Seeking High Contrast results.

Film Photography & Darkroom discussion

Moderator: Keith Tapscott.

analog.life
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 10:55 am
Location: Washington, DC

Seeking High Contrast results.

Post by analog.life »

Hello all,
I'm working with the materials currently available to me:
I have a roll of Plus-x 125 film which has already been shot normally and
I have two developer options: D-76 or Ilfosol S

I would like this film to yield high-contrast negatives (as much as possible) any advise would be appreciated.

Also, I've discovered that Rodinal is no longer available! Is there a substitute that would yield high contrast Ilford PanF+50 negs?

Thank you!

Ornello
Posts: 882
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:49 am

Re: Seeking High Contrast results.

Post by Ornello »

analog.life wrote:Hello all,
I'm working with the materials currently available to me:
I have a roll of Plus-x 125 film which has already been shot normally and
I have two developer options: D-76 or Ilfosol S

I would like this film to yield high-contrast negatives (as much as possible) any advise would be appreciated.

Also, I've discovered that Rodinal is no longer available! Is there a substitute that would yield high contrast Ilford PanF+50 negs?

Thank you!
Not another one....

analog.life
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 10:55 am
Location: Washington, DC

Post by analog.life »

Would you care to elaborate?

(With regards to the Rodinal...I was misinformed this morning by the clerk at the store.)

Ornello
Posts: 882
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:49 am

Post by Ornello »

analog.life wrote:Would you care to elaborate?

(With regards to the Rodinal...I was misinformed this morning by the clerk at the store.)
Just develop the film normally and print it normally. If you want to adjust the contrast, do it in the printing stage. Exaggerated contrast was a fad in the 1960's. It wore out its welcome a long time ago.

Jim Appleyard
Posts: 80
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 4:33 pm

Post by Jim Appleyard »

...but it's new to analog.life. Geez, let the guy experiment.

Yes, you can control contrast in the printing stage (easier to control), or you can process the film as high contrast.

You can try Rodinal (yup, still made) at something like 1+10. Or Dektol at 1+9. It may take you more than the roll you just shot to find out what times/dilutions will work.

analog.life
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 10:55 am
Location: Washington, DC

Post by analog.life »

Thank you very much, Jim for your direct and respectful response.

I almost always employ methods of control while printing (as opposed to film development). I was merely curious in what this method/combo would produce.

Ornello, not only have you just dated yourself, you've made me regret choosing to post here as I was hoping to avoid the elitist pretension common among many photography forums.
Didn't your mother ever teach you?
If you can't say something nice, don't say nuthin' at all!

Wirehead
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2006 12:58 pm

Post by Wirehead »

Nothing is so simple.

The resulting tonal curve from developing normally and adjusting contrast while printing will be different from developing high-contrast and printing normal contrast while printing.

If you scan your negatives like I do, you quickly discover that even a 16-bit-per-channel CCD scanner will have noise in the lower bits. This means you will get better results when you develop for high-contrast and then scan normally.

I keep thinking about with screwing around with D-19, which is a standard developer to use when you want high contrast. :)

Greg Winterflood
Posts: 49
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 2:11 pm

Attitude with Latitude

Post by Greg Winterflood »

@analog.life. Nice to see you here. I note that you were granted the traditional welcome. I'm returning to B&W after a 26 year hiatus, and just about anything interests me at the moment. Your question has focussed a fuzzy idea I have had. Somewhere [www, interweb, networld, wherever] I saw a discussion about being able to watch the development process, as opposed to the printing process, as it occurred. That would have to be a tricky business - but I would love to know how it was approached - for then one could control the development of contrast in the negative, as if one were tanked alongside the film :wink: I'm pretty sure I didn't imagine this.

@wirehead. My Epson 4990 arrived, and is plugged in. My wet darkroom doesn't work because I don't have a Safe Light. I've got all the rest of the gear for contact printing 127, and enlarging and printing 35mmm negs, but I can't buy a Safe Light here at the middle of the Universe. [Well, some hippie described Alice Springs that way, a few years ago!]

@Jim Appleyard. I was given 500mL of echt Agfa Rodinal two days ago. Not sure of its age. Previously [but, forgive me, I'm a new kid on the block] I've never seen mention of a dilution as low as 1+10 for Rodinal. 1:24 is the lowest I've seen. I'd be interested to know if a time reduction would be required with such 'strong' Rodinal, or does one leave it 'standard' to bring out the contrast?

Jim Appleyard
Posts: 80
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 4:33 pm

Post by Jim Appleyard »

1+24, or more commonly, 1+25 is a standard Rodinal dilution. 1+10 is what I've read on other forums to increase contrast. Sorry, I can't give you a time, you'll have to experiment. Please try your bottle of Rodinal on test film first. It's probably fine, but a test roll is a cheap way to find out.

