Sebastian
Hello forum,
I’ve just signed up to ask a few questions I’ve got before I start my first large-format project.
I should mention that a few years ago I was given some darkroom equipment as a gift and have developed a few rolls of black-and-white film. Just standard Ilford film; back then, you could still get the chemicals at the local Brinkmann department store.
The results were actually quite good, as far as I can tell from looking at the negatives today.
I had another go yesterday with the old chemicals and a test film; it actually went quite well, but it just wasn’t quite the same anymore.
Now I’ve got the bug again and want to delve a bit deeper into the subject. Also, I need to produce
a few larger photos for job applications, and I reckon doing them myself will definitely look better than if I had them done professionally.
I’ve got the hardware sorted – trays, tongs, containers, an enlarger (Opemus Standard2) and a Jobo tank for a 35mm roll, plus all the bits and bobs. What’s missing are the films and chemicals, as well as a bit of ‘know-how’.
I was thinking of using Adox CHS 50, developing it with APH09, MacoEcoStop and AddFix. As I’m starting from scratch, I’ve gone for the chemicals that, according to the catalogue, work best together.
I have two questions about this. The catalogue says that I should preferably use only a 2% stop bath for the Adox films because of the emulsion. That’s no problem, but on the technical page for the efke50 (efke is Adox, isn’t it?), it says I should pour the hardener into the stop bath, whereas the catalogue states for the Adox films that the hardener belongs in the fixer. Now I’m a bit confused. I’ve never used a hardener before, so I’ve no idea about that. Furthermore, the catalogue’s development tips say to pre-rinse for 1 minute. Although I use a different developer, is pre-rinsing generally necessary anyway? If so, what does pre-rinsing actually mean – just letting water run for 1 minute in the dark? I reckon otherwise it should be relatively straightforward, or are there any issues with the chemicals?
Right, then on to printing. I’d be happy to provide the stop and fixing bath chemicals. I just need some paper and a developer.
I’ve no idea what would be good there. The requirements are: tray development and beginner-friendly.
No gradation-shifting paper, as I don’t own any filters. The tone should be neutral black to warm black. Off the top of my head, Formaspeed appeals to me. Whether that’s suitable for the film (I’m assuming I’ll take brilliant pictures ;-)) I don’t know; perhaps you have a better idea. Well, and as I said, a suitable developer – but which one?
And just a quick question to clarify: what exactly are ‘gradation-changeable’ and ‘multi-contrast’ papers, and what is baryta paper good for?
Right, I think that’s it for now :-)
Many thanks in advance for your help
Best regards, Sebastian
cfb_de
Hi Sebastian,
Let’s get straight to the point and say the one thing you least want to hear right at the start:
You won’t be able to avoid putting in a fair bit of effort!
And now to your specific questions:
> I’m planning to create a few larger portfolios for my applications, and I reckon doing them myself
> will definitely look better than if I just hand them in.
Provided they really are better than the usual ‘submitted’ standard. In other words, they need to appeal to the reader (whom you *don’t* know when applying) and make them hesitate a little before the application ends up in the wrong pile.
It’s not just about producing a ‘correct’ piece of work tailored to the recruiter, but also about the motif in the photograph.
> kleinkrahm
In your application, you might want to do without these peculiarities and use standard German spelling instead. Otherwise, your application comes across to me just like your post does now: completely drunk, or at best high on coke.
That was harsh, but well-meaning. And now you know what matters.
> I was thinking of an Adox CHS 50, run through APH09, MacoEcoStopp and
> AddFix.
CHS50/Efke50 isn’t a bad choice as a roll film. For application photos – whether you mean portraits or an artist’s portfolio – you should bear in mind, however, that the film is sensitised differently from today’s average emulsions. Red is rendered significantly weaker and can result in a certain pallor in flash portraits (note: booze and coke are rendered more clearly as a result;-).
Development in Rodinal/R09/F09/APH09 is fine for the film; I’ve been doing it for years with good results.
