[JohnMc]

I meant that... and more. The game is all about controlling processes. If you make a choice/decision tree of the whole process of capturing an image it will be quite long. I believe more will be learned by doing, and snip tests makes doing a bit less costly be it trying to find ones own speed rating, comparing film/developer/dilution/time A to film B, tungsten to xenon, or whatever one wants to try and control better... and that that needs to be borne out by final the final output. As with any testing, variables need to be limited and controlled/repeatable.


That said, I have both soft and hard necked garlic; which is best? ;

[CristiC]

That said, I have both soft and hard necked garlic; which is best? ;

ROFL the second option - that is how they sell it but that is off-topic from the other thread, unless 2ml of the extra ingredient moves the base fog on the emulsion

[tuco]

How to find your working ISO speed of your film using the Zone System. It takes into account your developer, developing temperature, agitation profile, variations in light meters and any variation in actual camera shutter speed. You need a densitometer and a spot meter is very helpful. This is an iterative process. Ideally, you do it more than once to fine tune the combination of determining your working film speed and finding a development time that places Zone VIII contrast in a density range of 1.25 - 1.35 for a diffusion enlarger and 1.15 to 1.25 for a condenser enlarger.

Assuming your development time is in the ballpark, you meter and place a grey card at Zone I. ISO bracket a series of shots (1/3rd or 1/2 stops depending on camera's capability). Develop the film. Zone 1 is not affected much by a development time that is a little off. Measure the density of the results and find the one that measures a density of 0.10 above base + fog of the film (zone I density range goes from base + fog to 0.10 above it). That will be your working film speed.

Now meter and place a grey card at Zone VIII. Develop the film. Measure the density looking for a range as noted. If it measures more or less of those values then repeat the process decreasing or increasing your development time by say 10% to 15%. Once you have established a development time, it's a good idea to repeat the speed test again and if changed also repeat the Zone VIII test. It's a bit of work and it is not easy to develop your film consistently to 1/3-stop of precision all the time. But having done all that you will have increased your control of metering and exposure of your images.

[Denver]

Hi
When film was measured as ASA or DIN both were notorious for being overly optimistic rating. This lead to photographers using a lower setting to get the results they wanted. TriX usually rated at 320 for example. Most color negative film was closer to the box rating. Slide film would be shot a little underexposed to get deeper saturated colors. Kodachrome 64 at 80. With the onset of ISO (International Standards Organisation) Better Box to actual usage rating happened. I personally still underexpose my digital images to get deeper color saturation. It is easier to correct an underexposure than overexposure in post.

[tuco]

Hi
... TriX usually rated at 320 for example.

Until not long ago there were two flavors of Tri-X in roll film: 320TXP and 400TX. Both having a different nature. 320TXP still lives on in sheet film.

[Wheatfield]

I have a question that I think I know the answer to, but I'd like to check with you good folks that have more experience

I've read quite a lot about many films having a box speed that's arguably higher than the "real" speed... for instance, ISO 400 films that are allegedly closer to 320, 250 or even 200 in reality. In several articles and posts I've read, the suggestion is to shoot at "real" speed rather than the box speed... but no-one ever mentions if the development times change. I assume they don't. So, if I shoot Fomapan 400 at, say, ISO 250 - 320 (as many would suggest) and therefore technically over-exposing it with reference to box speed, do I keep the development as per the Massive Dev Chart timings for ISO 400?

Thanks in advance

When I was shooting sheet film, Ilford FP-4 was my go to film, but I rated it at something like ISO 25. I liked PanF, but I found it was closer to ISO 6. HP-5 was another nice film, but I recall it worked best for me at about ISO 80.
And yes, the development times shorten, or the dilution of the developer increases.

Any time I got a new emulsion batch, I made sure it was the same speed as the last one. I tended to buy fil a thousand sheets at a time to limit the amount of speed testing I needed to do.

Rate your film so that Zone1 is 1 stop over base fog and develop it long enough so that Zone 9 still shows some detail.

[filmmaster]

When I was shooting sheet film, Ilford FP-4 was my go to film, but I rated it at something like ISO 25. I liked PanF, but I found it was closer to ISO 6. HP-5 was another nice film, but I recall it worked best for me at about ISO 80.
And yes, the development times shorten, or the dilution of the developer increases.

Any time I got a new emulsion batch, I made sure it was the same speed as the last one. I tended to buy fil a thousand sheets at a time to limit the amount of speed testing I needed to do.

Rate your film so that Zone1 is 1 stop over base fog and develop it long enough so that Zone 9 still shows some detail.

But what about the isntances where people DONT know how to do that sort of stuff?

[Wheatfield]

But what about the isntances where people DONT know how to do that sort of stuff?

