# Just developped my first roll!



## Soulreaver (Jun 12, 2004)

Hi all.
Seems I am in the process of joining this fine comunity : Just did my first roll  8) 
Trouble is , I blew it...    I used the time for D76 pure strength, but I had diluted it 1:1.As I watch it dry right now, I can see the negative is a little on the clear side.Cant see much contrast in it at the moment.
Can I fix it at printing or must I just scrap it up as experience?

thnx all.


----------



## ksmattfish (Jun 12, 2004)

As long as it's not completely clear something should print.  How long did you develop it for, and how long should you have developed it?  If the negs are really very thin, then it's likely it was underexposed.


----------



## Soulreaver (Jun 12, 2004)

I developped it for 9', when i should have developped for 14'.
It is aTMax400, and temp was close to 19 centigrade.
I have also noticed some purple lines close to the edge of the neg , which might indicate infiltration of chemicals due to enthusiastic agitation.
Ah well...

Dont know about underexposure, i was very careful to zero it at all times.
Have to work on manual for the duration , but I am getting the hang of it.
Isn't it developping related?

As for printing, should I go for a high contrast filter?
In a way its lucky, next class is about filters


----------



## oriecat (Jun 12, 2004)

Congrats on your first roll!!  Don't worry about it, don't we all screw up on our first roll?  I know I did, but I have my dad to blame!  He thought I could roll the film with the safelight... so I got nothing!  I hope you can make something work out of them!


----------



## Soulreaver (Jun 13, 2004)

Thanks oriecat.At least u can blame it on someone   
I guess they'll print, only there wont be detail in some dark areas.Exposure times should be really short too.

I reread the part about developping in my book and it could be underexposure like ksmatish said, or underdeveloppement.The neg is both thin and flatish.

If the sun comes out Ill take another shot at developping today.It's a lot of fun to do.Its a pity it might die out.Just read it today that digital is selling a lot more than expected.Kodak is laying more ppl off.Too bad.
Most of the cameras sold are cheap low res ones too...


----------



## ksmattfish (Jun 13, 2004)

Soulreaver said:
			
		

> I have also noticed some purple lines close to the edge of the neg , which might indicate infiltration of chemicals due to enthusiastic agitation.
> 
> Dont know about underexposure, i was very careful to zero it at all times.
> 
> As for printing, should I go for a high contrast filter?



Opaque purple lines on the edges are probably where the film was pressed against the reels, and wasn't developed and fixed enough, but no big deal as long as they aren't in the image area.

Zeroing the meter is just a starting point, and depending on the scene and the type of meter, may not be accurate at all.

Start out with a #2, and then make your decision from there. 

Development time does affect neg density and contrast, but the effects will be subtle eyeing it; they will be much more apparent on the print.  The difference between 9 min and 14 min wouldn't make negs appear significantly thinner.  After about 3 to 6 min in the developer your highlights (dark areas on the neg) are almost done, the additional time is mostly working on the shadows (light areas on the neg).  Unless it was an overall dark scene, the negs should show dark highlights and clear shadows.  Also, if you "zero out" the meter on a dark scene, you are already overexposing, as the meter is telling you how to get middle grey.

Film geeks take heart, check out what Arizona Highways magazine has to say about images from digital cameras.

http://www.arizonahighways.com/page.cfm?name=Photo_Talk803


----------



## Soulreaver (Jun 13, 2004)

Thanks for the answer.


			
				ksmattfish said:
			
		

> Opaque purple lines on the edges are probably where the film was pressed against the reels, and wasn't developed and fixed enough, but no big deal as long as they aren't in the image area.


what do you mean, a kink in the film?



			
				ksmattfish said:
			
		

> Zeroing the meter is just a starting point, and depending on the scene and the type of meter, may not be accurate at all.


Yea,had trouble with some scenes.Those pics were made using the central area meter.I was also using the center spot meter, but I guess Ill use the matrix one for most shots.
But except about whites or blacks, i dont overrule the meter.



			
				ksmattfish said:
			
		

> After about 3 to 6 min in the developer your highlights (dark areas on the neg) are almost done, the additional time is mostly working on the shadows (light areas on the neg).  Unless it was an overall dark scene, the negs should show dark highlights and clear shadows.
> Also, if you "zero out" the meter on a dark scene, you are already overexposing, as the meter is telling you how to get middle grey.


They were taken in the morning, about 8:30.The light was okay, not an overcast day.
Its the shadows I am worried about, some light areas in the negs show no detail , as if it was all black, without texture even.That could be under development, or not?


----------



## ksmattfish (Jun 13, 2004)

A kink in the film could also do it, but sometimes the film presses tightly enough to the dev reel at the edges to keep chems from getting to that part of the emulsion.

It could be under development, but if the shadow areas are completely clear, then I'm not sure that 5 more min would have helped.

Anyway, wait until you print them, it's much easier to judge.  They might turn out better than you might expect.