Stop bath and fixer are of secondary importance. I do without commercial stop bath and use a level tablespoon of citric acid per litre of tap water. A pound of citric acid costs around €3.50 at the supermarket and is enough for half a cubic metre of stop bath.
For the fixer, I use X55 from Amaloco or any other fixer of your choice.
> Adding hardener to the stop bath
If you absolutely must use the stuff: it doesn’t belong there. You can insert a hardening bath after the stop bath, but you’ll then have to prepare the hardener yourself. Commercially available Maco-Geladur (to be added to the developer according to the instructions) causes nothing but problems up to and including the stop bath, but does not produce visible hardening results on printable negatives. At best, it leads to frustration.
> Adox films state that the hardener belongs in the fixer.
You can use a hardener there and even add Geladur. The fixing time increases drastically, the grain becomes coarsened and no longer remains as beautifully fine.
In short: Häter? I don’t use it. Instead, a clean process (which brings us back to the beginning of ‘Learning’…), followed by a bit of wetting agent after washing, and hanging the film to dry overnight in a warm, slightly damp bath. You might as well throw the film scraper in the bin beforehand; that’s where it belongs.
> Development tips: Pre-soak for 1 minute.
Yes. For exposure, use 50 ASA film, pre-soak for 1 minute, then develop in Rodinal 1+25 at 20°C for 15 seconds with agitation, followed by 7 minutes. Agitate roughly every 3 seconds during the pre-soak. The solution running out is blue – don’t be alarmed.
And whether you use Rodinal 1+25 or APH09/R09/F09 at 1+20, it actually makes no difference.
The film is fussy about exposure; it doesn’t like too much light. It has its ‘true’ speed and becomes rock-hard in case of overexposure. (Hence the tip about using fixed-grade papers at 0-2.)
Oh, and by the way: pre-rinse at 20°C, as well as development, stop bath, fixing and final wash. The emulsion isn’t an elephant, more like a delicate diva.
> Single-tray development and beginner-friendly.
These two things are mutually exclusive. For sizes up to and including 13x18, the frozen lasagne trays from Aldi Süd are suitable for a few darkroom sessions (downside: you first have to eat 3kg of lasagne and wash up afterwards). Or: cheap 13x18 trays are also available in the supermarket. Cutlery trays as a drawer insert system: e.g. from ‘Curver’ in 15x23cm PP for just under 2 marks each.
> No gradation test paper as I don’t own any filters
So you’ll have to work your way towards the right exposure and development. Not something you can just knock out in an evening.
You’d need fixed-grade paper in several gradients. Based on my experience of what beginners get out of the R50: gradients 0 to 2. A box of MG film with a filter set would be cheaper.
> (I’m assuming I’ll be taking absolutely brilliant photos ;-))
I don’t want to dash all your hopes, but you’d be better off not counting on that. Photography isn’t a craft, a learning process, and in some cases an art, for no reason at all.
Your entire post makes it hard for me to believe that you actually know what you want.
On the contrary: you’ve got this nice idea of snapping some absolutely brilliant application photos and developing them yourself on the spot in a darkroom you were given years ago. But you haven’t got a clue (see: “Just to clarify, what exactly is: variable gradation, multi-contrast, and what is baryta paper good for?”).
If you’d looked into this years ago, you’d know what baryta is. If you’d looked into it less than 20 years ago, terms like ‘multigrade/multicontrast/gradation-variable’ would be familiar to you. As it is, you’ve shown that you’re a complete beginner. Not bad, but don’t delude yourself. You’ll start right at the bottom, get frustrated, and try again. It’s a craft, after all. It takes quite a bit of practice before a DIY enthusiast can drill the first straight hole in a tile with a drill.
Otherwise, for the basics:
- www.fotolehrgang.de and then practise (also available in book form)
- ISBN: 3-9809801-0-3 and then practise (not available online, but goes a bit further)
- supplemented by: all PDF courses at sw-magazin.de (free download)
> The tone: neutral black to warm black.
Fomatone in Eukobrom with a little benzotriazole comes out quite neutral. Without benzotriazole, it tends to be warm black, especially if you use an older batch of Eukobrom.
