for highlights good, however limited. In practical terms it is moving all the zones up as each is getting over exposed, highlights to. It is a tourist system of getting all the faces visible in the print with disregard to the most of the rest and specially sky. Without spot meter no one can determinate the amount of needed exposure. Without extensive practice in development it will be not easy to say what's the value of that "minus development". 
However systematic pull as Derrek said in conjunction with delicate development (read the article) should give you more often than not a printable neg.


----------



## Rollei12

Derrel said:


> s E.I. of 250 on a 400 ISO film, making SURE that the exposure will create actual detail in the shadowed areas
> 
> 
> my experience is that any developer that is that strong, and that works in that short a time frame, is a BAD developer choice.



First one, why 250?  Isn't half of a 400 iso 200?  I would have guessed to put it at 200.  I'm curious why 250?

Second one, I currently have a bottle of Ilford's Ilfosol 3 (I'm almost out) and a near full bottle of DD-X.  I'm guessing DD-X is pretty potent, but I'd rather use that up first than get another developer.  I don't want to get ahead of myself.  Have you tried DD-X?  Any tips?


----------



## Rollei12

timor said:


> HC-110
> Something to read and consider regarding film development.
> Yes, method of exposing for sbhadows and developing for highlights good, however limited. In practical terms it is moving all the zones up as each is getting over exposed, highlights to. It is a tourist system of getting all the faces visible in the print with disregard to the most of the rest and specially sky. Without spot meter no one can determinate the amount of needed exposure. Without extensive practice in development it will be not easy to say what's the value of that "minus development".
> However systematic pull as Derrek said in conjunction with delicate development (read the article) should give you more often than not a printable neg.



Thanks   I just read it!  Really interesting.  I'm going to try out some of those ideas with my DD-X (dilutions, less agitiation, etc).

Oh, btw for both of you.  Why my negs probably looked bad or high contrast, I was agitating the film 10 seconds every min, including the first min.  Maybe over doing it completely considering what he said about less agitation lol!


----------



## gsgary

Rollei12 said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> 
> s E.I. of 250 on a 400 ISO film, making SURE that the exposure will create actual detail in the shadowed areas
> 
> 
> my experience is that any developer that is that strong, and that works in that short a time frame, is a BAD developer choice.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> First one, why 250?  Isn't half of a 400 iso 200?  I would have guessed to put it at 200.  I'm curious why 250?
> 
> Second one, I currently have a bottle of Ilford's Ilfosol 3 (I'm almost out) and a near full bottle of DD-X.  I'm guessing DD-X is pretty potent, but I'd rather use that up first than get another developer.  I don't want to get ahead of myself.  Have you tried DD-X?  Any tips?
Click to expand...

DDX is better for hp5 @ 400 and over


----------



## Derrel

ISO 400, 320,250,200,160,125,100, in third-stop increments. Why ISO 250? It's just a 2/3 stop reassignment. You could got to 200 E.I. if desired. My suggestion stands: try and do things repeatedly, systematically, for several months in a row, while keeping good notes on your development times, temps, and agitation methods, until you can predict what your negatives will look like. Film work demands rigor.

RE-agitation: The "old way" was 5 seconds agitation every 30 seconds; 10 seconds at 1-minute intervals is 'gentle' agitation in a traditional basis, but now we're in the era of stand development and people might not understand that 10 sec agitation every minute is NOT a lot of agitation. RE the HC-110 article: in college, I used to develop university newspaper film, often three tanks per night, 12 rolls per night, occasionally 16 rolls per night. I have processed THOUSANDS of rolls of 35mm film in HC-110, mixed as he suggests: *Mix dilution "B" (a generally better choice than "A") by putting one part HC-110 "juice" into thirty-one parts water, at your favorite temperature... e.g., one half ounce of HC-110 to fifteen and one half ounces of water, to make one pint of developer.
*****
Whatever developer you use, try and get a systematic, perfected development routine for your film. If you use DDX, then get it figured out so the negatives are "good". Don't search for a Holy Grail, but instead get really proficient with one film and one developer.


----------



## gsgary

HP5 @ iso800 developed in DDX 30 seconds agitation at start and 3 inversions every minute







HP5 @ iso400 same agitation developed in Ilfosol3


----------



## timor

Gary, it is not only how you develop film, it is also how you expose film in the first place. You said HP5 rated at ISO 800, but this is misleading. Maybe your light meter went bonkers and in reality you shoot at different ISO. This picture with dog looks soft, but there might be different reasons for that.


----------



## gsgary

timor said:


> Gary, it is not only how you develop film, it is also how you expose film in the first place. You said HP5 rated at ISO 800, but this is misleading. Maybe your light meter went bonkers and in reality you shoot at different ISO. This picture with dog looks soft, but there might be different reasons for that.


Dog was shot wide open at F1.5 the eye and teeth are sharp, nothing wrong with the lightmeter one of the best made Minolta ivf


----------



## timor

What Minolta ? Spot ? Averaging reflected ? Or incident ? How old ?


----------



## gsgary

timor said:


> What Minolta ? Spot ? Averaging reflected ? Or incident ? How old ?


It does all 3 and mixed ambient and flash and flash and cine


----------



## gsgary

I have the Vf Minolta announce a new Digital Exposure Meter and IV


----------



## timor

Very good.


----------



## gsgary

timor said:


> Very good.



This is the spot meter attachment
minolta 5 degree spot meter attachment - Google Search


----------



## timor

Basic read for all really interested in developing own b&w filmhttp://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/Developers/developers.html
This paper will help to understand this old, he he, technology.


