# Sunny 16 screw-up



## nealjpage (Jul 25, 2006)

Right.  So I took my YashicaMAT out the other day to finish off a roll of film.  Figured I'd try the sunny-16 rule.  Great.  One minor screw-up:  I forgot what speed film was in the camera, so i exposed TMAX 400 in the same way that I was supposed to expose 100:blushing:  What should I do with it?  Develop it like 100?  Like 400?  Or am I SOL?


----------



## Digital Matt (Jul 25, 2006)

I think you might be SOL, because the massive dev chart only shows TMAX 400 being pulled to ISO 200, not all the way to 100.


----------



## Unimaxium (Jul 25, 2006)

Was the entire roll exposed like ISO 100? If not, I would just go ahead and develop it like 400 and sacrifice the overexposed shots. If so, then it should be possible to pull the film, but what the image quality will be like I don't know. I'm not sure how much you'll need to alter your development time by, but perhaps someone else will know.

It's always worth trying whatever you can to develop it ;-). Otherwise, you're just throwing out a roll of film and you'll never get to see the shots on it


----------



## nealjpage (Jul 25, 2006)

Grrr.  I need to come up with some fool-proof way of reminding myself what film (if any film at all--i've opened the back before, too) i have in my camera at any given time:meh:


----------



## Luke (Jul 26, 2006)

hmm, i think if you develop like 400 youll actually have nicer negs.
i find sunny sixteen always underexposes stuff.  try developing at 400 and seeing how it turns out.  The problem is that different countries have different sunnyness.  In paris, sunny 16t works, in australia, more like sunny 8.  try it, see what works


----------



## Digital Matt (Jul 26, 2006)

nealjpage said:
			
		

> Grrr.  I need to come up with some fool-proof way of reminding myself what film (if any film at all--i've opened the back before, too) i have in my camera at any given time:meh:



Tape the box top on the back of the camera.  My Mamiya M645 actually has a slot to slide a 120 box top into, so you always know.


----------



## Torus34 (Jul 26, 2006)

By splitting the difference and processing at ISO 200, you may lose a zone in the shadows for the ISO 400 exposures and you may block a zone in the highlights of the ISO 100 exposures. Note the underline on the 'may.'

If your exposures were of low-contrast subjects, and if you metered the highlights and the shadows and split the difference, there should be no problem. If some were high contrast, working at the limits of the film's range, you may have some image loss.

I would suggest you do not try a two-stop pull. This assumes that the normally-exposed and under-exposed negatives are equally important to you, of course.

Under the heading of 'locking the barn door after the horse has been stolen,' your predicament is a prime example of why some folks triple their film cost but increase their exposure 'insurance' by bracketting +/- 1 stop on each shot.


----------



## ksmattfish (Jul 26, 2006)

I'd reduce development time by 20%.  A lot of people shoot ISO 400 neg film at ISO 200 anyway, so you may only be a stop or so over-exposed.  You'll get printable negs whether you reduce dev time or not.


----------



## Luke_H (Jul 26, 2006)

I did this during the 4th of July parade by getting caught up in the confusion of the moment and mixed up a roll of Tri-X and Plus-X (shot one at 125 and the other at 400 out of whack)

I tried to pull the Tri-X down to 125 with D76. The push of Plus-X to 400 was easy, using Diafine.

The Tri-X negatives turned out ho-hum, but scanned. They weren't great, but I got usable images. I think Tri-X is less averse to over/under exposure than the t-grained stuff though. If it were me, I'd just develop for the 200 times and cut the middle. 

Here's one of the Tri-X @ 125iso:


----------



## JamesD (Jul 26, 2006)

TMax has a very wide exposure latitude.  Chances are good that if you develop at 400, you'll still get printable images, and at 200 (one stop overexposure) you should be fine.  It's better to overexpose a stop than underexpose a stop, in any case, if you're using negative film (opposite for reversal film and digital, but they have narrow exposure latitude to begin with).

Just remember... the negative is overexposed, meaning darker than it should be.  It still retains detail in the silver.  It's when you don't get the silver (because of underexposure) that you have a serious problem, because the information simply isn't there.

So, I'd go with developing at 200, and increasing the printing exposure a stop or so.


----------



## mysteryscribe (Jul 26, 2006)

Id develop it at 200 have a couple of drinks while it dries and forget about it just do the best you can with it.


----------



## Torus34 (Jul 26, 2006)

I'll drink to that!


----------



## nealjpage (Jul 26, 2006)

Thanks, guys.  I'll see what i can do!


----------



## Paul Ron (Jul 28, 2006)

You just may like your over exposed pics more. Compensate by using contrast filters if they are too hard but I'll bet you'll be surpisingly pleased on a number 2 paper.


----------