For Polywarmtone, the normal ageing of Eukobrom is sufficient. Fresh Eukobrom produces a neutral black; adding a dash of fresh Eukobrom to aged Eukobrom ‘replenishes’ it, resulting in slightly warmer tones. Adding a little KBr makes it even warmer.
(This only applies to baryta; I have no experience with PE.)
I don’t like Fomaspeed. For PE, I tend to use Tetenal Speed from old stocks or Agfa MCP. We’ve still got some of that left, after all :-)
So, has that helped you? No, has it? Because there’s no instant solution for mixing.
Best regards,
Franz
Schwedenstahl
Well, Franz, that was a bit harsh.
I’ve been in the business for over 20 years now, and to be perfectly honest, you naturally approach things with a bit of naivety at the start. But there’s nothing wrong with that. You just grow into your role. And at the beginning, it doesn’t matter whether you’re dealing with a single-layer emulsion, a super-fine-grain developer or anything else.
The main thing is that you’ve got something decent onto paper. The Americans didn’t hit the moon with their first rocket either.
I’d recommend simply trying an Ilford film like the FP 4 or the HP 5 and a suitable developer from Tetenal or Ilford. No grand experiments to start with. There’s plenty of time for that later, and your application photos will surely turn out better if you have them taken by a professional photographer.
Regards
Marwan
huehnerhose
Hello
Compared to the film development I had done back then at Drospa/IhrPlatz (because it was cheap), my first attempt at developing film myself was at least as good. Back then, it was FP4+ in Ilfosol versus FP4+ from Drospa. So I can understand the opening statement.
Otherwise, Franz, not quite so hot-headed :D (don’t take that the wrong way) I’m grateful for many of your tips; I’m not questioning your knowledge in any way. But your manner is… “takes some getting used to”. When you started out, you might have had to turn to books or had people to guide you; today it’s all done in forums. I read books at the start too, but it takes quite a few books to give you as many ideas and impressions of what’s possible as you get in forums.
I started the whole thing six months ago and am now at the stage where I’m achieving quite good results with my starter kit (Fomaspeed, which I was given from a school clearance sale back then, Eukobrom). In other words, I’ve managed to print a picture from a negative that looked reasonably well-exposed and ‘improve’ minor details through dodging/burn-in or contrast adjustment – and do so consistently. Pictures that looked OK came out right from the start, but I still need _a fair bit_ of practice to produce really good darkroom work.
Then, when I eventually tried Fomatol, it simply took my breath away; that was exactly the kind of image I’d always imagined, in terms of the tonal quality.
New materials: Fomatol + Polywarmtone. I haven’t got to the point yet where I’ve got used to Polywarmtone. I’m not getting good results with Euko yet.
What I’m trying to say is: you can achieve ‘acceptable’ results relatively quickly. But to get them to be good, or even REALLY good, you need practice! And how are you supposed to tell the difference between a run-of-the-mill image and a REALLY good one? You only really start to see a lot of things once you’ve delved deeper into the subject and can spot the differences between the past and the present.
If you stick to one material, things do go a bit faster and you learn to handle the steps more confidently – something you’ll need quickly if you change a component.
(The first image on PWT took me about an hour of trial and error before I was happy with the exposure)
I hope to be at a stage by the end of January where I’m getting good results on PWT and have a negative process I’m ‘happy’ with. I’ll need to start putting together a portfolio of my own photos, so it’s got to be spot on. At the end of the day, you’ve got to sell yourself with this sort of thing, and if you haven’t got any further yet, well, that’s just the truth.
Regards
huehnerhose
Edit: A question from me: Can Adox films be exposed at their rated sensitivity without hesitation and developed roughly according to standard specifications? I keep reading that a Kodak/Agfa/Ilford/.... rated at 100/400 ASA only delivers 56/370 ASA. Does that mean the film produces ‘optimal’ results at 56 ASA in the relevant viewer/film/developer/process combination, or is that somehow ‘universally applicable’?
