|
In my opinion, save yourself the hassle and get a changing bag. It'll be an extra twenty bucks or so but it's a hundred times less frustrating than doing everything in the dark. If you're really looking to cheap out you can always put three large garbage bags inside one another (because they're at least somewhat translucent usually) and clothespin the opening to make two arm holes, but a changing bag is a worthwhile investment in my opinion. Especially since the good ones have double compartments and zippers on the back in case you forget something, etc. Make sure you get at least a medium sized one though. I accidentally bought a small and while it's still better than doing everything in the dark, I'm always worried that I'm going to poke a hole in it with my scissors, and things generally get tight inside. some kinda jackal fucked around with this message at 19:42 on Nov 30, 2011 |
#
?
Nov 30, 2011 19:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 20:16 |
|
|
nielsm posted:You're mixing up developing film and developing prints Yeah, I kinda realized that right as I said it  Appreciate the help everyone. Maybe I'll just go the develop-and-scan route then. If I want to make prints I'll do that down the line.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2011 19:39
|
|
|
Do it. There's nothing like pulling out the finished strip and seeing photos that you took come out. At least in my case it gave me a whole new enjoyment for shooting film, just because I was involved in every step of the mechanical process. Not to mention that to my untrained eye, I've yet to have a photo come out unusable because I messed up the development process, and I've MESSED UP the development process on more than one occasion. Black and white is so forgiving, and film is so forgiving. Combine the two and you have to WORK to mess up a black and white development. Once you're more familiar with the chemicals and know how to achieve the look you're going for you will probably start to notice things like subtle temperature variations affecting your outcome, but for me as a beginner I was just happy that every photo I put into the can came out usable, scannable. Film has so much latitude that you can do a lot of post processing as well so for beginners I think it's just about perfect. some kinda jackal fucked around with this message at 19:48 on Nov 30, 2011 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2011 19:44
|
|
|
Right? That's part of the reason I love film, that moment when I pull a roll of film off a wet reel and see the images for the first time. It's my favorite part of the process. I'm about to graduate from college, and that means loosing access to a very nice b/w darkroom. I know I want to continue taking pictures, but there's no way I'll be able to set up a darkroom in the house I'm moving into in January. I'm pretty certain there's no way I'll be able to wet print at home, but I certainly intend on developing my own film. I'm a huge fan of changing bags. I know that a dark room gives you more options, but I'm perfectly happy with my little pop up changing bag. I typically process 35mm in two tanks that hold 6 35mm reels each and have never had issues with room.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2011 19:55
|
|
|
DJExile posted:God help me, I might get into developing my own B&W. The process doesn't seem that complicated, but I have a few questions: $100 is a reasonable budget. $20 for the tanks, probably $50 of chemicals, plus some misc things like baby syringes and bottles to store chems, clothespins, distilled water, etc. Wet printing is quite a bit more involved and expensive, though. It's probably $2-300 of stuff if you can wait, $500-800 if you are impatient. quote:How big an area do I need? I can't dedicate a room to it, but it sounds like I only need space for 2 or 3 of those little tub things and a little extra. I thought I'd heard someone say they just use their laundry room since there's no windows and did things on top of their washer and dryer. Not very. You need a darkroom or a changing bag to load film reels into a tank. Once the film is inside the tank, you can turn the lights on and do your thing. quote:How wary do I have to be about these chemicals in terms of a ventilated room, burning the poo poo out of my fingers, etc? As mentioned above, you don't have to do this in the dark. Anything with chemicals can be done in the light. Making wet prints requires much more space, though. You need at least enough space to set the enlarger down and work. If you develop with a rotary drum, you don't need a large or well ventilated space. You do need ventilation for trays. To answer your question, though, nothing to be too afraid of with developing B+W. You shouldn't drink developer or fixer, and NEVER put exhausted fixer down the drain. Find a local lab or a school and they will probably take it for free/a small fee. They can recover silver out of it. Fixer remover is a weak acid. Stop bath is basically vinegar, Photo Flo is basically dish detergent. Don't drink any of them, avoid getting them on open wounds, wash your hands before eating, but none of them will burn you on contact. Work in an open area to be safe, fixer is the primary inhalation danger. Some of the extra chemicals you can use are nasty though. Sepia toning produces hydrogen sulfide and can choke you. Selenium toner probably isn't the best thing to inhale either. Some of the developers can be pretty nasty - pyro based developers in particular needs gloves at a minimum. quote:I guess I need at least one of the solutions to be at 20 degrees Celsius. Are there tricks to holding it exactly there or is general "room temperature" fine? B+W developing, it doesn't really matter that much. It's good to be as precise as you can so you can zero in on the proper exposure/development combination, but you'll be fine if you're