As previously suggested, D-19 is meant to be a high-contrast developer. If you can find a time somewhere, that is a viable route to take. You may have to do test rolls.

My high contrast work is limited. I can't recall ever intentionally developing film itself for high contrast. I used to play around with Kodak 4x5 Graphic Arts Film. I would take a regular negative, enlarge it onto a piece of GA film, develop that in Kodak A-B developer and then high super-high-contrast internegs. Then, you make a print from there and if done properly, you get a b/w image with no gray tones. Fun stuff, but I haven't done it in years.

Ornello
Posts: 882
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:49 am

Post by Ornello »

analog.life wrote:Thank you very much, Jim for your direct and respectful response.

I almost always employ methods of control while printing (as opposed to film development). I was merely curious in what this method/combo would produce.

Ornello, not only have you just dated yourself, you've made me regret choosing to post here as I was hoping to avoid the elitist pretension common among many photography forums.
Didn't your mother ever teach you?
If you can't say something nice, don't say nuthin' at all!
I get really tired of people trying to get non-standard results. Learn how to get high-quality results first, develop your eye to find interesting things to photograph, rather than trying to "be creative" with technical processes. These things date rather quickly. Yesterday's "creative approach" is tomorrow's joke. Not too long ago I saw in a used book store a book on "creative photographic techniques" published in the mid-1980s. It was hilarious. Let's not forget the grainy infrared nudes!

If you develop your negative normally, you can print it in high contrast or normal contrast. If you develop your negatives to an excessive contrast, they're ruined for all time. You cannot go back. The high-contrast (or 'posterized') effect was popular in the 60's and is extremely dated now, though every once in a while someone gets a "brilliant idea"...

Been there, done that....
Last edited by Ornello on Fri Apr 20, 2007 4:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Jim Appleyard
Posts: 80
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 4:33 pm

Post by Jim Appleyard »

Who's to say Analog hasn't already perfected his/her skills??? Maybe this person just simply want to have fun with photography.

Who says the negs are ruined? Maybe Analog *WANTS* them that way?

Who cares if you've been there, done that? What does it matter to you, Ornello? Are his/her high contrast images keeping you up at night?

Ornello
Posts: 882
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:49 am

Post by Ornello »

Jim Appleyard wrote:Who's to say Analog hasn't already perfected his/her skills??? Maybe this person just simply want to have fun with photography.

Who says the negs are ruined? Maybe Analog *WANTS* them that way?

Who cares if you've been there, done that? What does it matter to you, Ornello? Are his/her high contrast images keeping you up at night?
It's so 1966.

http://artfiles.art.com/images/-/Beatle ... 30431.//jpeg//

This famous photograph was done with dramatic (high-contrast) lighting and perhaps printed on a slightly hard paper. Overdeveloping the film would have ruined it.

http://www.amazon.com/Beatles-Private-V ... 1592261760

pirateoversixty
Posts: 221
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 1:21 pm
Location: Peoria, Illinois

Post by pirateoversixty »

I am sure that Ornello is quite an accomplished darkroom worker, and that he is quite versed in the limits/capabilities of film. I have not seen any of his pix (has anybody?) but I am sure that under ANY lighting situation, they would exhibit superior tonal range, grain, etc.
I have noticed that Jay DeFehr does not respond to Ornello's posts anymore, but I don't wonder why.
As I said, he is , I'm sure a very talented person, but his replies tend to box a person in.
Caveat: I don't claim to be the sharpest knife in the drawer, but I am usually willing to listen to other peoples ideas.
Jim

Ornello
Posts: 882
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:49 am

Post by Ornello »

pirateoversixty wrote:I am sure that Ornello is quite an accomplished darkroom worker, and that he is quite versed in the limits/capabilities of film. I have not seen any of his pix (has anybody?) but I am sure that under ANY lighting situation, they would exhibit superior tonal range, grain, etc.
I have noticed that Jay DeFehr does not respond to Ornello's posts anymore, but I don't wonder why.
As I said, he is , I'm sure a very talented person, but his replies tend to box a person in.
Caveat: I don't claim to be the sharpest knife in the drawer, but I am usually willing to listen to other peoples ideas.
Jim

There are two points I wish to emphasize:

1) One must learn how to get the best results first, as a basic skill, before wandering off in other directions. You have to have a reference point.

2) The high-contrast look is extremely trite, and was old hat by 1970.

Jim Appleyard
Posts: 80
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 4:33 pm

Post by Jim Appleyard »

"The high-contrast look is extremely trite, and was old hat by 1970."

In YOUR opinion.

Post Reply