Stagirit
When I think about how many metres of film I wasted before the first results were even passable.
I can’t get worked up about Franz’s tone; Wastel’s line of questioning was a bit cheeky. After spending two years as a photography assistant at my university, I’m definitely in favour of bringing back corporal punishment.
At least one Nikon FM2 broken every semester, because yet another ‘know-it-all’ is convinced that with a bit of force, you can squeeze 42 shots onto the film.
At least once, power packs and lamps blown, because the Elinchrom and Broncolor have the same plug (they’re in separate studios, Bron for product photography and Elinchrom for fashion).
Regularly returned the cameras either without lenses or without memory cards.
Misplaced tripods.
Etc. etc.
Last year, two students were sitting in the courtyard counting the sheets of photographic paper they’d just bought, only to be left gaping in the darkroom.
They’ve all got A-levels, and there are plenty of introductory photography courses, as well as assistants who are constantly shouting at them. It’s even almost come to blows because of the brazenness of some students.
In that respect, I can understand Franz.
The most dangerous people are those who firmly believe that everything is very simple and that, thanks to their natural talent, they need a maximum of 10 minutes to do what others spend 20 years learning.
cfb_de
Does that mean the film produces ‘optimal’ results at 56 ASA with the specific combination of viewer, film, developer and process, or is that somehow a ‘universal’ rule?
Yes and no :-) What it means is that, for example, HP5+ in HRX-II developer only delivers a true 250 ASA. In a different developer, it might still achieve a higher ISO.
And then it all depends on how the exposure was measured, personal taste and everything else. If you don’t want to measure it precisely (for that, have a look in the parallel forum for “Martin Jangowski”; he’s quite active there when it comes to the precise approach).
The only thing that’s “universally valid” is what’s stated above :-) No, seriously, the vast majority of manufacturers (apart from Efke) specify idealised ISO sensitivities (because DIN has little to do with photographic reality) and, strictly speaking, these only apply to the specific developer and other specific conditions.
Best regards,
Franz
SamuliSchielke
Guys,
"The most dangerous people are those who firmly believe that everything is really simple and that, thanks to their natural talent, they need a maximum of 10 minutes to do what others spend 20 years learning."
I can certainly agree with that, but as long as they’re doing it with their own kit, it really doesn’t matter to the rest of us. And when I think of the uninformed questions I asked here in the forum not so long ago (such as: why do ‘normal’ graded papers X and Y not have the same gradient, but one appears softer and the other harder...), I do want to be understanding towards someone asking a question, even if the questions betray a complete lack of knowledge. You try things out, you learn, and I’d advise a beginner like Sebastian to do exactly what I did – and still often do: use as much cheap and simple material as possible; it really doesn’t matter about the developer combinations or ‘genuine’ ISO sensitivities, but rather that something comes out of it at all, and sometimes you do just happen to strike gold.
For quite a while, my home-developed film wasn’t as good as the lab-processed stuff (in Holland, HEMA produces really good black-and-white prints in their large-scale lab), but my negatives were often so badly exposed that I could only get the prints halfway to how I wanted them in my own darkroom, whilst the commercial lab exposed them using the average value, which apparently only looks good if you expose with expert care. And once you get better (which you might notice because you start finding more and more of your own photos rubbish...) you can consider whether it’s worth investing in quality...
Samuli
Sebastian
Hi there,
I have to admit, to be honest, that I’m a bit disappointed with the replies.
That said, the first post was actually the most helpful to me. Purely from a technical point of view. But generally speaking, firstly, this isn’t the first forum I’ve joined, and internet slang is always open to different interpretations – though I do keep wondering how people go from ‘photo developer’ to ‘corporal punishment’. ‘Beat the newbie’... well, I can easily skim over that and tick it off. Secondly, it’s certainly not the case that I think I’ll take brilliant photos tomorrow (in terms of the film!), just pop out and buy a bit of chemical kit, and produce superb prints. I realise full well that this isn’t something you can do in a single evening. It wouldn’t be the first hobby (for me it remains one) that involves a certain learning curve which I’d also like to master. I’m sorry if anyone feels their professional pride has been hurt....
