B&W Processing Advice for newbie developer

[DJ]

Well, I've finally succumbed to peer pressure and got myself setup for some home film processing.

I'm a complete novice in the darkroom so you'll have to bear with me. I've got myself a CPE/2 and drum/reel etc and all the hardware I need. I've seen Tim Parkin's videos so I'm pretty comfortable with what I have to do for the E6. Before I do that though, I'm currently going through a B&W phase, and I'm keen to try my hand at that, so I was hoping you can give me a few pointers.

My preference is for very smooth graduations and finest possible grain so I shoot Delta 100, I also have some FP4 kicking about as well. Is the Delta 100 a good choice?

I've read a bit through the PDF document available on Ilford's site which is really helpful, and so I bought some chemicals :

Ilford Ilfotec DD-X
Ilford Ilfostop
Ilford Rapid Fixer
Tetenal Mirasol 2000 wetting agent (heard conflicting reports on Ilfotol)

This is what the document recommended ( except the wetting agent of course ), does this sound reasonable? I'm not interested in toning and other more advanced stuff yet, just want a decent negative for scanning.
I think I understand the jist of the tables, Delta 100 has to be processed in DD-X for 12 mins etc.

At Maldon, Helen kindly sat with me and explained a bit about the zone system and exposing for B&W and gave me a much better understanding of how to use it. I'm fairly confident I know when to use options like "N+1" and "N-1" for my negs, but not how to achieve them in the processing. I'm sure these equate to increasing or decreasing the processing time, but by how much? What does the "1" mean in actual time? How do you work that part out?

[richard littlewood]

I've the same set up as you and I've done stacks of FP4, T-max and now I'm on to Foma 100 - a delicious film if ever there was one. It's a tiresome route to nailing down precise dev times, but a Jobo sure helps with that. You will find out that some developers work better rotary than others. Pyro is good, as is good old ID11, and Rodinal I think is a bit wasted that way.
A good starting point for what you want to do might be to load up 3 sheets,rate the Delta at 64,. pop out into the garden and expose one on how you usually make a reading, one on one stop less, one on one stop more. Then dev these as per instructions - with about a quarter off the time for rotary processing. I reckon you will have a good neg there. If these shots were done in bright light with no direct sun, they could be considered N. My little system is to give film a little more exposure/less dev (N-) in bright light, and in dull, flat light I rate the film at more or less box speed but give more dev (N+) and in thick mucky fog the film gets almost double the iso and what must be N+3 or 4. My current N is 9 mins, N- is 8 mins N+ is 10 mins, and the +3 is near 14 mins. It really depends on how the dev activity works out as to how the N - and + works to how you like.
I've not found it too critical on the whole what with modern films and our weather, but I dont like nasty contrasty highs, or dull flat negs, and the exposure/dev time combo sorts this out.
Watch Delta 100, it can be a bugger in the high department with over deving. It is as good as any film for scanning, but I would go for the FP4 - it's more forgiving to exposure and deving, and I'm not 100% up on your developer, but you may well find out a softer working dev like ID11 suits better. ID11 1+2 and FP4 in a Jobo is a great mix, smooth, sharp, and fine grain, as is the Foma film.
You may also find the Jobo reels work better with only 4 sheets loaded and not 6, but others may say otherwise.
Good luck!

[Peter B]

Hi DJ and welcome to the mono world!

I've never used DD-X, but it gets a good name and you should be OK with it. The other chemicals look fine. The main thing to watch out for is that development times will generally be shorter due to the constant agitation in the CPE-2, and you could be talking in terms of 15-20%.

http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.php?doc=faq

The Massive Dev Chart only has times for diluted DD-X on sheet film,so that should be your starting point for a dev time, less the 15%.

http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.ph ... mdc=Search

It's fun, so get out there!

[richard littlewood]

Oops!, too late at night, forgot to mention that after deving those first 3 sheets to establish N, there should be no problem with shadow detail, exposure will have taken care of that. The issue here is high detail. If all 3 sheets have (printable and scanable) blocked highs, then reduce dev time by 25% and run another test. Increase dev time by the same if highs are too thin.
I think establishing a bacic N time is dead important, and once you have it the plus and minus will be easier to make a decent guess at. For starters if you end up with a happy N, say at 8 mins, then minus may fall about 6-7, and plus about 9-10. These may be basic plus and minus, and you only may need to experiment a little more with 'extra' plus and minus to overcome extreme low contrast, and perhaps night shots that benefit from over exposure and under development more than the usual minus or plus.