within +/- 2 degrees. You only need to be exact for developer, the other processes just need to go to completion and as long as they're at a reasonable temperature they'll be fine. My first trick is I presoak my milk jugs of distilled water in a bathtub. In the summer, I use cold water, in the winter, warmer water if necessary. Since I use one-shot developers (Rodinal or HC-110) this means 95% of my solution is at a reasonable temperature. Then, I have a plastic measuring cup I mix in. I measure, if it's too cold I run hot water on the outside of the cup, if it's too hot I put it in the freezer for a few minutes. quote:After I get a roll developed, am I best off making my own prints then, or shipping the negatives somewhere? If you want scans or digital prints, you can do that yourself. Turn off infrared dust scanning, because silver blocks it. Typically I find that scanning on my Epson V500 drops quality one format - 35mm makes a nice 8x10 wet print, but the scans are better at postcard size. Medium format makes a nice 8x10 scan, or you can make huge wet prints. Prolabs that will do wet prints are getting rare and expensive. There's a lot more skill involved than with digital prints. Good printers basically do analog photoshopping - burning in bright areas, dodging dark areas, spotting dust and scratches. That can be hard to do with someone else's photo - you know what you intend a picture to look like, they don't. It's not hard to wet print for yourself, but you do need more space and there is more equipment involved. If you have to buy everything individually, you will be nickled and dimed to death. If you can, try to poach an entire darkroom at once for the equipment. They are often free to cheap - this summer I picked up a pretty complete darkroom with a 4x5 enlarger for free off Craigslist. It will probably have a crappy 35mm enlarger. I would look separately for a 6x9cm/2x3" or 4x5" enlarger - they will cost $50-150, but will be a lot sturdier than 35mm enlargers. You'll also probably have better luck hunting for parts later. Sorry, I'm in a bit of a hurry, that may not flow the best. If you have any questions, shoot. I don't think you'll have any trouble developing B+W film, it's really really easy once you've done it a couple times. If you want help with wet printing, I might be able to help you in person. I'm in Michigan, if I remember you're in Ohio. We met briefly at G43's goonmeet a couple years ago. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 20:58 on Nov 30, 2011 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2011 20:55
|
|
|
DJExile posted:Yeah, I kinda realized that right as I said it I just developed my first ever roll of film (c-41 though) this past weekend. Unfortunately, the only exposed film I had came out of a Holga, so who knows how well I did or how well my scanner works. However, it was really easy and I hosed it up and the pictures still came out. I've got some chemicals in the mail to try B&W. Most of B&H's developers are "pick up in store only", I assume there are some rules about mailing chemicals, so I couldn't get r09 which I've seen recommended and they don't appear to have Rodinal so I just guessed and bought Ilford Ilfosol S. We'll see how that goes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2011 22:03
|
|
|
Definitely get the largest changing bag you can find. I found out the hard way to work as quickly as possible: the first 35mm roll went on the reel no problem, but by the time I got the top off the second one, the inside of the bag was too humid, and the film was curling, making it impossible to load on the reel. I think I scratched the poo poo out of it. Also, I had a brain fart, and used water straight out of the refrigerator, and the fixer crystalized when it hit the water.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2011 23:03
|
|
|
eggsovereasy posted:I've got some chemicals in the mail to try B&W. Most of B&H's developers are "pick up in store only", I assume there are some rules about mailing chemicals, so I couldn't get r09 which I've seen recommended and they don't appear to have Rodinal so I just guessed and bought Ilford Ilfosol S. We'll see how that goes. There's some sort of regulations regarding certain photo chemistry. Freestylephoto.biz will ship most developer solely via ground, but it's how I get my chemistry. I just ordered some Rodinol from them a few weeks ago (they carry it under adinol). $19 bucks incl delivery, and stand developing at 1+100 or 1+125 I think it's enough developer to last me a decade.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2011 00:01
|
|
|
If I'm only shooting and wanting to develop black and white, does it matter which brand/type of developer I buy? Will the HC-110 work with all kinds of black and white film, or do you have to match up the develper to the film I want to develop?
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2011 01:12
|
|
|
Falco posted:If I'm only shooting and wanting to develop black and white, does it matter which brand/type of developer I buy? Will the HC-110 work with all kinds of black and white film, or do you have to match up the develper to the film I want to develop? To an extent it doesn't matter, all B/W developers will give you an image, but they can have wildly varying effects. HC-110 is a very safe bet in that it gives normal results with nearly all films.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2011 01:16
|
|
|
QPZIL posted:I shot a roll of Tri-X at 1600 and then tried to stand develop it in 1+100 Rodinal for an hour. Did you shoot 120 or 35mm? For 120 I always dilute to 1+125, and only do gentle inversions for 60s, then leaving sitting of the next 59min then pour out, I never do the 30min inversions that other people suggest. I've pushed T-max 400 to 6400 with that and managed to get some usable images out of it (not something I suggest).
