Silk Shirt: Neopan 400, D76 and Fortuitous Mistakes

05960007

05960008

05960010

These, and the photos in the preceding post, are from a couple of rolls of Neopan 400 developed in D76 1:1 for 6.75 minutes at 72F, which is a minute and 45 seconds less than the Fuji data sheet recommends. This wasn’t intentional. I misread the time/temp conversion chart. I seem to be doing this a lot lately, but in this case, it turned out fine, good enough, in fact, that I repeated the ‘mistake’ again this morning with two more rolls, although this time I went for 7 minutes – round numbers are easier to time.

Lately I’ve been biasing my exposures to the shadows more heavily than I have in the past, so between that and the under development, I’ve probably pulled the film a bit. Seems to be working for me. I’m also playing around with some new scanning techniques. More on that later.

For the record, these shots are actually Freestyle’s Legacy 400. Although the edge markings are slightly different, it seems to be Neopan 400. Mixed in with a roll of Neopan 400, the density came out identical to my eye.

Xtol 1+3

M6TTL, 50 Hex, Neopan 400, Xtol 1+3

M6TTL, 50 Hex, Neopan 400, Xtol 1+3


M6TTL, 50 Hex, Neopan 400, Xtol 1+3

M6TTL, 50 Hex, Neopan 400, Xtol 1+3


M6TTL, 50 Hex, Neopan 400, Xtol 1+3

M6TTL, 50 Hex, Neopan 400, Xtol 1+3


M6TTL, 50 Hex, Neopan 400, Xtol 1+3

M6TTL, 50 Hex, Neopan 400, Xtol 1+3


M6TTL, 50 Hex, Neopan 400, Xtol 1+3

M6TTL, 50 Hex, Neopan 400, Xtol 1+3


M6TTL, 50 Hex, Neopan 400, Xtol 1+3

M6TTL, 50 Hex, Neopan 400, Xtol 1+3

Sharper than stock or Xtol 1+1, some adjacency effects and maybe a bit of a compensation too.

  • Use at least 100ml per roll.
  • Four inversions per minute.
  • 16 minutes at 68F

Mistakes and Failures

The other day when I meant to grab 2 rolls of FP4 that had been shot at 125, I grabbed one that had been shot at 250. This turned out to be a happy mistake as the negs from the roll at 125 turned out really dense. The roll at 250 came out with great tonality, but there are these horrid striations parallel to the long edge of the neg and occasional places where the emulsion is completely clear. It’s really only visible in the thinner parts of the neg, but it makes most of these more or less un-printable, which really sucks; I like a lot of these shots.

I’m not sure what happened here, but since it effects both rolls, I’m going to go with a problem with the developer, a bottle of Tmax Dev that’s been on the shelf for . . . uh, yeah . . . I don’t know how long probably means too long. Oh, well. The one of Kate would be particularly pretty if it weren’t all messed up.

Click on the thumbnails to see each image larger. The problem is easiest to see in the last image.

Film Notes

http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pl92ZNRpLsL-Z38KCXbfpUQ&output=html&widget=true

I’ve been keeping notes on development times, temps etc for years, but they’ve been scattered across notebooks, negative sleeves and film boxes, until now. I’m putting them all online in a google docs spreadsheet. I’ve only transcribed the data for the last 35 rolls so far, but I should have the rest of it up in a week or so. These notes are mostly for my own benefit, but I suspect others will find value in them as well. You can see the whole spreadsheet here.

Ilford Wash Method

M6TTL, 50 Hex, XP2 @ 200, Rodinal Stand

For years I’ve been using what I thought was a minor modification of the Ilford wash method, 6 changes of water with continuous agitation. I’ve no idea how I got started on this method, but I’ve used it for years. Apparently, 3 changes of water is plenty and even one might be enough, as is documented in this PDF: Some Investigations on the Kinematics of the ILFORD batch Film washing Procedure. It’s got graphs, words I don’t understanding and bizarre capitalization in the title, so it must be true.

Ilford XP2 Stand Developed in Rodinal

M6TTL, 50 Hex, Ilford XP2, Rodinal
M6TTL, 50 Hex, Ilford XP2, Rodinal
M6TTL, 50 Hex, Ilford XP2, Rodinal
M6TTL, 50 Hex, Ilford XP2, Rodinal
M6TTL, 50 Hex, Ilford XP2, Rodinal
M6TTL, 50 Hex, Ilford XP2 @ 200, 5ml Rodinal + 600ml H20, Stand for 1 Hour

I had planned on developing these rolls in Diafine, but my Diafine has developed a case of the crud, and I couldn’t find anything around the house with which to filter it. I’d been wanting to try stand development with Rodinal, and since I didn’t expect much from these negs anyway, I didn’t figure I’d be out much if the whole lot was ruined. The process worked a lot better than I thought it would. I was fully prepared for these negs to turn into an unevenly developed, grainy, high contrast mess. Instead they’ve got good separation in the highlights, plenty of detail in the shadows and less grain than TriX in Xtol. They were also some of the easiest to scan negatives I’ve worked with in a long time, requiring very little photoshop work. Recipe below.

