# pls help me



## andylou17 (Nov 9, 2004)

i have process my film using HC-110 dilution 1:31 with Tmax 400, developing time 6min

the problem is i used that film to print, but the print out is so noisy and the grain is big. do u guys have any solution to this problem?

and how do i attach the pic in here?[/img]


----------



## santino (Nov 9, 2004)

actually high speed films have got a much higher grain than low speed but you could have used too cold developer/fixer/water.


----------



## motcon (Nov 9, 2004)

for dilution B your time seems to be correct, but still need many more details.

- did you shoot the film rated at 400?
- at what temperature did you develop?
- did you keep all the chemicals at the same temperature?
- what methodology do you use when the film is in the developer? ie did you invert? shake? how often and how much?


----------



## andylou17 (Nov 9, 2004)

i used 68 degree F as what the factory mention

yes, i did shoot the film rated at 400

yes, i keep all the chemical in the same temperature i put them all in the tray with the water, so that it will keep them the same temperature

i turn and invert it
agitation for the first 30 sec and 5 sec for every 30 sec. 

i can see that my negative so thin, but i don't know it's so noise, is it because i shoot them in a dim light?

i have the same problem too with other film which i over develop, but some turns out good less grain, some a lot of grain especially where there's not much light like indoor light. is that the problem. 

when i take the picture on dimly light i don't use flash


----------



## motcon (Nov 9, 2004)

ohhh yah, the most important part; how to post an image here. 

just use the image tags







it would be helpful to see it.


----------



## andylou17 (Nov 9, 2004)

i don't have URL


----------



## motcon (Nov 9, 2004)

andylou17 said:
			
		

> i don't have URL



send it to me via email and i'll host it for you.

will@motionless-continuum.com


----------



## Hertz van Rental (Nov 9, 2004)

Did you keep the wash water at the same temperature too? Variations of as little as 2 degrees across the whole process can cause micro-reticulation which looks like bad grain.
Would need to see your negs to tell you for certain.


----------



## andylou17 (Nov 9, 2004)

just 2 degree difference in washing will mesh everything out. i think i wash it cooler than the process, i wash it with water running through the film and i wash that for 15 min.

is it possible the printing problem?


----------



## motcon (Nov 9, 2004)

well, you still haven't emailed the image to me so i could upload it. without that, it's difficult to even understand the problem. could be riticulation. could be minerals in your water. could be air bubbles. would help to see it.


----------



## Hertz van Rental (Nov 9, 2004)

If you wash it in running water from the cold tap it's almost certainly reticulation. Try filling a big bucket with water at the same temp as everything else and use this to wash with. Use the Kodak twenty changes method. Make sure the room you are in is around 20C too. If the problem persists get back to us. It's the best advice we can give without seeing your negs.
Hope it helps


----------



## BernieSC (Nov 9, 2004)

1:31 for 6 minutes? Is that correct?  Its been a long time since I developed BW and I don't think I have ever used HC-110 but that sounds way to high of a dilution. 

6 minutes is about the normal developing time for tmax using tmax developer.  Like I said its been a while since I worked with BW film or is HC-110 a paper developer?  I know some films you can use paper developer but I have never tried it.   Usually tmax has a very tight grain even for 400 ASA.


----------



## motcon (Nov 9, 2004)

BernieSC said:
			
		

> 1:31 for 6 minutes? Is that correct?  Its been a long time since I developed BW and I don't think I have ever used HC-110 but that sounds way to high of a dilution.



yah, that's correct for the hc-110(b) dilution.


----------



## oriecat (Nov 10, 2004)

I use Rodinal at 1:50,  there are lots of dilution options


----------



## BernieSC (Nov 10, 2004)

Oh I didn't consider is that metric measurments?


----------



## motcon (Nov 10, 2004)

it just arrived to me via email. see below.


----------



## Hertz van Rental (Nov 10, 2004)

Hard to really tell. Like to get a lens to the neg. But from here it looks like clumpy grain - way too coarse for T-max 400 in HC-110.
I think it almost certain to be reticulation. 8 time out of 10 thats the cause of graininess in my experience.
Get control of the temp for the WHOLE of the process including washing. If you use a drying cabinet don't have that too hot either.
If it persists we'll have to think of something else.


----------



## motcon (Nov 10, 2004)

scan from negative:


----------



## andylou17 (Nov 10, 2004)

i think there is no problem with my film, how do u guys think.

i think i have the printing porlbem, how u guy solve this

thanx for the help


----------



## motcon (Nov 10, 2004)

andylou17 said:
			
		

> i think there is no problem with my film, how do u guys think.
> 
> i think i have the printing porlbem, how u guy solve this
> 
> thanx for the help



well, u now need to walk us through your printing methods.

chemicals.
time in each chemical.
agitation procedure.
temperature.
etc.


----------



## Hertz van Rental (Nov 10, 2004)

Neg looks OK from the scan. Never known graininess to appear in printing...The only time I've seen a texture like that on a print along with low contrast is when students have had the paper the wrong way up in the easel. That is, emulsion side down and printed through the base. 
Without eyeballing the actual neg, print and darkroom set-up I can't really help.
Any suggestions from anyone else?