Then they can either learn or throw darts at a board while blindfolded.
Look, some of this stuff is work, and the culture of ignorance as a virtue isn't going to go very far.

[DonV]

But what about the instances where people DONT know how to do that sort of stuff?

Many of the "nuances" quoted are less than 1/3 stop, less than the variation in aperture or shutter speed or light meter accuracy of your gear; so- unless you are an expert like Wheatfield - this is much "ado" about nothing. JMHO.

Bracketing is your friend.

[Wheatfield]

Many of the "nuances" quoted are less than 1/3 stop, less than the variation in aperture or shutter speed or light meter accuracy of your gear; so- unless you are an expert like Wheatfield - this is much "ado" about nothing. JMHO.

Bracketing is your friend.

Bracketing won't help if your development time is too far out of whack.
The thing to remember is that exposure controls the shadows, development controls the highlights.
Roll film users are in a compromise situation because they can't individually develop each frame to ideal density, so they have to pick a happy medium.
In the enlarging days, we used different paper grades to get around this. With scanning, the variable contrast is done early in post processing the negative.
With sheet film, I was able to settle on one grade of paper and customize the exposure and development on an individual basis depending on the scene.

---------- Post added Jan 7th, 2022 at 08:31 AM ----------

But what about the isntances where people DONT know how to do that sort of stuff?

At some point this weekend I will post how to determine film speed and development time based on enlarging to photographic paper. I'm pretty sure I still have the course outline I wrote for it on my computer.
It shouldn't be too hard to transition it to scanning as Photoshop effectively has a built in densitometer.

[normhead]

If I remember correctly, pushing and lulling was all about contrast or flat.
Expose normally and push give you a sensor negative with more DR.
Expose normally and pull gives you a thinner negative with higher contrast.
You can also underexpose and push or over expose and pull.

At one point in life I had it all figured out and over or underexposed, and pushed or pulled depending on circumstances. However, I remember none of the specifics. And it's not something I ever addressed in my high school curriculum, so I have no notes on the subject.

[vonBaloney]

I just made sure I have a decently dense negative (controlling the shadows). Then when printing, burn in the highlights as needed (controlling the highlights). If you are relying on somebody else to do your development (which is ok as long as you know what they are gonna do) or printing (never!) then it becomes a harder problem.

[filmmaster]

Then they can either learn or throw darts at a board while blindfolded.
Look, some of this stuff is work, and the culture of ignorance as a virtue isn't going to go very far.

David Vestal had a passage in his book, and some nice photos.. simply take a light meter reading and adjust your cameras shutter and aperture to get the area in the frame WITH THE DARKEST SHADOWS YOU WANT TO SEE DETAILS IN,,,, set up nice. and then when you print the rest of the film will be dead on.

---------- Post added 01-07-22 at 11:50 AM ----------

I just made sure I have a decently dense negative (controlling the shadows). Then when printing, burn in the highlights as needed (controlling the highlights). If you are relying on somebody else to do your development (which is ok as long as you know what they are gonna do) or printing (never!) then it becomes a harder problem.

alot of the places doing mail order development DONT give a choice about making prints.

[vonBaloney]

alot of the places doing mail order development DONT give a choice about making prints.

Yeah, my film days are solidly behind me anyway, but if I wasn't doing the printing then I just wouldn't be interested. To me, that's most of the game. Of course, if it is cheap enough and they wanna send me some small prints then I can use those instead of a contact sheet as a starting point. I was reading about caffenol in another thread, which I had never heard of (which was strange because in school there were all kinds of "alternative processes" explored -- Liquid Light, etc). Turns out it was invented after the last time I did any darkroom work. It was been a while, but if I wanted to shoot some b&w film these days, I'm sure that's what I'd do -- all developing and printing at home but with less nasty chemicals.

[Wheatfield]

David Vestal had a passage in his book, and some nice photos.. simply take a light meter reading and adjust your cameras shutter and aperture to get the area in the frame WITH THE DARKEST SHADOWS YOU WANT TO SEE DETAILS IN,,,, set up nice. and then when you print the rest of the film will be dead on.

And does he say exactly how to make that determination? How are we deciding what to set the shutter speed and aperture to in order to get the darkest area we want detail (People who know it isn't that simple call it Zone1) if we don't know the real film speed for our particular conditions. Does he say anything about how to determine how long to develop the film for to get the rest of the film "dead on"? How do we know the rest of the film will be "dead on" if we haven't determined the correct developing time for the film and developer combination we are using in our conditions.

What you are saying is, in essence, put on a blindfold and throw darts at a dartboard and hope for the best.

---------- Post added Jan 7th, 2022 at 12:28 PM ----------

alot of the places doing mail order development DONT give a choice about making prints.

If you are doing mail order development with B&W, you are stuck with the blindfold and dartboard method of exposure determination.