----------



## Soulreaver (Jun 19, 2004)

I enlarged a couple pics today, the result is good, but I had to use a #2 filter and a #2,5.
They got somewhat dark, perhaps I overdid a bit in the time under the lamp, but got a nice pic.Perhaps some dodging and burning will make them good.Ah, well.

Thanks 4 the info and suggestions


----------



## ksmattfish (Jun 20, 2004)

Soulreaver said:
			
		

> I enlarged a couple pics today, the result is good, but I had to use a #2 filter and a #2,5.
> They got somewhat dark, perhaps I overdid a bit in the time under the lamp, but got a nice pic.Perhaps some dodging and burning will make them good.Ah, well.
> 
> Thanks 4 the info and suggestions



If the contrast looks good at 2 or 2.5 that means you are right on the money.


----------



## Soulreaver (Jun 23, 2004)

ksmattfish said:
			
		

> Soulreaver said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Thanks   
Second roll is washing as I type  8) 
Hope this one turns better.This time I followed the time to the second!(+- 7 secs   )

I also tried some control of exposure, setting the dark details to zone III.
Lets see if I got it.


----------



## oriecat (Jun 23, 2004)

Good luck!  Welcome to our darkroom club.


----------



## havoc (Jun 23, 2004)

You said D76 at 1:1 for 9 minutes? that should be the right time for tmax. 14 minutes is really high. I dev. tmax 100 for 7 1/2 minutes at 20C and its perfect. Those times seem to be over stated.


----------



## Soulreaver (Jun 23, 2004)

Thanks Oriecat.Someday I`ll buy an enlarger (they expensive around here  ), and then I`ll go full speed  8) 



			
				Havoc said:
			
		

> You said D76 at 1:1 for 9 minutes? that should be the right time for tmax. 14 minutes is really high. I dev. tmax 100 for 7 1/2 minutes at 20C and its perfect. Those times seem to be over stated.A


Well, I do not have the TMax box anymore, but the book I have says that at 24C the time is 12'30''.
I was at 19C (actually 18.5   ), so the that  seems about right 

This time I raised the temp to 20C , by the book.
The neg is much nicer, density looks alright to me, the proud father   
One frame has a streak from one edge to the other, about 0,5 cm large 
It was the very devil to put the neg on the spiral this time, took me quite some time, and the neg kinked a little.My be my finger on the emulsion too.


----------



## oriecat (Jun 23, 2004)

You don't have an enlarger?  Then how did you do your enlargements?  Rental place?


----------



## ksmattfish (Jun 24, 2004)

From Kodak Tech Pub F-32:  Kodak T-max Professional Films

Small tank roll processing w/ D76 1:1

Tmax100:  18C/14.5min  20C/12min   21C/11min  22C/10min    

Tmax400:  18C/14.5min  20C/12.5min  21C/11min  22C/10min


----------



## Soulreaver (Jun 24, 2004)

oriecat said:
			
		

> You don't have an enlarger?  Then how did you do your enlargements?  Rental place?



Hi Oriecat.
No, I am following a photography course at a local college, and we use their equipment.I think we can go there anytime its not in use, but duty calls, so I only use them on Saturday classes.
Cant wait...  :roll: 
Have u set up your darkroom?

Thanks Matt, useful info as always.
What do you think caused that streak on the neg?


----------



## oriecat (Jun 24, 2004)

Ahhh cool.  Too bad you aren't able to use the space more often!  Yes, I set up in my basement...


----------



## havoc (Jun 25, 2004)

Yeah you guys are right. I was thinking the dev. times for ISO 100 & 400 were the same. I was looking at a box of 400 today and it is longer. My bad.


----------



## ksmattfish (Jun 25, 2004)

There's no rule that says we have to do what Kodak says, but those are the "official" times.


----------



## Soulreaver (Jun 29, 2004)

damn, my ISP, I had no internet till today  :evil: 
anyways, this second roll is really better, got nicer prints this time.
The streak was caused by putting two loops of the neg on the same circle of the spiral...  :roll: 

I heard that when you use the zone system you get to use your own times for each type of film, and you also change the Iso somewhat.
But that doesn't seem much practical with 35mm ...


----------



## ksmattfish (Jun 29, 2004)

Soulreaver said:
			
		

> I heard that when you use the zone system you get to use your own times for each type of film, and you also change the Iso somewhat.
> But that doesn't seem much practical with 35mm ...



In a very specific manner, it only works for roll film if the entire roll was shot under the same lighting conditions.  In a more generalized manner though, many aspects of the zone system can be applied loosely to roll film.

With medium format it is sometimes easier, because there are a lot less shots per roll.  With 35mm, if you were bulk loading you could use 12 exp rolls.