The fact is, I’d like to delve deeper into what worked years ago with simple equipment. And I thought, I’ll ask first before I buy everything and then find that something doesn’t work because it’s completely wrong or doesn’t work despite the shop’s recommendation – see Hüter, for example.
The fact is, I just want to try something new and, for goodness’ sake, let the first few rolls of film turn out absolutely rubbish. Who cares? It’s just that pure trial and error is a bit too much of a faff for me. One more thing about the application photos: the theme is ‘how do I see my family in 10 pictures’, and it’s more about the message than the quality of the photos. I could just pop in a colour film
take 10 photos and that’s that. That would have been the alternative anyway if the black-and-white prints didn’t work out. It just would have been nicer.
Anyway, I’m not much wiser than before, so I’ll give it a go like this. However, the replies have actually made me feel less confident about it. A comment like: “No, you’d be better off trying this and that” or “Technically it’s fine, but it’s not exactly straightforward” would have been just as helpful.
Best regards, Sebastian
PS: Why are single-bath developers and beginner-friendly options actually mutually exclusive?
I mean, 3 baths is easier than 4 baths if you count them all...
huehnerhose
Hello Sebastian,
Baryta: Photographic paper made from ‘real’ paper without a plastic coating – probably not of interest to you at the moment. To me, drying baryta or making it high-gloss seems like a matter of science versus religious war. Baryta is said to produce an even ‘more beautiful’ image than PE/RC papers and is (when properly processed) probably more durable. That’s why exhibition prints or fine art prints are almost exclusively made on baryta. PE/RC is coated with a plastic layer. This prevents the paper from becoming saturated with liquid. PE dries (almost) flat and to a high gloss, if it is high-gloss paper. (I’ve had hardly any experience with baryta myself so far; I only have two boxes of ORWO baryta, which I struggled with in terms of contrast when I first made prints with them, because I made a mistake with the development)
Multigrade/gradation shift/multicontrast (shouldn’t they all be the same thing?) You can control the image contrast using filters. If you buy a set of filters, you’ll save yourself the hassle of having to stock various types of paper and will have options like split-grade or similar.
Regarding the Adox CHS: I’ve only used it in medium format so far and have only processed one roll of film. I developed it without any issues, in Rodinal. The film actually looks pretty good. I didn’t pre-rinse. I think the result of that was ‘just’ that the poured-out developer was purple. If I recall correctly, the recommendation was primarily for sheet films?
By ‘pouring water in’, do you mean a Cascade? I think Franz means pouring water on top and treating it as if there were chemicals in it, with a pouring rhythm. I’d find that interesting too. I use a Jobo Cascade because it came with my canister back then and I’ve never worried about rinsing, but I recently read something about “Ilford rinsing”. So Franz, could you perhaps briefly explain how you rinse your films, including the final rinse?
As for Franz’s tip regarding Eukobrom with KBr... don’t take that too seriously. Franz is a chemist and knows his stuff when it comes to photochemistry. Once you’re at that stage, you can ‘tweak’ the developers or mix your own, but for you (as well as for me) that probably doesn’t make sense yet; first you need to master the process itself. I use Eukobrom too, though. Unlike Fomatol, it’s very gentle. By that I mean it lasts a long time without ‘oxidising away’ its effectiveness. (Can you say that about all warm-tone developers?) It develops relatively quickly and, with Fomaspeed for example, produces a result that’s almost neutral, and the image is fully developed in 40–120 seconds, which makes testing much easier. You can have the image printed from test strips in 5 minutes, whereas with Fomatol you have to wait 5 minutes just for the first test strip to finish developing. So it’s brilliant for practising your technique.