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2011 01:28
|
|
|
Falco posted:If I'm only shooting and wanting to develop black and white, does it matter which brand/type of developer I buy? Will the HC-110 work with all kinds of black and white film, or do you have to match up the develper to the film I want to develop?
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2011 01:34
|
|
|
Or D-76. I mean, it's the baseline all developers are measured against. It's not sexy but it works.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2011 02:36
|
|
|
eggsovereasy posted:Ilford Ilfosol S. We'll see how that goes. I've never used any other developers (I'm still fairly new at this) but I'm happy with Ilfosol.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2011 03:09
|
|
|
I prefer Xtol to D76, but you have to mix it from powder which is a pain in the rear end.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2011 07:12
|
|
|
atomicthumbs posted:I prefer Xtol to D76, but you have to mix it from powder which is a pain in the rear end. It's really not that bad, you get the required water hot enough, pour it in with the developer, swirl till mixed, top off with rest of the water. One gallon of D-76/XTOL whatever done. Takes like 5 minutes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2011 14:14
|
|
|
Ferris Bueller posted:It's really not that bad, you get the required water hot enough, pour it in with the developer, swirl till mixed, top off with rest of the water. One gallon of D-76/XTOL whatever done. Takes like 5 minutes. And then you wait two hours for it to cool down to working temperature all while trying to figure out where to store five litres of stock solution. Edit for a question: Does anyone know if Ilford Pan F+ really just has a naturally low Dmax? Every roll I've developed so far has been rather transparent even on the leader. Far from unprintable, but still low compared to every other film I've tried. nielsm fucked around with this message at 15:26 on Dec 1, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2011 14:55
|
|
|
nielsm posted:And then you wait two hours for it to cool down to working temperature all while trying to figure out where to store five litres of stock solution. Brown glass gallon* bottle works like a champ for me, I've also heard of people using wine bottles with the vacuum cork devices. Cold water bath cuts that down to about a 1/2 hour. *I generally use D-76 which comes gallon sized. Ferris Bueller fucked around with this message at 16:17 on Dec 1, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2011 16:14
|
|
|
After diluting the B&W developer and fixer how long can I realistically store it? Will I need to dilute a new bottle every time I want to develop film?
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2011 17:11
|
|
|
eggsovereasy posted:After diluting the B&W developer and fixer how long can I realistically store it? By "diluting" I'm not sure what you mean... If you're using a one-shot developer like Rodinal or HC-110, you'll put your few milliliters of syrup into your water, develop your roll, and toss the developer. They make replenisher that can save your developer, but it's really not worth it. Same goes for stock solutions like Xtol. You'll mix your powder and water and keep it in a 1gallon brown jug or something, then when you want to develop - you'll either use 300-500ml undiluted, or 1:1 diluted, or whatever you wish. Then you'll throw out the developer. There's more of a case for replenisher here, since you use so much developer per roll, but I don't know much about replenisher. Fixer, on the other hand... I usually mix up a 600ml bottle and clip test it every few rolls. When it stops fixing like I want it to, I (safely) dispose of it and mix up more. So, that's what I do \/  \/
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2011 17:25
|
|
|
eggsovereasy posted:After diluting the B&W developer and fixer how long can I realistically store it? If you buy liquid stock developer, only make up as much working solution as you need for each development. The usual guideline is that (any) diluted developer keeps 24 hours. The keeping properties of developer mainly depends on two things: The presence of oxygen and light. It keeps the best in a dark, sealed bottle which is either filled to the brim or where the oxygen has been replaced with another gas. Properly stored, a stock solution made up from powder might keep up to 6 months. For Kodak HC-110 and Ilfotec HC, the "stock" solution is officially not the contents of the bottle, but is rather made up by diluting the syrup a bit, to get a less viscous liquid easier to work with. The stock solution made up that way should also keep for a few months, while the syrup can keep for possibly years even in an opened bottle. But don't dilute a stock solution to working strength unless you plan on using it immediately. Prepared fixer and stop bath should keep well enough, mix it and keep it until it has lost its strength.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2011 17:32
|
|
|
nielsm posted:Edit for a question: It should have one of the highest, I thought. I figured ISO corresponds inversely with Dmax
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2011 18:18
|
|
|
guidoanselmi posted:It should have one of the highest, I thought. I figured ISO corresponds inversely with Dmax Pan F+ has given me the thinnest-looking negatives I've ever had. Still scans/prints great, like nielsm said.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2011 18:44
|
|
|
For what it's worth, the bottle of Ilford fixer I mixed up lasted me for like a year and change. In fact thanks for reminding me, I still need to go take it on campus to have it disposed of.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2011 18:45
|
|
|