Ilford XP2 Stand Developed in Rodinal

  • Shoot the XP2 at 200.
  • Pre-soak the film in distilled water. I’m not sure if this is necessary, but the Delta films seem to develop bromide drag in minimal agitation regimes – see my post on diafine – so some insurance seemed advised.
  • Develop in a solution of 5ml Rodinal and 600ml water (dilution chosen because it’s easy to measure with my current equipment). My solution measured 69F, but I suspect anything around there would work.
  • Rotational agitation for the first minute followed by a couple of inversions for good measure.
  • Set it aside for approximately an hour. Don’t touch!
  • Fix and wash as normal.
  • I can’t imagine that this a relevant part of the process, but just in case it is, I’ll note that I had to use some vodka in the final rinse. I usually use a solution of 100ml rubbing alcohol to 500ml of water and 3ml of photoflo. I was out of rubbing alcohol, so some vodka from the freezer had to stand in. The vodka doesn’t seem to have hurt it, but Smirnoff is a lot more expensive than rubbing alcohol.

The negs are an odd rust brown color. I’m not sure how well they would print in a wet darkroom, but the base color didn’t have any impact on scanning. I’m curious to know how well this process would work with other C41 films, and I’ll be trying it on a couple of rolls of Delta 400 that I shot at 200.

1pt4 Photography Goes to a Wedding

M6TTL, CV 35 1.4 SC, TMY, Tmax Dev
M6TTL, CV 35 1.4 SC, TMY, Tmax Dev
M6TTL, CV 35 1.4 SC, TMY, Tmax Dev
M6TTL, CV 35 1.4 SC, TMY, Tmax Dev
M6TTL, CV 35 1.4 SC, TMY, Tmax Dev
M6TTL, CV 35 1.4 SC, TMY, Tmax Dev
M6TTL, CV 35 1.4 SC, TMY, Tmax Dev
M6TTL, CV 35 1.4 SC, TMY, Tmax Dev
M6TTL, CV 35 1.4 SC, TMY, Tmax Dev
M6TTL, CV 35 1.4 SC, TMY, Tmax Dev
Of course, my mom has her eyes closed . . .
M6TTL, CV 35 1.4 SC, TMY, Tmax Dev
M6TTL, CV 35 1.4 SC, TMY, Tmax Dev
M6TTL, CV 35 1.4 SC, TMY, Tmax Dev
M6TTL, CV 35 1.4 SC, TMY, Tmax Dev
M6TTL, CV 35 1.4 SC, TMY (New TMax 400), TMax Dev

On the 4th of July, my cousin Brian got married on a veranda over looking Lake Michigan. The M6TTL, CV 35 1.4 SC and a couple of rolls of the new TMax 400 (TMY) performed admirably. Tents over looking lakes on bright sunny days make a lovely setting for a wedding, but all that backlighting can bedevil the flashless photographer. The new TMY seemed to handle the wide luminance range well, though. I’ve always liked TMY despite its reputation as a difficult film. It was the first film I developed on my own, so I’ve been using it off and on for 15 years. The new TMY seems to be just as forgiving as the old. Just give it generous exposure to keep the shadows healthy. It probably would have done even better pulled to 200, but these were my first rolls with the new film, so I didn’t want to experiment too much. For those who care, I shot the TMY at 400, developed in TMax Developer and followed Kodak’s new developing times. This worked out to 5.5 minutes at 75 degrees with a dilution of 1+4.

Apart from the disposable cameras on the tables, I was the only person shooting film. A couple of people commented on this with a mix of bewilderment and awe. The pro was shooting a D3 and a D300, but I was more interested in his foot gear, a pair of black reverse heel shoes. I’ve got to try those out.

Rodinal

I’ve been playing with Rodinal again lately. This TriX @ 200 in Rodinal 1+150 for something like 30 minutes.

M6TTL, CV 35 1.4 SC, TriX @ 200, Rodinal
M6TTL, CV 35 1.4 SC, TriX @ 200, Rodinal

I’ve also tried it rated TriX @ 400 in Rodinal 1+50 for whatever time the box said.

Hexar RF, ZM Biogon 35 F2 , TriX @ 400, Rodinal

I can handle the grain, but shadow detail doesn’t seem great. Contrast seems really high in general. Somewhere on the web I found a formula for a split a Rodinal/Xtol. You get Rodinal’s acutance and Xtol’s smoother tonality. That sounds interesting, but I need to mix up some more Xtol first. And finish the rolls of Adox 50 that I shot @ 125 for Diafine. And try out FP4 at 250 in Diafine. Did you know you can soup XP2 in Diafine too? So many films, so many developers. Who needs digital?

Astute blog readers will notice from the properties of the images above that the first two were shot with an M6TTL. Yes, I bought one. It turned out that I did want a Leica, just not an M8. More on the M6 later . . .