Developing and Agitating Experiment. Ortho Film Under Safelight!
Vložit
- čas přidán 15. 12. 2020
- QUICK LINKS
SFLaB BEGINNERS GUIDE TO FILM PHOTOGRAPHY & DARKROOM
payhip.com/b/RtMY
JOIN SFLaB CZcams COMMUNITY MEMBERS AREA
/ @shootfilmlikeaboss
SUPPORT MY CHANNEL ON PATREON
/ shootfilmlikeaboss
ORIGINAL PRINTS FOR SALE
www.etsy.com/uk/shop/shootfil...
THE SFLaB WEBSITE
www.rogerlowe.co.uk
FACEBOOK
/ shootfilmlikeaboss
INSTAGRAM
/ shootfilmlikeaboss
ABOUT THIS VIDEO
EQUIPMENT USED
CAMERA - Nikon F90X
FILM - Ilford Ortho 80
DEVELOPER - Rodinal, 1/50 15 mins
STOP & FIX - Fotospeed
ENLARGER - DURST M605
PAPER - Ilford MG DELUXE
DEVELOPER - MG Ilford
STOP & FIX - FOTOSPEED
PRODUCTION GEAR
CANON 6D, GOPRO 7 BLACK, TASCAM DR10L MIC, SENHEISSER SHOTGUN MIC,
NEEWER LED PANELS, GVM COLOUR PANELS,
Editing - FCP, PHOTOSHOP, LIGHTROOM
ABOUT MY VIDEOS
If my videos inspire, create ideas and help others in film photography and darkroom work then it's worth making them.
I always welcome comments that are useful towards the video subject that will help others understand the process within.
Keep shooting and thanks for watching.
MUSIC CREDITING
CZcams Studio Music - Jak na to + styl
I think adding more agitations would create more of a difference than simply using different methods of agitation. Whether like a madman or a gentle lover, you are still just replacing the developer that is touching the film surface. The additional time at the beginning of the gentle method offsets the fewer agitations later...
I think you're right. Next time Arty!
Interesting experiment. Don't know it you've seen it, but Azriel Knight did a video on this a couple of years back where he compared no agitation, normal agitation and constant agitation. No agitation came back as expected - muddy and low contrast. The interesting thing was that there was very little difference between normal and constant agitation, apart from a slight increase in contrast and more pop in the highlights.
I used to worry that over-agitation would ruin my negs, but now I tend to err on the side of over-agitation just to be sure.
Another interesting session. Surprising how little difference it made. Thanks for sharing.
Enjoyed this, very interesting. Thank you
Rodger,
My personal prefrence is the last pic it has slightly more contrast than your normal agitation set. There are more details in the budda head. Just my opinion though
Thanks Roger. Super interesting as always.
Thanks, very interesting !
great experiment Roger, interesting how little difference there is considering the extremes of agitation. Im a close my eyes to spool and 5 inversions every minute type of guy.
Thank you Roger for your work and continuous inspiration! I have read in numerous books that you should agitate for the first 30s, then 10s every minute unless specified otherwise by the film / chemistry manufacturer.
Interesting Roger. Thanks for making the effort to experiment. I suppose it’s the usual don’t fix it if it’s not broken!
You bet. I'll stick with what works but it's interesting to see.
That was really interesting as its answered a few questions I had! To my taste I preferred the 3rd option. This is good as I do slow agitation for 1 full minute and then 5 every full minute - so its a cross between your 1st and 3rd!
Thanks for investing the time in this subject! Always wondered about agitation and its quirks. May be significant that your were consistent with inversions/time each tank.
Yes I think so. Maybe 20 inversions like a nutter would have showed different.
Interesting! Watching you, I realise that my agitation has been on the, erm, “enthusiastic” side for years (a bit like your sample 2. My thinking being to dislodge any trapped bubbles). But my negs are indeed always quite contrasty. I’ll calm down a little and see if that improves things! Good video, thanks!