[DJ]

Crikey, I didn't realise even finding N was going to be such a trial and error affair, I thought N was what was written on the box! Thank you for the advice so far, it's very helpful, keep it coming!

From Richard's suggestions, you meter your shot for what you expect to be N and take two more 1 stop either side, and then somehow try to determine whether they're right when developed? This is where my knowledge will let me down, having never seen a properly exposed and developed B&W neg I have no yardstick by which to judge what is right and how it should look. Would shooting some kind of calibrated step wedge be a good idea? I'm sure such a thing exists, are they hideously expensive?

I also didn't realise that dev times needed to be reduced for use in rotary processors, the figure seems to vary, the website link posted by Peter says 15%, Peter says 15-20% and Richard says 25%. Do I have any advances on 25%?

Reading through some back threads on this, I see that developing for darkroom printing and for scanning are different disciplines, and the Zone system employed slightly differently. Joanna advises placing Zone 3 on Zone 1 when calculating exposure, to get a neg with a full range of tones for scanning purposes; as I will never use these negs in a darkroom, I think I should take this approach.

Being of limited resources at the moment I can't spend too much on trials and testing, the thought of working out a "personal" ISO speed terrifies me, can't I just use the one on the box?! Are they wrong? Is there a consensus opinion on dev times for Delta 100 in DD-X with a Jobo CPE/2 to give me a good starting point?

I can see now there is a lot more to shooting B&W than I originally thought, it seems you have to spend a great deal of effort determining your baseline, I think once you've got those dialled in it should be a lot easier right?

So many variables...

[Joanna Carter]

I also didn't realise that dev times needed to be reduced for use in rotary processors, the figure seems to vary, the website link posted by Peter says 15%, Peter says 15-20% and Richard says 25%. Do I have any advances on 25%?

I have always reckoned on 15-20%, depending on hard the maths is with the starting time

Joanna advises placing Zone 3 on Zone 1 when calculating exposure, to get a neg with a full range of tones for scanning purposes; as I will never use these negs in a darkroom, I think I should take this approach.

Actually, I don't recommend placing Zone 3 on Zone 1, I recommend placing your deepest shadow with detail in Zone 1-2, depending on the results of a couple of tests.

Then, you should be able to determine your brightest reading and determine how many stops it is away from Zone 1-2. If it exceeds Zone 10, then note by how many stops. e.g. the highlight reading falls in Zone 12, so count that as N-2 and increase the exposure by 1/3 stop per N-.

Being of limited resources at the moment I can't spend too much on trials and testing, the thought of working out a "personal" ISO speed terrifies me, can't I just use the one on the box?! Are they wrong? Is there a consensus opinion on dev times for Delta 100 in DD-X with a Jobo CPE/2 to give me a good starting point?

Instead of decreasing the time for continuous agitation, I have found that it is better to increase the dilution of the developer. Because we use a Jobo ATL1500, which processes B&W at 24°C, we also have to allow for that difference as well as the agitation. Ilford do give times for 24°C and we take those as the N time but use a dilution of 1+6 to accomodate for the agitation.

[DJ]

I have always reckoned on 15-20%, depending on hard the maths is with the starting time

I'll start around that point then and see how I get on.

Actually, I don't recommend placing Zone 3 on Zone 1, I recommend placing your deepest shadow with detail in Zone 1-2, depending on the results of a couple of tests.

Noted, thx.

Then, you should be able to determine your brightest reading and determine how many stops it is away from Zone 1-2. If it exceeds Zone 10, then note by how many stops. e.g. the highlight reading falls in Zone 12, so count that as N-2 and increase the exposure by 1/3 stop per N-.

Increase exposure if there's too much contrast in the scene? Forgive my ignorance, but that sounds backwards to me.

Instead of decreasing the time for continuous agitation, I have found that it is better to increase the dilution of the developer. Because we use a Jobo ATL1500, which processes B&W at 24°C, we also have to allow for that difference as well as the agitation. Ilford do give times for 24°C and we take those as the N time but use a dilution of 1+6 to accomodate for the agitation.

I like that plan, less chemicals = cheaper! I think I will give that a try, 1+6 it is. Do you do the same extra dilution for the stop and fix as well? or is it just the developer?

[Marizu]

I like that plan, less chemicals = cheaper! I think I will give that a try, 1+6 it is. Do you do the same extra dilution for the stop and fix as well? or is it just the developer?

I have been thinking about this a lot because the some of my dev times get quite short and I will get less consistency if I go too short.
You can't keep diluting it forever, though. You need a certain amount of active chemistry in there or it can get exhausted if you dilute too far. A particular dilution might look like it is working really well for a while but if you put in a set of high key sheets then the amount of extra activity associated with them can wear it out and prevent the negs achieving the expected contrast (that is my understanding, anyway).