Regarding the fixer for film and paper: You should definitely have two batches, one for paper and one for film. I think Franz would be better placed to explain why; unfortunately, I don’t have the link to hand that explained it. You could make a small 300ml batch for film if you only ever develop one roll at a time – that’s how I do it.
cfb_de
Hi Sebastian, hi Seb^H^H^Hhuehnerhose (I just had to:-),
Now that the dust has settled and the issues have been clarified (Sebastian: if you’d just said straight away what the deal was with the application photos, I would have behaved a bit better. But as it was, I could only have that one impression.), I’m popping back onto the OP (and our now free-range chicken-leg outfit:-). Things are getting a bit jumbled, so I won’t be too strict about quoting, but I’ll tackle one person at a time. I’ll spare you the name games for now.
> Baryta is supposed to produce an even ‘nicer’ image than PE/RC papers
A matter of taste. I like it. And whether dried against the cloth of the dry press or treated with the wet tape method, it’s actually quite simple to get the stuff flat. The surface of baryta dried in this way cannot be achieved with any PE in the world (and it doesn’t matter if glass is going to be placed over it anyway). Thanks to ‘modern’ papers, achieving a high gloss has become a real science/black magic.
I really like the air-dried and subsequently waxed baryta surface.
> [ADOX 50 development]: If I recall correctly, wasn’t that recommendation primarily for sheet films?
No. At least not mine. I don’t use sheet films (my GF DIY project has been turning into a “running gag” of my life for years); I was referring to roll films.
> I think Franz means pouring water on it and treating it as if there were chemicals in it, with a tilting rhythm.
Yes. Water in, 3–10-second tilting rhythm. Water out and developer in.
> So Franz, could you perhaps briefly explain how you rinse your films, including the final rinse?
As I feel like it. If I’m doing a lot of development and want to save time: put the first can through the process, add Cascade and let it run. When I’m done with the second can, that marks the end of the rinsing for the first one.
If I’ve got a small batch: then I rinse according to the Ilford method and watch the telly at the same time (Sunday’s Tatort). So: water into the can, tilt five times. After two minutes, pour out, add water, tilt ten times. Out... in... tilt 15/20/25 times, done.
A frugal technique for water-savers. But: stress-free and safer if you work with water pre-heated to 20°C. A 10-litre bucket easily covers two development runs for me.
> [Shelf life of Eukobrom solution]: Meaning it lasts a long time without ‘oxidising away’ its effectiveness.
Yes. It lasts almost forever. In a sealed container in a cool cellar, up to a year and a half. I haven’t tried keeping it any longer than that; I very rarely prepare 12 litres of the stuff at once.
> Can the same be said for all warm-tone developers?
No, not in this case. Eukobrom is not a warm-tone developer. And warm-tone developers do not keep for quite so long. I’ll spare you the derivation; the forum can’t handle mathematical notation.
> [Fixer]: In any case, you should have two batches, one for paper and one for film.
Yes. Absolutely! This is because films contain iodide, which also degrades the fixer. Furthermore, residues from the film’s antihalation agent end up in the fixer (keyword: ‘pink TMax’), and photographic paper certainly isn’t happy about that either.
But that doesn’t change the fact that you can still make both solutions from the same bottle of concentrate.
> Secondly, it’s certainly not the case that I think I’ll be taking amazing photos tomorrow (in terms of the film!)
Then just say so :-)
> I’m sorry if anyone feels their professional pride has been hurt....
No need, I have a different profession. However, I’ve seen enough people who approached black-and-white photography like a ‘paint-by-numbers’ kit and expected a perfect result on the very same day. Hence my clear reference to the rocky road ahead.
> The theme is ‘how do I see my family in 10 pictures’ and it’s more about the message than the quality of the photos
Then go for it. Use a general-purpose film like HP5+ (that’s the one), FP4+ (fine grain, but only roughly 100 ISO) and develop it strictly according to the instructions in ID11. That should give you a rough idea of the film development process.
But forget about the Efkes for now; they’ll clearly be too much for you to handle at the start.
For the prints, it’s best to get yourself a set of MG filters (the cheap ones from Mirko here are perfectly adequate) and a pack of MG paper. Red Duka lighting; filters can be held under the viewfinder lens (remove the red filter if necessary, then you’ll have a handy filter tray).