I close my eyes as well when spooling the film in absolute darkness! I don't know why??? ;-)
So do I!
@@renkenbrad So do I. Glad to know I'm not the only irrational loony in the darkroom. Then when I drop the film canister I open my eyes to look for it :-)
Same here! Sometimes I'll try to keep my eyes open, and I find it uncomfortable!
Great Wacky Wednesday session. I follow the invert and twist if I do inversions. Recently, I have started to twiddle with the Paterson tank, which has given very similar results.
The Buddha seems great in B&W...
I saw another inversion method that was interesting - invert at minutes 0, +1, +2, +4, +8, +16, +32 -- double the interval each time - akin to stand development.
I did an experiment similar to that numerous years ago. I was checking my notes from that session. I had very similar results like you did. There might’ve been a very slight difference, but nothing that would’ve caused me to change my development routine.
I used Ilford HP5, and developed with DDX, Ilfostop, and rapid fix.
What I did learn however, was that I didn’t need to be so precise with the development. I always approached it like it had to be a certain way? I used the same method for close to 20yrs before migrating to digital.
I probably could’ve just been a bit more relaxed about it! Lol
I think I have to fine tune my film - developer - temperature - time - agitation approach once again. Thank you Roger!
You can do it Claus!
Thanks for this series. There's a lot of conflicting info out there about film, processing, and printing. I've never taken the time to experiment myself and always just took the majority's opinion as truth.
I think it's a case of sticking with what works for you. If it's not you can always tweak it.
Very interesting! I prefer the look of the normal method, but they do look very similar.
I even close my eyes when I use a dark bag. Probably pointless, but it feels easier to focus on the job with closed eyes somehow😝
I know. I literally struggled with my eyes open! Strange.
Interesting, and it really confirms what Azriel Knight did a few years back. That agitation has really minute effect on the development. I think it might stem from good/bad practice. Bad agitation technique might not be visible most of the time, but still may fail more times then good technique.
"You coming out?" "No...... F@ck off" 😂 Brilliant 😂
it was p*** off lol
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss :-D
Like first and then enjoy the video as always.
Thanks again!
It appears the more I look into Photography that professionals, principally teachers like writing rules and stipulating what must be. Anyway thanks for publishing this series of videos.
Stephen, you should have seen the late sixties. Every soul who had some standing somewhere waxed didactic. It was a generation of frustrated school marmes. Curiously, the pros stayed away from the Warholites.
@@jamesjacocks6221 Evening James, I think certain people wanted to mystify photography and I suppose that has been the human way for everything, take early steam engines for example or the wheel, anyway I personally stick to Ilfords published data and methods, boring unimaginative as that approach maybe I have faith that I will get results that I am happy with and Roger's Wednesday Wonder series sort of confirm that sticking to the middle of the road gives plenty of latitude.
Haha such a good intro
My late mentor lied to me....lol
Great video Roger. I once tried 1+100 r09 for 1h development!
I used a (almost) continuous rotation. The tank was half way full, and it was spinning on its side on a wood base with 4 cart wheels. Later on I read that for continuous rotation time should be cut by a 10/15%, but cannot find anymore those papers.
The result was not bad, maybe too contrasty!
Thanks for this experiment ^^
Cheers
Generally for an hour you'd invert once or twice initially then again 30 mind later (stand). I imagine you would hit a compressed neg agitating for an hour. I've not tried that Jacopo
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss Hey Roger, if i'm not wrong this is the one, a 4x5 neg, fp4@125. www.flickr.com/photos/jt99x/49701173981/in/dateposted/ (it's a mess but somehow i liked it. I had a really hard time to fit the frame and focus it on a lf camera.)
Cheers ^^
Nice image. I can see the contrast. Thats the process you used to develop. Very compressed. If that's the process you want to use I'm sure over time you'll find what works best. I have heap of contrasty negs from my early days where I was trying all kinds of development.