If I go for higher dilution, should I keep the same volume of active chemistry but increase the overall volume of water?
Will 300ml of 1(dev)+9(water) always have the activity to achieve the same blacks (on the neg) as 600ml of 1(dev)+19(water) but just need longer dev times?

Your stop and fix should be the standard dilution.
I hope I'm not confusing matters.

[Joanna Carter]

Increase exposure if there's too much contrast in the scene? Forgive my ignorance, but that sounds backwards to me.

The increase in exposure time is to compensate for the reduction in development time. The shorter the development time, the thinner the negative, thus the need to "thicken" the neg by increasing the exposure slightly.

I like that plan, less chemicals = cheaper! I think I will give that a try, 1+6 it is. Do you do the same extra dilution for the stop and fix as well? or is it just the developer?

No, I leave the stop at standard dilution (you will be able to reuse it in a CPE) but I only use minimal stop bath, even plain water can be sufficient.

If I go for higher dilution, should I keep the same volume of active chemistry but increase the overall volume of water?
Will 300ml of 1(dev)+9(water) always have the activity to achieve the same blacks (on the neg) as 600ml of 1(dev)+19(water) but just need longer dev times

Ilford state (by inference) that DD-X can develop 40 sheets per litre of 1+4 solution; thus it takes 200ml of concentrate. So, the requirement for concentrated DD-X is 5ml per sheet. If you develop in a Jobo 2500 series drum, you need around 250ml of solution, which infers 50ml of concentrate, thus you can develop 10 sheets at a dilution of 1+4.

Taking a dilution of 1+6, with 280ml solution (because the maths is easier), you get a coverage of 8 sheets.

When I develop Fuji Acros, it requires a much shorter time compared with Delta, since DD-X is such an aggressive developer. I use a dilution of 1+9, which means I have to use 300ml of solution, thus 30ml of concentrate, which is enough to cover 6 sheets.

In short, you need to work out the coverage per sheet of the concentrate developer and adjust the volume of solution to ensure it covers the number of sheets you are developing.

[richard littlewood]

For starters a decent neg that suits scanning and printing are a bit similar. Scanners seem to like no real hollow dark areas (clear neg) of a pic, or any real dense areas, so thinking a bit on the lines of making a softer neg is no bad idea.
Exposing B+W film can become a science in itself - if you let it. I know there are folks out there that use step wedges, densitometers etc, and I suppose calibrating every thing from the shutter speed accuracy right through to print viewing light may turn out to be more of a vocation than actually making photographs.
I've found the real key to all of this stuff is to establish a route to exposing and deving negs that work with my set up, and its not as complex as it might seem. If you can make negs that have enough shadow detail (exposure) and high detail (deving) and have the sort of tonality, grain and sharpness that tick a few boxes, then the job is coming along nicely. Establishing a good working N type value will let all the other minor tweaks fall into place, and I've found I really only need to deviate away from a 'standard' exposure/dev combo when there is real flat light (under expose and over dev) or real contrasty light (over expose/under dev). There are others such as accomodating for night shots and dim light.
Theres been some decent ideas here on how to get cracking with the exposing/deving (wish there had been when I needed all this info all those years ago) and if you are coming from tranny film it may all seem a bit weird - such as over exposing in contrasty light, but essentially all this is doing is controlling the contrast of a neg, and the rule here is more exposure/less dev reduces contrast, and less exposure/more dev increases contrast. Once this is nailed it's possible to tweak negs as much as you like.
I only mentioned reducing dev by 25% because Delta 100 can steer towards highlight build up - Fp4 is more forgiving in this dept. As they say in Star wars 'use the force' (and take it from there)

[Joanna Carter]

Hi Richard

I only mentioned reducing dev by 25% because Delta 100 can steer towards highlight build up - Fp4 is more forgiving in this dept. As they say in Star wars 'use the force' (and take it from there)

Yes, I had a word with Ilford's technicians when I found that developing Delta 100 at 25°C was really building up the density too much and, although they were not officially allowed to tell me to increase the dilution, their comment was that DD-X was an "agressive" developer and that gave me the idea that dilution rather than time reduction could provide the right balance. And it has

[richard littlewood]