----------



## starkkarim

Hey guys, I develop my own C-41 in my kitchen/bathtub using standard develop times and temperature. I just use a regular pot to keep my temperature consistent though sometimes I get funky results which I don't mind! Here's an example of a shot from a roll I developed and scanned, I can post more if anyone is interested:





*Berries* on Flickr


----------



## starkkarim

Another one using the same method:





Distance by Stark Karim, on Flickr


----------



## timor

This colours are very nice. Composition and use of DoF in the first picture is to say at least romantic and pictorial like. Lovely.


----------



## rosewater

I'm developing 35mm film for the first time at home but I'm a bit nervous about getting the film out of the canister. Is it easy to use one of these?  AP METAL 35MM FILM CASSETTE CARTRIDGE OPENER CAN OPENING DARKROOM DEVELOPING


----------



## jcdeboever

rosewater said:


> I'm developing 35mm film for the first time at home but I'm a bit nervous about getting the film out of the canister. Is it easy to use one of these?  AP METAL 35MM FILM CASSETTE CARTRIDGE OPENER CAN OPENING DARKROOM DEVELOPING


Those work gteat from what I seen on videos. I use and old fashion bottle opener for the metal canisters. The plastic canisters, I just peel apart by grabbing the film exit and prying it back, then just pull the top off. But lately I've been bulk loading film into reusable canisters and those just pop off by hand. You can save a substantial amount of money by buying film in 100 ft rolls and loading yourself. Of course that only applies if you plan on shooting a lot. My favorite 35 film is Kodak 400tx and Fujifilm Acros 100. I bulk load the 400tx and use the Acros for special well lit situations.


----------



## timor

Do you really want pay that much money for it, when regular beer bottle opener will suffice ? Opening cassette in even "messy" way will not damage film.


----------



## timor

Off course the trick is to do it in total darkness.


----------



## Bob Peters 61

I use Unicolor C-41 powder kit, makes 1 liter each of developer, blix (combination bleach-fixer) and stabilizer, which can be re-used for 8-10 rolls within 6 mo. of mixing the chemicals, given you express the air from your storage bottles before putting them away.

I selected a plastic Paterson tank as it holds the heat of warm liquids better than metal and has a light-proof funnel that locks on securely more easily and reliably than finding and threading on a screw-on light-baffle.  Also lets me see the fluid level in the funnel to make sure I have enough chemical in to completely submerge the film.

For initial mixing, the developer and blix both need to be mixed (separately) into 110º F distilled water and the stabilizer into room temperature distilled water.

Pre-soak film for at least 1 minute in 102ºF tap water, no agitation needed but I usually give it a little goose with the agitator stick to get the bubbles out.  Also, a tad bit warmer to start is OK as that helps warm up the film and plastic processing tank.

Developer for 3:30 at 102º F, agitating for first 15 seconds and then 4 inversions every 30 seconds.

Blix for 6:30 at 95º - 105º F, same agitation as Developer.

Then you can open the tank up as after the blix the film is no long sensitive to light.

Rinse well, and then another 3:00 rinse in tepid running water.

Stabilizer at room temperature for 1:00

Then squeegee off the film and hang it up for a couple hours until completely dry.

I then soak and wash the Paterson tank and all its components with dish detergent and rinse well afterward

And I just mixed my second batch of chemicals before noticing that I need to mix the blix ahead of time, or else not use them just as soon as the developer cools to use temp.  Because when adding the Blix B powder to the blix it has an exothermic reaction.  That fizzing isn't all the chemical reaction does, it also gets hot.  Not too hot to mix and store in plastic containers, but hot enough that by the time the developer hits use temp and is used right away, the blix will still be way too warm come time it's needed, under time and temperature constraints.

Consequently, these two rolls have the same ugly color cast as the first roll I developed myself.  Well, live and learn, I guess.


----------



## Bob Peters 61

rosewater said:


> I'm developing 35mm film for the first time at home but I'm a bit nervous about getting the film out of the canister. Is it easy to use one of these? AP METAL 35MM FILM CASSETTE CARTRIDGE OPENER CAN OPENING DARKROOM DEVELOPING



I've tried a flat "church key" type of bottle opener and never had much luck with that.  However, I have a waiter's corkscrew with a dual bottle opener cut into the hinge, and the pointy prongs of that get right in under the lip of the cassette end to pry it right up.  So I would assume that any sufficiently pointy bottle opener cut edgewise into the metal of which it's made should do the trick.

Never saw fit to spring for the special-purpose tool for a function I have covered another way already.

And even in the unlikely event that opening the cassette leaves a jagged edge that scratches the film coming out, it'll only get the part at the end that got fogged loading the camera anyhow and not the negatives.


----------



## snowbear

A regular bottle opener or can opener has always worked for me.


----------



## wobe

I use Cinestill C-41, a lightbag and Patterson bucket and now develop all my films myself with results I am quite happy with.

No special tips - i just follow the printed instructions 

Tricky part is loading the film onto the spools inside the light proof bag, has a tendancy to twist off the spool as you're winding or worse get jammed around the little ball bearings that are supposed to grip and release the film to pull it onto the spool. Very stressful when you are doing everything by touch and trying to keep your fingers off the film!

(If the film tag is fully wound into the spool I use the old piece of film trick, moistened and fed into the spool to stick to and pull out the leader tag which usually works, then snip with scissors inside the bag after winding on the spool)


----------