My Patterson tank leaks like sieve so i started using the rotary agitation method using the furnished agitator rod. Problem solved! As far as i can tell, the development is ok. I use Xtol and over fill the tank a bit. I do bump the tank to dislodge bubbles. Maybe you can try this method for some Wed.
I've never used the rod. Must give that a go!!
interesting video. I develop all BW film at 24C and continuous agitation. I control contrast with development time. I use a densitometer, so it's pretty easy to work out a development time for a given film to get the negative contrast I want. Doing it this way removes all variables except development time.
That's very interesting. I control the contrast with the development time, but always having into account the zone or if I'm pulling or pushing.
@@LaViejaConsolada If you want to zone system it, an 18% grey exposure card correctly exposed should land right about 0.72-0.75 density above film base plus fog if doing the traditional Ansel Adams zone system. I prefer ISO based contrast as it nets more film speed. That means that the 18% grey card would land at about 0.84 density above film base plus fog instead of the 0.74 of zone system. A bit more contrast and grain, but more film speed. Whatever density you want middle grey to be, if it comes out low, add more development time, if it comes out high, reduce development time. An 18% grey card, an incident light meter, a little X-Rite densitometer from eBay, and a reliable light source and you can very easily dial in a development time for a given camera, film, and developer combination.
Thanks for sharing Adrian... What about grain? At higher temp and continuous agitation.
@@AdrianBacon Thank you, Adrian! I will meditate about your advice. It's difficult to change a routine, but perhaps it's worth it.
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss Grain is a function of how much density (contrast) you build, which you control through development time. It doesn't really matter if you do intermittent agitation at a lower temperature, or continuous agitation at a higher temperature (within reason), if both methods are given the appropriate amount of time to develop the same amount of negative contrast, the grain will be the same, because.... the contrast (or density) is the same. Temperature and agitation affect how quickly density is built up. How the grain looks is more of a function of what developer (and dilution) is used, not so much temperature and agitation method (again, within reason... developing at 100F won't look good compared to 68F, but the difference between 68F and 75F isn't really visible). I prefer higher temps and continuous agitation because you get the same contrast with a much shorter development time, and time is money. I don't recommend higher temperatures and continuous agitation if doing it by hand though. I use a JOBO. The temperature and agitation are consistent, and I just simply vary the development time to get the desired contrast for a given film and developer.
Forgot it was Wednesday! Yay 😀
Great video as always (sorry I don't post much comments but always check your channel) I've been wanting to try this as I agitate really different.. I can't use my left arm since a couple of years ago, so I do everything with my right arm only, even loading the tank (yes it's possible! ) so, sometimes my agitation is like if I'm holding a glass of brandy (kind of).. round movements without turning upside down the tank.. I always get nice results, what do you think about this technique?
If it works for you it's fine.
Another interesting video. Thanks again for making these.
And here is a random question, can you make black and white prints from colour negitives, will they turn out alright?
You can Anna. I have a video somewhere on that. If I remember it took ages under the enlarger !
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss very interesting.
oh ok, I thought I had watched all your videos, will have to have another look. Thanks again. 👍
The reason for the difference: Developer exhausts itself faster on highlights so when you invert it it refreshes itself and continues to develope. The opposite happens with the shadows. That is why stand people stand develope. Preserve the highlights and bring out the shadows.
I love your channel. It's cool to see you commenting as well!
And we love your Jeep too John!
@@AnttilatheHun1 Thank you for watching my videos
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss Lol me too.
Invert the shit out o it
ha ha nice one
How much agitation alters the contrast of a film depends on the type of film ( slow ones are more contrasty) and the developer . A highly active solution HC 110 dilution A for example, requires minimal agitation. If HC 110 is used with dilution H, more agitation would be required to ensure proper development of highlights otherwise, a flat and murky negative is the result. Some developers such as Xtol are quite insusceptible to agitation. Xtol dev times even for a rotary processor are quite close to small tank processing ( less than 10% variation ). Unfortunately unless one has access to a densitometer or an accurate light meter with a flat disc, proper measurement of density to determine density values are just guesswork. Hence, It is advisable to concentrate on a couple of emulsions and a developer of choice for consistency and avoid using a large selection of films and developers. My standard agitation routine with normal developers such as LC29 or Atomal 49 is 10 inversions with rotation in the beginning of development and two inversions with rotation every minute.
