Video

I never would have thought. I’ve always removed the tape thinking it might be bad for the chemistry. And never removed the paper first. So then I’m always struggling to tear it off with the film mostly in the reel at the end. AND I can see how the tape would make it a tad stiffer, therefore easier to start. Brilliant! Thanks!!

When you learn to draw, you learn 3 axis perspective. For of course in a natural perspective everything that is farther away seems smaller, also in the height. As you rightly stated, wide angle lenses exagerate perspective, and it shows most clearly when it comes to heights. But to "straighten these converging lines" up, ignores the 3 axis perspective. When you look up at a tower from a close distance the top is not as wide as the base. In your "corrected" picture the two outer posts seem actually to go outwards, because in a natural view we actually expect them to get narrower to each other the higher they get. This is a common error of overcorrection. Plus: What you cannot (and therefore didn't) correct is that the top is still not level and skew because it was photographed from below (look at the line over the left tower window in this example). Instead of a natural perspective which one can get when drawing a building, you created what is sometimes called "photography perspective", owing to the use of a distorting lens...

Another great video, John. Thanks. Do you make your own FX55? I would love to see a video on the use of your Zonemaster!

Hi John. Is two bath necessary if I'm only printing a dozen or so prints in a session with freshly mixed fix?

Hi John, is it possible to replace sodium metabisulphite with the potassium salt? I think this releases less sulphite into solution so I'd have to add more? Thanks a lot in advance, Stan..

Is it possible to get a variety of grain characteristics in the negative? For example, rich, thick grain in shadows and finer grain in highlights?

I would love to learn how to shoot and develop and print black and white film.

one tip, some meters, like the Minolta Spot meters have a button or mode which calculates this for you (S/A/H on the Minolta), which allows std metering in zone 5, but tells the meter you are 'shooting' a shadow or highlight, S\H buttons, thus shifting these back to the zone 3 or 8 which they are, so not making a silhouette of a grooms tux, when metering a brides white dress, or visa versa. The A or Average function of these meters takes these outliers and combines them, into one reading, for setting a camera, so ALL tones lie in this dynamic range of the film, and accounting for the contrast range of the scene, so they are not crunched into a flat image, but a vibrant one.

great video, never knew that specular highlights where zone 10; and you are right about them at 3:23 as most ND \ND grads and polarisers deal with this zone, one would assume this is where the 1/2/3 stops of ND originate from, this "lowering" of Zone 10 to a detailed zone 7/8 where we want them.

First: thank you very much for the video Second: why isn't enough to take a look a the negatives? If the film isn't actually as sensitive as it should, wouldn't the first negative (the one after the hand shot) be as transparent as the lenscupon+fog one? In fact, its noticeable in your negatives, that the "supposedtobezone1" frame, is already distinguishable from the lenscupon one! Which means, i thought that the zone one was actually achieved successfully, therefor the film iso is the one actually claimed. ...heeeelp!!!

For maximum control, would it help to cover the back side of the paper also? Would the bleach soak up through the bottom of the paper?

Can you advise how long it takes to sufficiently stop the development using a 2 percent vineger solution and what agitation method is used? Also do you prepare your development solutions using tap water or distilled water, and would you find a different result using one over the other? Thanks! I love your content!!!!

This is OK for 35mm but I've found that it pays to be careful when developing 120 size film in a tank. I have had a problem where I agitated too vigurously and the action actually unwound the film off the spiral due to it being much wider than 35mm. The film ended up stuck to the side of the tank and ruined. I now make a point of noting which way the 120 film is on the spiral and twisting gently in the opposite direction to the direction the film is loaded onto it. The force of the film entering the end of the film then doesn't push the film out of the spiral!

I end up getting bromide drag every time I do stand development with homemade PaRodinal. Can't quite figure out the cause though.

Hi, very much enjoy your videos. They are becoming a go-to in this area for me. Just a question about your video which I couldn't easily find the answer to on Google - what is cooking a print? Thank you,

I found this video very informative. I did not realize I had to agitate solutions (water & a rinse aid) in a film tank prior to washing. I used Photoflo in the past and I was obviously doing something very wrong because after the wash I could see muck all over an expendable negative I experimented on. I have a question for the uploader: Can I use this method to safely remove embedded dirt, debris or dust that is inside a film negative? Also, how do I prevent the washed negatives from curling?

Thanks you John Finch so much. Your tips were very useful for me.

What a brilliant tip. Would be happy to see many more photography tips from you, John!

John - I'm a film photographer on a budget from Calcutta. Cannot express how much I appreciate this channel. I will save up and buy your book soon. Keep making these and helping us out. Cheers!