Joanna
I've tried to steer away from those highly active developers for rotary deving, although like a lot of photo chemical routes there are plenty of folks who have the results they want doing just the opposite. Personally if I were to be asked what to do from scratch, very much like the OP, with a Jobo, I would reckon on FP4, Fuji 100, or Foma 100 as a starting point for a film. I've found Delta 100 (not 400 at all) to be a bit prone to high density issues. But what the hell!, start off using it and there is a pretty good chance those issues will be tamed throughout time. Its still a great film.
As for a developer, some pyros are good in rotary but for someone starting out that option may well be a while off, so that leaves a more conventional one, and to be honest its probably better the devil you know. I've never used that particular Ilford developer, and I dare say I would find its activity levels a bit scary, and especially with Delta 100. So in that respect I'd be more likeley to go for a softer working dev like ID11, and especially for scanning. I'm a bit of an ID11aholic. Its just so easy to use and is one developer that works great as a dilutable one shot rotary processing type.
I've been messing around recently with Rodinal at high dilutions/semi-stand using the Jobo reels and tanks stood on the bench, and I cant make my mind up if the negs are 'better' than my ID11 negs. The legendary sharpness to me isnt quite that legendary, and the compensating effect is no better than ID11@ 1+2 (not that I find that an issue at all). Its a dead cheap way to dev film though, and I think its suited to smaller formats.
Actually round where I live today would be ideal for a film/dev test with N+. Its the sort of day Delta 100 would get box speed and around 15% more development - dull, flat light. Heavy dark sky.

Just out of interest, I'd be curious as to how many of us UKLFers use the zone system. I know America is its spiritual home, and they use it quite thouroughly there, and I have a watered down version, but in all honesty I've yet to come across someone that uses the system as intended.

[DJ]

I've just done my first batch of B&W film, and there's a few issues. I used the DD-X at 1+6 as Joanna suggests for the full 12 minutes. I left the stop (1+19) in for about a minute, and then did 3 minutes on the fixer (1+4).

The film seems to have developed ok, but the base is slightly cloudy, and with a slight warm tint, could this be down to my leaving the (yellow coloured) Ilfostop in for too long?

There are a couple of patches on uneven development but I think this is down to the bloody magnet falling off the drive halfway through the process and my having to do the 10 wash cycles by hand. I've glued it back in place now.

I had a couple of B sheets left over from Maldon, the A sheets having gone to Peak for developing. The Peak ones are darker, have greater contrast and greater detail in the shadows.
I remember I requested Peak develop those sheets at N+1 or N+2. Would this explain the difference in contrast? Would an N+ development pull out more shadow detail?

Another quick question, I know I can re-use the stop and the fixer, but I don't have any sealed bottles for them, does being open to the air affect them? Naturally I wouldn't keep them like this for long, but would they be ok for the next day?

I'm determined to see this through, but it's seeming quite difficult at the moment trying to hit an unknown target given I don't know what a "proper" negative should look like.

[Patrick Dixon]

I use a water stop and give it 2 mins, and at least 5 mins for Fotospeed fixer at 9:1 (with an Orbital, continuous hand rotation) - maybe you need longer with the stop to kill development?

N+ development should make the negatives darker and therefore more detail in shadows and more chance of blown highlights (depending on exposure of course).

[Joanna Carter]

I've just done my first batch of B&W film, and there's a few issues. I used the DD-X at 1+6 as Joanna suggests for the full 12 minutes. I left the stop (1+19) in for about a minute, and then did 3 minutes on the fixer (1+4).

This may not be long enough in the fixer, we tend to use between 4 and 5 minutes. This could be the reason for the slightly cloudy appearance. Just dunk them in the fixer again, even if they have dried, then give them a really good wash for at least half an hour under running water.

There are a couple of patches on uneven development but I think this is down to the bloody magnet falling off the drive halfway through the process and my having to do the 10 wash cycles by hand. I've glued it back in place now.

Which reels are you using?

I had a couple of B sheets left over from Maldon, the A sheets having gone to Peak for developing. The Peak ones are darker, have greater contrast and greater detail in the shadows.
I remember I requested Peak develop those sheets at N+1 or N+2. Would this explain the difference in contrast? Would an N+ development pull out more shadow detail?

Most definitely. The longer the development, the darker the negs.

Another quick question, I know I can re-use the stop and the fixer, but I don't have any sealed bottles for them, does being open to the air affect them? Naturally I wouldn't keep them like this for long, but would they be ok for the next day?

Certainly for the next day and even for longer. The stop is only akin to vinegar and the fixer might crystallise over time if not sealed but it won't come to any harm. Put them in sealed bottles as soon as is practical though.

I'm determined to see this through, but it's seeming quite difficult at the moment trying to hit an unknown target given I don't know what a "proper" negative should look like.

A "proper" negative is the one that looks like you want it to look and that prints how you want it to print