----------



## motcon (Nov 10, 2004)

well, i've had it happen to me with paper that was stored in conditions too humid, but the spot pattern wasn't consistent as it is here. on some fiber papers, cold chemical temperatures can cause ill effects very near the above (i've experienced a crackle look on luminos). 

but, as mentioned, my experiences don't quite match up to what i see in this print.

edit: almost looks like it was printed through tissue paper...


----------



## andylou17 (Nov 10, 2004)

during the printing
i mix the chemical 1:9 with kodak paper developer and develop the print for 1 and half minutes. i don't really do agitation much. temperature is 68 F

and i put on stop bath for 30 sec and then i put it it the fixing for 2 min and then wash it for about 4 min and dry it with drying machine.


Hertz, so u mean my paper turn upside down. I haven't though about that, but i will check for this. is it also a problem too if the negative turn the wrong way?

i think i check my paper everytime i print. it should n't be turn to the wrong direction


----------



## Hertz van Rental (Nov 10, 2004)

Printing with the neg upside down just reverses the image - no noticeable degredation.
The paper should be emulsion up for printing. That's the side that gets the image on it. If you moisten your lips a little and put the edge of the paper between them the emulsion side sticks to your lip.
Try doing a print making sure the emulsion is uppermost and let us know if it makes a difference.


----------



## andylou17 (Nov 10, 2004)

i will try and will let u guys know


----------



## motcon (Nov 10, 2004)

quick note: you really should agitate the tray when in the developer - uneven development can (will most likely) occur with unpredictable results.


----------



## andylou17 (Nov 10, 2004)

is there any rule in agitation for the printing like what the rule in the film process for example first 30 sec and every 5 sec in 30 sec.


----------



## Hertz van Rental (Nov 11, 2004)

Put the print in face down so it gets immersed in the dev all at the same time. Rock the tray gently back and forth the whole time.
Turn the print over (face up) after about 10-5 seconds.
Keep rocking the dish gently.
This makes sure that the print is all in the developer -  the paper warps when wet and if bits of the print come out the dev then you get uneven development.
The rocking also agitates the dev so you don't get a layer of exhausted dev sitting on top of your print killing development.
This is the Kodak method and works for me but I'm sure other people have their favourite methods.
The important thing is to be consistent - do EVERYTHING the same way every time so you can pinpoint problem areas.
If you ask what went wrong with something but you can't remember what you did then you can't learn from your mistakes.
Best if you can keep the tray in a water bath to keep dev temp around 20C. Print dev usually has two active chemicals. One does blacks the other the tones. If the temp drops bellow about 15C the one that does blacks stops working so your prints look dull and grey.
Dev for the manufactures recommendation. Usually about 1 min for RC and 2 for fibre.
Use a stop bath and don't leave prints in the fix for more than 5-10 mins. Fix bleaches silver (leave a print in overnight and just see what happens....)
Good luck and keep us posted


----------



## ksmattfish (Nov 11, 2004)

motcon said:
			
		

> almost looks like it was printed through tissue paper...



That's what I thought when I saw it.  It looks a lot different than the neg scan.  I think HvR may be onto something with the paper in the easel wrong side up theory.


----------



## oriecat (Nov 11, 2004)

If the paper was upside down, wouldn't the image be opposite of the neg scan?  Unless he reversed both the paper and the neg?


----------



## Hertz van Rental (Nov 11, 2004)

Yes to Q1 and things like that can happen to Q2, but we are just exploring possibilities and positing theories. The paper reversal thing seems the most likely at the moment. Remember your Sherlock Holmes.


----------



## andylou17 (Nov 11, 2004)

thank you guys for the help and the idea that you guys shared.

i am just begining to this photography class

i will keep posting if there's any further issue after i try what you guys suggested

thank you so much


----------



## havoc (Nov 11, 2004)

Yep just remeber when printing (with glossy paper) the smooth side faces up. Make sure to constantly agitate paper while in the chemicals. Tray rocking works fine, but i prefer to flip the paper constantly. ( I know others here may disagree with that) but if you do a constant paper flip in the developer i have noticed that you can get better contrast in your prints. (again some may disagree) But try things out and see what works for you. Take constant and detailed notes. When you find the process that works for your art duplicate it.  There are many many factors that can effect what your doing in the darkroom. Everyones water source is different for example, that can affect your dev process as well.  Expiremantation is required in any art. Don't give up, just remember to try different things and always fall back on your notes.


----------



## andylou17 (Nov 15, 2004)

hi guys


i already make sure the paper is in the correct face, it still give me the same problem, and i try to use a new pack of paper and it seem alright, i don't know i think what happen to my old set of paper, i think i bought them 2 weeks ago and don't know why it got so many noise on it. is it because the light go through my pack?


----------



## Hertz van Rental (Nov 15, 2004)

If the pack was exposed to light then it tends to be more noticeable down the side nearest the light source. Besides which it will only affect the top half-dozen sheets as the ones underneath are protected by the ones above. Again, fogging tends to be even. What it looks like on yours is a texture. It could be chemical fogging but the comments about light hold for this too.
To fog through the packaging and affect the whole pack of paper would need a light with the intensity of a small nuclear explosion. And the top sheets would still be darker than the bottom ones.
But if you have a new pack of paper and it's working ok then just write off the experience as one of the wonderful mysteries of photography


----------



## andylou17 (Nov 16, 2004)

is that will change much if i used different kind of paper. example between polycontrast IV and Polycontrast V.  i use the same chemical, the old one with get the noise but the new one is so smooth


----------

