Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register ☰
Main Photography Discussion
Nightski Got a Film Camera!
Page <<first <prev 15 of 27 next> last>>
Aug 6, 2015 17:07:07   #
selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA
 
Darkroom317 wrote:
I use running water instead of stop bath for film. This washes away the developer rather than neutralizing it. Some films, not Kodak or Ilford, cannot be used with acid stop bath. Either way it needs to done. Developer tracking over to the fixer in significant quantity will degrade it causing shorter life for the solution

Yes, there are two reasons for the stop bath - to stop development and to protect the fixer.

If the development step is long you don't need to stop it suddenly with an acid stop bath and if you rinse with water you are also protecting the fixer.

Diafine recommends not using a stop bath but rather a rinse in plain water before fixing.

Reply
Aug 6, 2015 17:07:13   #
Michael Hartley Loc: Deer Capital of Georgia
 
Michael Hartley wrote:
Has anyone, rpavich, or anyone else, used this 'monobath' solution he mentioned a few post back? Kinda sounds too good?


Thought it sounded too good.

Reply
Aug 6, 2015 17:22:25   #
SharpShooter Loc: NorCal
 
Nightski wrote:
No I haven't, thanks! :-)


Nightski, no matter what process you choose to use, I would recommend that you use the same process and stay VERY consistant with it till you know exactly what you are doing.
In shooting, developing or printing there are a lot of variables like developing times and temperatures that will cause small variations in the final product. When you are not consistant in your methodology, it's very hard to tell what went wrong and where? Was it initial in-camera exposure or a slight push process because you didn't keep track of developing time? You get the idea. When you are producing good solid contrasty negatives consistently, then you can experiment. If you have skinny thin negs, you need to know why and what caused that.
Leave the experimenting to the pros, just do what your good at, getting good solid shots that are worth printing. If you're not getting THAT, what's the point of the experimentation, but to creat even better alternatives?!
Be a photographer, not a tinkerer.
Just my two cents. ;-)
SS

Reply
 
 
Aug 6, 2015 17:28:16   #
Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.
 
SharpShooter wrote:
Nightski, no matter what process you choose to use, I would recommend that you use the same process and stay VERY consistant with it till you know exactly what you are doing.
In shooting, developing or printing there are a lot of variables like developing times and temperatures that will cause small variations in the final product. When you are not consistant in your methodology, it's very hard to tell what went wrong and where? Was it initial in-camera exposure or a slight push process because you didn't keep track of developing time? You get the idea. When you are producing good solid contrasty negatives consistently, then you can experiment. If you have skinny thin negs, you need to know why and what caused that.
Leave the experimenting to the pros, just do what your good at, getting good solid shots that are worth printing. If you're not getting THAT, what's the point of the experimentation, but to creat even better alternatives?!
Be a photographer, not a tinkerer.
Just my two cents. ;-)
SS
Nightski, no matter what process you choose to use... (show quote)

:thumbup: :thumbup:

Reply
Aug 6, 2015 17:28:38   #
Darkroom317 Loc: Mishawaka, IN
 
SharpShooter wrote:
Nightski, no matter what process you choose to use, I would recommend that you use the same process and stay VERY consistant with it till you know exactly what you are doing.
In shooting, developing or printing there are a lot of variables like developing times and temperatures that will cause small variations in the final product. When you are not consistant in your methodology, it's very hard to tell what went wrong and where? Was it initial in-camera exposure or a slight push process because you didn't keep track of developing time? You get the idea. When you are producing good solid contrasty negatives consistently, then you can experiment. If you have skinny thin negs, you need to know why and what caused that.
Leave the experimenting to the pros, just do what your good at, getting good solid shots that are worth printing. If you're not getting THAT, what's the point of the experimentation, but to creat even better alternatives?!
Be a photographer, not a tinkerer.
Just my two cents. ;-)
SS
Nightski, no matter what process you choose to use... (show quote)


Some of the best advice that can be given.

I settled on a developer years ago and currently I only use three films. I started developing color, C41 and E6 alongside b&w. I have also been working on dryplates with commercial emulsion with the intention of making my own emulsion. I am also doing some gum dichromate printing. This is all well and fine and certainly fun but I have figured that I am stretching myself thin.

Reply
Aug 6, 2015 17:29:51   #
chazz4623 Loc: Prairieville, La
 
W@hy not let her do what she wants to? She's the one learning and will live with the consequences. Kinda harsh, maybe??
SharpShooter wrote:
Nightski, no matter what process you choose to use, I would recommend that you use the same process and stay VERY consistant with it till you know exactly what you are doing.
In shooting, developing or printing there are a lot of variables like developing times and temperatures that will cause small variations in the final product. When you are not consistant in your methodology, it's very hard to tell what went wrong and where? Was it initial in-camera exposure or a slight push process because you didn't keep track of developing time? You get the idea. When you are producing good solid contrasty negatives consistently, then you can experiment. If you have skinny thin negs, you need to know why and what caused that.
Leave the experimenting to the pros, just do what your good at, getting good solid shots that are worth printing. If you're not getting THAT, what's the point of the experimentation, but to creat even better alternatives?!
Be a photographer, not a tinkerer.
Just my two cents. ;-)
SS
Nightski, no matter what process you choose to use... (show quote)

Reply
Aug 6, 2015 17:37:41   #
selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA
 
chazz4623 wrote:
W@hy not let her do what she wants to? She's the one learning and will live with the consequences. Kinda harsh, maybe??

I think Sandra is getting some very good advice. Keep it simple (KISS).