----------



## Prophet (Jun 30, 2004)

I know you guys are using celcius, but I am having problems with a slight purple tint to my negs. I have fixed for 15 minutes and up to as much as 17 minutes in the past and have gotten no change to the negs (from 10 - 12 minutes). Currently at 70 degree F I am developing for 7 minutes as per the TMax box,using D76 1:1. The negs come out looking ok, showing great detail and grain. Could I not be developing long enough.

I have been having problems getting good contrast for some time now and I think this purple cast on the negs is responsible for my disatisfaction with the contrast in the prints. Mind you this isn't a a lot of purple but noticable. 

Back when I was first developing film 10 years ago, using Kodak B&W(can't recall the exact type of film) the negs came out clearer (if memory is still on par). When my High School switched to Fuji film is when the purple haze started. Since then, I have never been able to escape the purple haze curse on my negs. 

Recently I have given thought to switching to Ilford film and processing to try my luck.
-Jeremy-


----------



## oriecat (Jun 30, 2004)

I think some of the negs are just purple with different films.  Do you do a pre-rinse before developing?  I think that helps take some of the purple out?


----------



## ksmattfish (Jun 30, 2004)

Kodak films are known for the purple tint; I've never seen it on Fuji BW, but then again, I rarely use it.  

Sometimes it fades over time.  Sometime additional fixing, or using a rapid fixer helps.  You can re-fix previously developed negs by dunking them in fixer.  Just try to avoid scratching them, and make sure they get washed completely (more difficult if they have already been cut).

What are you contrast problems?  Too much or too little?


----------



## Prophet (Jul 1, 2004)

To much grey. Maybe I am just being unrealistic. I will post my latest prints of my new son.

-Jeremy-


----------



## ksmattfish (Jul 1, 2004)

Prophet said:
			
		

> To much grey.



So low contrast.  The method I was taught is to print until you get your highlights right, and then adjust the contrast filter until the blacks are right.  Going to higher # contrast filters will increase the necessary exposure time to keep the highlights right.

If that doesn't work for you you may need to increase contrast in the film development.  Are you using the standard Kodak recommended method for tank developing?  It's something like agitate for the 1st 30 seconds, and then agitate briefly for 5 sec every 30 seconds there after.  You can increase agitation, and see if that increases your contrast like you want it.  I'd start out by increasing agitation to 10 sec every 30 sec, and maybe go for 45 sec at first.  

When I was starting out in the darkroom I had problems with high contrast Tmax 400 negs, so I would skip the initial 30 sec agitation, and this helped lower the contrast enough.


----------



## Prophet (Jul 2, 2004)

Agitate 30 secs, first minute, 5 seconds every minute there after. I agitate with the single tank, turning it upside down and back over in a half circle motion. I want to try pre-washing. Someone noted that you could prewash for 30 seconds, but is that at 70 degrees?

-Jeremy-


----------



## ksmattfish (Jul 2, 2004)

Prophet said:
			
		

> I want to try pre-washing. Someone noted that you could prewash for 30 seconds, but is that at 70 degrees?



Here's the order I use:

prewash    30 sec
dev           
weak stop  30 sec
fix             for twice the clearing time
wash         30 sec
hypo clear (wash aid)  30 sec
wash         1 min
wash         1 min
wash         1 min
wash         1 min
wash         1 min
photo flo   30 sec

All chems and water should be as close to the same temp as possible, or you may get reticulation.  Reticulation is when temp changes actually cause the emulsion to break apart, leaving a fine texture of lines all over your image (actually can be kind of cool if done on purpose).

To figure clearing time dip your discarded film leader in the fixer and time how long it takes to go clear.  Then you fix for twice that time.  

For regular BW films fixing times should be 5 min or less with fresh fixer.  For tabular grain films (Tmax, Delta) it may be up to 10 min.

I use a weaker than manufacturer recommended stop bath.  Although this usually isn't a problem with 35mm film, with the larger formats strong stop bath can actually cause clumps of emulsion to explode, leaving a little pinhole in the emulsion (which then prints as a black speck).  I add just enough concentrated indicator stop to get a slight yellow in the water.  When it turns purple, I just mix up more.  Back in the old days they just used water or water and vinegar for stop bath.  I use it to try and make the fixer last longer (depleted faster by mixing with dev).


----------



## Soulreaver (Jul 3, 2004)

I do not use pre washing.What is it for?

Also my times for washing are much longer, 30 minutes, open tank.
then photoflo


----------



## oriecat (Jul 3, 2004)

Are you using hypoclear?  If you do, then you don't need to wash that long.


----------



## Soulreaver (Jul 4, 2004)

oriecat said:
			
		

> Are you using hypoclear?  If you do, then you don't need to wash that long.


No, been meaning to buy it but theres none in shops nearby.
But the procedure I have learned uses it and a half hour wash as well.
I will read a book I have to see what steps it uses.


----------



## windycitylover (Jul 8, 2004)

oriecat said:
			
		

> Congrats on your first roll!!  Don't worry about it, don't we all screw up on our first roll?


Can't say I did.


----------

