Developing issues ?

[starvingjack]

Hi guys,

im not very impressed by the quality of some rolls that i've developed myself. Im using t-max 100 rolls , t-max developer, 7.5 minutes , 20degrees. scan 1200dpi.

The first 5 is from a bronica gs-1 which im quite disappointed in the IQ. I suppose its the developing which failed no?

[starvingjack]

This 2 are from a rollei which im pleased with the IQ. these turn out fine...





these are from a isolette, looks crappy...





can anyone rectify my problem? im doing everything by the rules but yet it doesnt feels right.

[dryonks]

Hi there. I had exactly the same feeling when I first developed my roll of Tmax 400. So I have been surfing exactly the same question you are asking. From what I've read so far, Tmax is good if you want to get a real creamy, dreamy look with minimal grain (check out the Tmax group in flickr, esp the one of taps done with stand development rodinal 1:100), and If you are used to the 'pop' of trix/rodinal, Tmax may seem flattish?

If you're developing all those pics with exactly the same formula, then could it be the differential contrast of the lenses used? I've realised that my canon ltm, being medium contrast is better off for colour pics. the CV21/4 though, gives the 'pop' that I'm looking for - like your rollei shots.

cheers! and keep on developing that film

[waileong]

Originally Posted by starvingjack Hi guys, im not very impressed by the quality of some rolls that i've developed myself. Im using t-max 100 rolls , t-max developer, 7.5 minutes , 20degrees. scan 1200dpi.

From the no of cameras you are selling, I assume you know cameras, so the problem is not the lens or the focusing or camera shake or the exposure, etc.

Shadow detail is controlled by exposure, developing basically affects grain and contrast. So if your exposure is correct, you should see enough shadow detail. If your developing is correct, you should see good contrast with controlled grain.

If you develop wrongly, your contrast may be off, or you may get uncontrolled grain. If you don't fix properly you may get blotches across your negs, etc.

So which do you see?

[starvingjack]

Originally Posted by dryonks Hi there. I had exactly the same feeling when I first developed my roll of Tmax 400. So I have been surfing exactly the same question you are asking. From what I've read so far, Tmax is good if you want to get a real creamy, dreamy look with minimal grain (check out the Tmax group in flickr, esp the one of taps done with stand development rodinal 1:100), and If you are used to the 'pop' of trix/rodinal, Tmax may seem flattish? If you're developing all those pics with exactly the same formula, then could it be the differential contrast of the lenses used? I've realised that my canon ltm, being medium contrast is better off for colour pics. the CV21/4 though, gives the 'pop' that I'm looking for - like your rollei shots. cheers! and keep on developing that film

hmm, i do like tmax for its smooth look but somehow im just not used to looking at it. Took a look at the flickr group and perhaps i'll try with other developers as well.. thanks!

Originally Posted by waileong From the no of cameras you are selling, I assume you know cameras, so the problem is not the lens or the focusing or camera shake or the exposure, etc. Shadow detail is controlled by exposure, developing basically affects grain and contrast. So if your exposure is correct, you should see enough shadow detail. If your developing is correct, you should see good contrast with controlled grain. If you develop wrongly, your contrast may be off, or you may get uncontrolled grain. If you don't fix properly you may get blotches across your negs, etc. So which do you see?

After spending more time to look at it, the photos are definitely overexposed. All were taken on a hot day. I should have pull process in developing no? The underexposed areas looks really dark thou.. man..headache..hahaha..frankly speaking these are my first batch of self processed b/w which i got it scanned, so before i screw up more i wanna rectify these first..haha...tks waileong...

[waileong]

You pull only if your whole roll is overexposed. Don't pull till you know what you're doing.

Originally Posted by starvingjack After spending more time to look at it, the photos are definitely overexposed. All were taken on a hot day. I should have pull process in developing no? The underexposed areas looks really dark thou.. man..headache..hahaha..frankly speaking these are my first batch of self processed b/w which i got it scanned, so before i screw up more i wanna rectify these first..haha...tks waileong...

[leej0038]

Originally Posted by starvingjack

woah whats happening? mosquito fogging?

[starvingjack]

im just wondering which part did i went wrong. Either the exposure was wrong from the start or i've drown it too long in the working solution , so i presume by shortening the time i'll be able to rectify the mistake? correct me if im wrong. tks..

[sweat100]

By the way, did you scan the negatives yourself or via a photo developing shop? Usually the photo developing shop scans have too much contrast till there are details. Try to view the negatives via a loupe to observe if there are shadow details. If there arent, it maybe a developing problem.

From the cameras, you were using, did you use a light meter or a digital camera to meter the scene?

Did you use any colour filters while you were shooting? That maybe a reason for the lack of contrast if you are referring to that.

What time were the pictures taken? Judging from the pictures, it appears in the afternoon from 12pm to 3pm with the full sun or total shade? May be that is why you see the pictures is mainly grey as the subjects were evenly lighted. The no details part is because the difference in light intensity is too great such that the negative were not able to register.

If it is a developing problem (which i think is unlikely), I suggest you change to D76? Somehow I feel it is easier to get more details out from D76 but at the expense of larger grains. Hope that helps.

[waileong]

Overexposure would give good shadow detail, dark highlight areas but generally not a problem for most negs as they are tolerant of overexposure.

Overexpose+overdevelop will give you thick almost impenetrable negs. Is that how your negs look?

Originally Posted by starvingjack im just wondering which part did i went wrong. Either the exposure was wrong from the start or i've drown it too long in the working solution , so i presume by shortening the time i'll be able to rectify the mistake? correct me if im wrong. tks..

[starvingjack]

leej0038 - haha all those came out of the sewage, ppl are like wah wah wah.

Sweat100 & waileong -
The scanning was thru someone who offered the service. Double checked again and theres tons of details in the shadows. For example in the highway photo,the underside of the trees are just patches of darkness, but on my neg it's got sharp details.. uh oh... dun tell me its the scanning part? hahaha. I used my 350d to meter the scene, no filters were used (OT abit, anyone knows where to look for 95mm filters? tried a couple and they had none) . All are taken in blazing hot sunlight , wrong timing... My negs shows good shadow detail and dark highlight areas ...

[sweat100]

In my opinion the weakest link is probably due to the scanning process from what you mentioned with the details seen on the negatives. It maybe that the levels or curves have been tweaked such that the shadow areas becomes black. Or the scanner Dmax isnt high enough to penetrate through the dense negatives.

Maybe next time you should try shooting at early morning or dusk to see to see if you get better results. Add some colour filters according to your scene to bring the contrast up.

As for 95mm filters, they are large! Why dont you get cokin filters instead? I am not sure if cokin supports up to 95mm though.

[leej0038]

Originally Posted by starvingjack leej0038 - haha all those came out of the sewage, ppl are like wah wah wah.

try and see the lighter side of things.. i too had my painful episodes with rolls that turned out less than satisfactory due some idiotic mistakes i made.. thankfully they don't happen too often know that i've fine tuned the workflow.. i haven't shot tmax before so i'm not in a position to give you advise but heres to better developing results.. cheers!

[mdzmr]

Bro, i think ur scanning is the prob. Seeing ur #1 & #2 pics.
Why not try to sent for a scan at any photolab? Then you will know what the problem.