Thanks for the value Lensman. I was surprised at my results. There is soooo much to play in regard to variables with film and development.
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss In the old times, Ansel Adams and a lot of other photographers used to make use of a technique called ' Water Bath Development ' to control the contrast of a negative. I believe it involved immersing the film in the developer for a minute with constant agitation and then leaving it a pure water bath for a couple minutes and then repeating the cycle until the total development time was achieved. Adams indicated that this technique used to work better with the older thick emulsion films of yesteryears, but the results were amazing. I have not tried this technique myself but I guess it is worth a try with more traditional emulsions. I am not sure if the modern T grain emulsion would respond to it well, but it is worth a try.
I watched this on THURSDAY -- will I get 'Told Off?? '
Ha Ha.. Thinking Thursday! Hi Pete. Any input on this Pete?
Ql, thanks Roger for experiments! btw, what about stop/fixer agitation, guys? Just curious :) I am using same agitation technique like developing (something between #1 and #2 in video)... Is that matters? Thanks! :)
I'm not sure if there is any agitation issue with stopping or fixing. I've fixed film under inspection and noticed the milky fog clears quicker with agitation than without. That's all I know on that. Good question
I have a question for you! Can you load you exposed film on the developing reel under the safe light? Or should it be under complete dark? Thanks 🙏
Only Orthochromatic Film and even then you should do tests with that film to make sure your safelight is safe for it. If you shoot Panchromatic Film, (most films are panchromatic), under red light it will fog. I only did this for viewing purposes. I always load films in complete darkness ortho or pan.
@@ShootFilmLikeaBoss thank you!
I don't know if this is the right place to ask ?
I usually develop my films ( mostly HP5) in ID11 in a 1+3 solution. It takes longer but the reason I do it is purely because the expense and hard to get developer in RSA. I have been advised that 1+1 would give better results., but haven't tested it yet. Of course , film is also expensive , it is thus a question of what is most economic. I also have tried caffenol , where I substituted the instant coffee with an extract of Rosemary, with a rather satisfying result. I keep wondering on Wednesdays ... 1+3 or 1+1... Thanks a lot
1+3 with ID-11 and normal agitation gives less contrast and slightly more noticeable grain from my experience. I did a similar test on XTOL about a year ago on a pumpkin. That video is on my channel. When I first started film to keep cost down I would use Rodinal a lot as it is a highly concentrated developer and I could stand develop and use only 10ml of developer. I used it yesterday actually 1 part to 50 for a 120 film and used just 17ml of Rodinal for 15 minutes.
Ever shoot kodakith 2556??
I have not. Ortho film
I think your camera has some shutterspeed difference
Not at all. At least as far as I know. They are pretty accurate. If it was one of my older cameras, maybe.
no subtitles :(
Try again in a few hours, they usually appear then.
Sorry. They should be there.
Your videos are very interesting But please don t cry when you speak it make that who are not english speaker cant understand you as I by example Slowly is betterCongratulations
to be fair his English is very clear. And I'm a spaniard struggling here in the UK, so believe me, I know what I'm talking about.
@@LaViejaConsolada Puede ser que lo sea para ti No es mi caso lamento no tener tu capacidad para entender el idioma
A veces hablo rápido para mantener el flujo del video, sin darme cuenta de que puede ser más difícil de entender para las personas que no hablan inglés. Lo tendré en cuenta. Gracias. (¡Traductor de google!)
??? Why testning al the time..
Because you read lots what people say and without trying yourself you'll never know. It's all part of educating the what if. Like a chef will always test and try new things. That's all