When you experiment randomly you will never learn much. The key to figuring it all out is to pick one film, one developer and one dilution until you get what you want. Then change only on variable at a time - film, developer, dilution, time, etc. There is plenty of time later to explore all of the possibilities.

Reply
 
 
Aug 6, 2015 17:37:58   #
Nightski
 
SharpShooter wrote:
Nightski, no matter what process you choose to use, I would recommend that you use the same process and stay VERY consistant with it till you know exactly what you are doing.
In shooting, developing or printing there are a lot of variables like developing times and temperatures that will cause small variations in the final product. When you are not consistant in your methodology, it's very hard to tell what went wrong and where? Was it initial in-camera exposure or a slight push process because you didn't keep track of developing time? You get the idea. When you are producing good solid contrasty negatives consistently, then you can experiment. If you have skinny thin negs, you need to know why and what caused that.
Leave the experimenting to the pros, just do what your good at, getting good solid shots that are worth printing. If you're not getting THAT, what's the point of the experimentation, but to creat even better alternatives?!
Be a photographer, not a tinkerer.
Just my two cents. ;-)
SS
Nightski, no matter what process you choose to use... (show quote)


Oh, I agree with you SS. But in watching this more advanced video by Ted Forbes it has given me some insight into the things that go wrong in development and why. I am definitely sticking to the basics when I start. I'll get the developer, the bath stop and the fixer. It is so true what you say about consistency. First I have to get my exposures consistent. I am very much in the learning stage with that because I'm going from being able to see what I am getting in live view on a digital to having absolutely no idea what I'm getting with this camera that is completely foriegn to me.

It doesn't stop my curiosity though. I still like to listen to youtubes while I'm at work.

Reply
Aug 6, 2015 17:48:47   #
Darkroom317 Loc: Mishawaka, IN
 
Nightski wrote:
Oh, I agree with you SS. But in watching this more advanced video by Ted Forbes it has given me some insight into the things that go wrong in development and why. I am definitely sticking to the basics when I start. I'll get the developer, the bath stop and the fixer. It is so true what you say about consistency. First I have to get my exposures consistent. I am very much in the learning stage with that because I'm going from being able to see what I am getting in live view on a digital to having absolutely no idea what I'm getting with this camera that is completely foriegn to me.

It doesn't stop my curiosity though. I still like to listen to youtubes while I'm at work.
Oh, I agree with you SS. But in watching this more... (show quote)


Also, get fixer remover. It helps with the washing process. Too much left over fixer can eventually damage the negatives. Using it also reduces was times. 30min without it, 10 min with it.

Reply
Aug 6, 2015 17:51:24   #
OldEarl Loc: Northeast Kansas
 
SharpShooter wrote:
Nightski, no matter what process you choose to use, I would recommend that you use the same process and stay VERY consistant with it till you know exactly what you are doing.
In shooting, developing or printing there are a lot of variables like developing times and temperatures that will cause small variations in the final product. When you are not consistant in your methodology, it's very hard to tell what went wrong and where? Was it initial in-camera exposure or a slight push process because you didn't keep track of developing time? You get the idea. When you are producing good solid contrasty negatives consistently, then you can experiment. If you have skinny thin negs, you need to know why and what caused that.
Leave the experimenting to the pros, just do what your good at, getting good solid shots that are worth printing. If you're not getting THAT, what's the point of the experimentation, but to creat even better alternatives?!
Be a photographer, not a tinkerer.
Just my two cents. ;-)
SS
Nightski, no matter what process you choose to use... (show quote)


The voice of experience? Back when we were young an immortal we tried something new every three days. It does not work. 8-)

Reply
Aug 6, 2015 18:08:00   #
Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.
 
Nightski wrote:
Oh, I agree with you SS. But in watching this more advanced video by Ted Forbes it has given me some insight into the things that go wrong in development and why. I am definitely sticking to the basics when I start. I'll get the developer, the bath stop and the fixer. It is so true what you say about consistency. First I have to get my exposures consistent. I am very much in the learning stage with that because I'm going from being able to see what I am getting in live view on a digital to having absolutely no idea what I'm getting with this camera that is completely foriegn to me.

It doesn't stop my curiosity though. I still like to listen to youtubes while I'm at work.
Oh, I agree with you SS. But in watching this more... (show quote)


I know this is a bit of a different genre, but have you checked out Lisa Kristine and some of her perspectives?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UubzcXSBbw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xg3Ou2Xog-M

Interesting stuff, the full videos shed a lot more insight...., in the full videos there is more conversation about film and process....

Reply
 
 
Aug 6, 2015 18:16:39   #
Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.
 
OldEarl wrote:
The voice of experience? Back when we were young and immortal we tried something new every three days. It does not work. 8-)


But it felt like it did back then! Has that changed for you? :mrgreen:

Reply
Aug 6, 2015 18:18:05   #
Nightski
 
Darkroom317 wrote:
Also, get fixer remover. It helps with the washing process. Too much left over fixer can eventually damage the negatives. Using it also reduces was times. 30min without it, 10 min with it.


Darkroom, would you recommend brands to begin with for each of these four chemicals?

Developer
Stop Bath
Fixer
Fixer Remover

where is the best place to get them?

Reply
Aug 6, 2015 18:38:23   #
corryhully Loc: liverpool uk
 
are you shooting colour or b&w sandra?

Reply
Aug 6, 2015 18:54:23   #
Nightski
 
corryhully wrote:
are you shooting colour or b&w sandra?


b&w now. My first roll was color because I had to order the b&w. They didn't have that in stock at Walgreens. But it was always my intention to use this camera for b&w's.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 15 of 27 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections
Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms of use | DMCA
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.