Hero. ❤

Do the clothes pins not leave marks on the paper? The papers not sticking together? with RC if the papers touch when wet they usually stick and leave marks. The cloths pins too. Is FB different?

Always good advice 👍

I usually cut them 6 frames at the time from the bottom , scan and sleeve and so on until I reach the top.

I have been so inspired by your darkroom work the past couple days of watching your channel I pulled my Beseler 45M out of storage and set up my darkroom again. 🎉

Do anybody know if 0.075 g is same as 750 mg? 🤔

If I had to land a passenger plane in an emergency I'd want the maker of this video to be the guy talking me through it. So thank you for this video. Just watched this in Berlin and used it to load my first roll of 120 - without dramas. Appreciate your efforts with making it, the very clear and confident way you explain with just the right about of repeatition.

Hello John. Thanks for doing all of this testing for us. It really is helpful. One of the things I love about FX55 is the way it elevates budget filmstocks, such as Fomapan. Diluted FX55 + Fomapan 100 is amazing.

Absolutely amazing the look of both the photos and from 35mm. Would be interesting to see a slight reduction in the 10ml grain reduction amount to 6ml and shot again. Would love to see it in medium format. Great videos as always !!

Thank you 😊

cheers. subscribed!

But how about milligrams ? I need to measure 1-3 milligram accurately..

1-1

cool.. having never used pyro... does it make a huge difference to other developers when it comes to sharpness and grain? Have you compared say doing dev in standard chems like they would at a lab and then drum scanning the image and then do a print at the same size, and see if the wet print and a digital print are any different? Also... i know its tongue and cheek.. but there is nothing wrong with digital.... I shoot large format film and digital medium format, and they are a beautiful combination of many different things that yield the best results for the image I have in mind.

id like to see a close up of the 2nd shot, as moving the plane of focus im sure would of ended up with the ground not sharp or the roof not sharp?

Ive never used zone3... always zone 4 for much more play with processing the negative. Have always used grads or done N-1 or -2 development.

7:50 the turning with a twizzle stick is this a colour neg step? For BW is the standard agitation by moving gently around the same as with 35mm? 🔄

Hello Sir, i am a follower of your channel, can you please advise how to develop pan f50 with ilford ddx developer? Thank you🙏

Lol I used the inverse square law to do this with out knowing about this

Thank you ! One has to be sure, that every camera you use has correct exposure times for you do not have to test iso for every camera !

Thank you so much for this tip. Much appreciated!

With night photography, when you have light sources in your frames, is this method good? Or i will have to shorten the development time even more?

John, I have made 200 ml. FX-55 part B just after the posting of your video. By this time, the (B) solution has become dark brown in colour and honey like in consistency. I prepared 100 ml. of working solution, which was golden in colour. Then I dropped a film leader of PanF + in it, which became quite black on the emulsion side by 13 minutes. Is my solution B alright?

Thanks for the excellent video. Please, how did you get 2.62?

Ah shit

Seems like it might be a waste of water no?

I wonder if watered down tooth paste on a white glove would polish it out. I used this method on a plastic motorcycle head light the once.

Is it 10% reduction of the print exposure in RC paper as well, or is it a different value? I did do film photography and development 30 years ago. I have just bought some 35mm and 6x6 and 6x9 cameras and a 6x6 B&W enlarger, film loaders. Just got to get film, paper and chemicals to get me started now. Nice videos

Hiya John. Thanks for this. I've done similar tests with other developers and now want to play about with the 510Ptro. If I find anything interesting I'll give you a shout. Best wishes from The Rhondda.

This comment is about BT2B. In one batch I prepared the developer, I missed to correct the sodium metaborate tetrahydrate concentration against the octahydrate in Bath B and used the whole 12 g/L. I have developed a role of Eastman 5222 exposed at 200 iso in both Sunny and overcasted situations . The film came out to be amazing with contrast and the tonal range even a little increase in film speed. Same thing I have observed for foma 200 (exposed at 160) and kentmere 400 (exposed at 400) but double X was the best. Double X developed for 4 min in bath A with initial 30 sec with continuous agitation then 10 sec every minute. In bath B 4 min with first 10 sec (4 inversion) continuous and one inversion every min. Requesting your opinion on this.

You are so spot on, those 3 are what I've tried to make same way every time, including how roughly I do agitation and how many turns I do. Trying out every combination of agitation is impossible so it needs some limiting. I've had repeatable density differences below 0.05 with keeping parameters same. Part of that is due to aging developer and needs adjusting over time. In practice that means every standard contrast image exposed right prints on grade 2. I love that when I try FX55 I have a baseline and may not need to test every parameter myself (although my agitation may differ from yours)