guidoanselmi posted:It should have one of the highest, I thought. I figured ISO corresponds inversely with Dmax Maybe it's just my imagination... I did a quick very unscientific test:  Grabbed a leader clip from a Pan F+ roll I just developed, and another random one I had around, most likely FP4+ or HP5+. Held them up to a lamp for a little while to make sure they were properly exposed, then developed in Tetenal Ultrafin 1+5 (or so, stronger than any recommended dilution) with vigorous agitation for a couple of minutes, stopped with water, fixed and washed. Then took this picture. I can't tell much difference from this test... I wonder why real negatives look so different despite this.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2011 19:04
|
|
|
I've been pretty busy with school lately and have only had time to shoot a couple rolls over the past few months. I must have developed my last roll at least 3 or 4 months ago, which turned out fine, but I just sort of realized that I mixed my chemicals at least 2 years ago. Oops :\ How long does Diafine normally last? I know it's sort of an oddball, ridiculously foolproof solution, I just don't really know what its shelf life is once you've thrown it into water and let it sit in a jug. I think I've run about 20 rolls of film through it, so I'm more concerned about old age than overuse. I'm pretty sure my Kodak rapid fixer is boned after that long, but I guess I could run an end test just in case. Edit: I found that order confirmation email, I guess my chemicals are from January 2010...that's not quite as bad as I thought, but I'm still a little concerned. penneydude fucked around with this message at 02:12 on Dec 3, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2011 02:00
|
|
|
penneydude posted:How long does Diafine normally last? I know it's sort of an oddball, ridiculously foolproof solution, I just don't really know what its shelf life is once you've thrown it into water and let it sit in a jug. I think I've run about 20 rolls of film through it, so I'm more concerned about old age than overuse. Pretty much forever as long as you don't mix them together.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2011 02:10
|
|
|
Reichstag posted:Pretty much forever as long as you don't mix them together. Haha, god I love Diafine so much. It's invincible.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2011 02:13
|
|
|
The only thing that can stop it is the Canadian border! Seriously though, nobody here carries it 
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2011 03:46
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:If you're really looking to cheap out you can always put three large garbage bags inside one another (because they're at least somewhat translucent usually) and clothespin the opening to make two arm holes, but a changing bag is a worthwhile investment in my opinion. Especially since the good ones have double compartments and zippers on the back in case you forget something, etc.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2011 23:21
|
|
|
Good point. I haven't experienced that myself (in my limited attempts I mean), but it sounds like it could certainly happen.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2011 23:28
|
|
|
The fuji 690 owns, delta 400 owns, rodinal owns, etc. 9/11 Memorial, NY by JaundiceDave, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2011 00:45
|
|
|
Tri-X owns. The Wall by Chris Hayden Photo, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2011 00:50
|
|
|
I developed my first roll of black and white film and have two big splotches on the film like: Is this what it looks like when the photographer is a moron and accidentally pops open the back while film is in it (my hand was on the door so it didn't actually open up, but I guess light could have gotten in) or did I screw up the development? The rest of the roll looks pretty good, waiting for it to dry before I scan it though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2011 02:02
|
|
|
To me it looks like your film stuck to itself in the tub and the developer didn't uniformly coat the surface of that one area. Maybe it skipped the track when you were loading?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2011 02:10
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:To me it looks like your film stuck to itself in the tub and the developer didn't uniformly coat the surface of that one area. That's what I was thinking, but after comparing the size of the splotch with the camera's "film area" (not sure what to call it) I'm pretty sure some light just got in when I unlatched the back.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2011 02:17
|
|
|
Nope, that's definitely a mistake in development. Light leaks, even large ones, have a very defined shape and would show up as a black area, but would look similar to the rest of the roll. Film sticking to itself causes blotchy discolored areas, which is what you have.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2011 03:11
|
|
|
TheLastManStanding posted:Nope, that's definitely a mistake in development. Light leaks, even large ones, have a very defined shape and would show up as a black area, but would look similar to the rest of the roll. Film sticking to itself causes blotchy discolored areas, which is what you have. I guess I'll need to be more careful spooling the film on the reel. It seems a lot easier to get 120 film on the reel than 35mm.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2011 03:21
|
|
|
I've had rolls come out like that - usually when I've had trouble loading the film on the reel. I've also had light leaks, and they look very different; as was said, they show up as consistent, defined shapes in pure black.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2011 03:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 20:16 |
|
|
JaundiceDave posted:The fuji 690 owns, delta 400 owns, rodinal owns, etc. May I ask your development time and concentration? I'm trying to learn as much as I can about Rodinal.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2011 05:40
|
|