And then just get on with it. As a self-taught photographer, you’ll probably end up binning the first few dozen prints the very next day anyway. That’s why you should write on the back in pencil (as it won’t show up in the developer) how you performed the exposure; otherwise, the learning experience will go in the bin too.
> The replies have actually made me feel less confident about giving it a go.
Well, that may have waned, but the dose of realism in my world view has increased. No effort, no reward.
> Why are single-bath developers and beginner-friendliness actually mutually exclusive?
Because it strongly tempts you to work sloppily, not to engage in proper development, not to stick to fixing times, and nasty sources of error lurk just around the corner: e.g. in a ‘strange’ way, suddenly only faint prints (fixer bath residues in the bowl, which then cause the developer for the next print to fail miserably), spots (silver deposits from stale fixer, which then end up in the print) and a thousand other nasty surprises.
Oh, so you didn’t mean a single-tank process but just a developer bath? Grmpf. Why didn’t I think of that straight away? Yes, *that* is more beginner-friendly! Three trays plus a final solution. It doesn’t get any safer than that. The next tuning stage would then be two-bath fixing: used fixer solution first, fresh one then at the end as a second bath. You can do it, but you don’t have to. I don’t do it, only sometimes with ‘commercial baryta’.
A couple more tips for getting back into it:
- Red light. I’ve already mentioned that. Not a party bulb(!), a proper filter.
- Take a newspaper with you. After a few minutes in the red light, the images in it should look ‘normal’ to you again; by then your brain will have adjusted somewhat to the altered visual impression and your prints will just seem a bit too harsh. But you’ll be able to tell if they’re fully developed.
- Work slowly! It’s better to take one print through the whole process until it’s dry (dry-down effect: contrasts change as it dries) and then have a second go.
- A large bin in the darkroom and one in front of it in the daylight area ;-) And another one for the next day.
- Do some mental training beforehand to ward off frustration.
- Practise film development/exposure: buy 24-exposure strips, take eight shots at one stop below the rated speed, eight at one stop above, and eight at the rated speed. Develop them, then enlarge them. That way you’ll get a rough idea of your development process and automatically get to grips with positive processing.
- For film development: standard film, standard developer. For the positives: standard papers such as Ilford MGIV or Foma Variant. We’ll sort out the residue later.
Best regards,
Franz
Sebastian
Hi,
Thanks so much for the replies – they’re definitely going to be useful! I already knew one or two of the tips, which at least shows me I’m not completely at the starting line :D. To combat frustration, 3 or 4 chocolate men in red coats should do the trick, right? Per day, that is. Although I should probably think of something else because that’ll make me put on weight in the long run. I’ll let you know how it went if the items arrive before Christmas.
Best regards, Sebastian
Gast
Hi Franz,
Why would the Efkes be too much to handle? I got into home processing back then using Adox KB 17 and pre-graded Adox baryta paper – it works just fine.
Ilford FP4 and Ilfospeed are admittedly easier, but not strictly necessary.
Roland
cfb_de
Hello Roland,
Why should a self-taught photographer start out with a more complicated approach than necessary? Of course, it’s possible to use Efke films. But it’s simply easier with less demanding film stock. Given the multitude of potential sources of error (which Sebastian can’t possibly spot them all), I’d like to rule out as many as possible right from the start with my recommendation.
And if I’ve understood Sebastian correctly, he’d also like to have his first printable films relatively quickly, rather than developing three Efkes only to bin them (I’m thinking of the standard mistakes: ‘too hard’, ‘emulsion scratched/peeling off’, ‘doesn’t dry flat’, ‘stays pink’).
I started out differently back then too. But under on-site guidance, not on my own at home.
Best regards,
Franz
Gast
Franz is stupid!
cfb_de
Peace on earth, hallelujah!
Gast
Hello
My advice to beginners is not to listen to others, especially not on various forums.
Buy books on the subject, read them and give things a go.
My book recommendations: the publisher Augustus has a lovely series, and if things go well, the book by Andreas Weidner. Everything else is too fiddly.
Kind regards, xxx
