Dev-Film Combos: What are "the Old Standards"?

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 01:11:08 -0400, PATRICK GAINER
wrote:

When I start talking to myself, I figure I'd better stop.

Nah ! It just means that someone is really interested in
hearing your thoughts. So what if that someone is you ? I used to
listen to the radio on my daily commute to work. Now I enjoy the time
in silent contemplation.


Regards,

John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.puresilver.org
Please remove the "_" when replying via email

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 01:11:08 -0400, PATRICK GAINER
wrote:


The trouble is that you have defined a vicious circle quite well. If you do not
have correct exposure, you won't know how to define normal devlopment. The best
way to define normal development is with a series of step exposures, either by
photographing a step density wedge or by a series of 1/2 or 1/3 stop exposures of
a blank card or other blank field. You can find descriptions of how to do this
with minimum equipment in other publications. It is probably best not to try to
define your usable film speed until after you have defined normal development. If
you have or can borrow a densitometer, you can plot the characteristic curve and
see if the film has a long or short toe, etc. Or, you can take the manufacturer's
word for it.

That sounds about right. I only got to use a densitometer during
periods when I was conducting trials for an MP lab. Damn little
opportunity to do much of my own stuff.

For my own, I started with a packaged developer and the manufacturer's
time and temp for their own film. I shot 7 frame strips of a Gray
card, color chart and a reflection step tablet, the Kodak one used for
separations and registration. I shot the exposures from 3 stops under
to 3 stops over, which gave me normal exposure on the 4th, middle,
frame. After processing, I printed, by contact, on my normal paper,
one strip for a full black density of the clear base areas outside of
the image. That first test got me very close to my final settings.

After doing this with different films and developers, I gained a
better ability to judge what was going on and to evaluate a fim in one
test session. Later, when I was co0mpounding new formulations, I
could quickly evauate the negative strips themselves, by eye and know
what the next step in reformulation was likely best. You just need to
get a little experience before this will become clear, and I do mean
just a little.

As to your original question, I am not sure there are any traditional films left.
When I started, Super XX was fast at ASA 100.

HA! I used Ansco Ultra Seed Pan, as it was rated at 125. That was
before I got familiar with testing, though.

I used to set my meter at 1000 and
read the significant shadows. That was not really pushing. When the ASA
specification was traded for ISO, the same film gained a stop of speed. When Tri
X first came out, it was 200 ASA.

Yep, I got some of the first batches that were called "New Improved
Super XX". I had a local photostore process my and he used DK-60A.
Ugly. After that, I got a daylight tank with an apron and began using
D-76. Then I saved some pennies and began a brief flirtation with
Promicrol. Then back to D-76.

When I start talking to myself, I figure I'd better stop.

No, continue. Really, it keeps the conversation on an even level.
;-)


Robert Vervoordt, MFA