Re: [Leica] Excuse me, I actually have photo question.

["Dan Post" <dwpost@email.msn.com>]

Aaron-
What dilution? Sounds from the large grain that you may be slightly
UNDEREXPOSING and underdeveloping. Both have the tendency to make the grain
more noticeable.
I would suggest that you first shoot HP5 at about 1/3 stop more exposure-
say at an EI of 320.
Then, work on the contrast- more development means more contrast, as a rule
of thumb. Personally, I would try a little more agitation- inverting the
tank while turning it slightly, and agitate for 5 full seconds every minute,
after the initial 30s of agitation. Usually one inversion per second works
and is not to vigorous.
The times and temps given with ANY developer should be used as a guide only-
unless you use a rotating tube or tank to process, there is enough
'variation' in the human arm to account for a wide range of results from
person to person!
But, the GOOD news is that once you adjust your method and start getting the
right results, if you stick with that method, without fail, then you will
continue to get consistently good results, barring bad mixes or things
beyond your control.
Relax, it is not rocket science! If you use a meter to enlarge your
negatives, shoot a few frames of  a test target. I use a 16x20 matte board
to which I have affixed a white 8x10 matte board, an 8x10 black matte board,
and a neutral gray card!
With the meter, I can get a 'ballpark' estimate of what the density range of
the negative is- subtracting the density of the image of the black card from
the density of the image from the white card- this takes into account the
flare or any loss of contrast in the enlarger itself, and its lens. If I
zero the density on the base+fog at the end of the roll- I looks for a
'density' of about .65-.75 in the gray card area. This tells me if the
exposure is right. If the difference between the high and low density of the
white and black card images is a density range of .90-1.10, I figure I did
the right amount of agitation and development was sufficient. It might take
a couple of rolls to get the EI down to what you want, and to zero in on the
contrast you need, but once done for that film and developer combination,
you are pretty much set! Keep notes, so you will know what you did right
when it falls into place, and good luck!
Relax- like I said, it is not rocket science, you won't blow yourself up,
and if you are a little bit methodical, then you won't become unduly
frustrated, and quit! All of a sudden, you'll start to realize that YOU"RE
HAVING FUN! It don't get much better than that!
Best of light,
Dan
- ----- Original Message -----
From: Aaron Ruby <aruby@rci.rutgers.edu>
To: LUG <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Friday, October 01, 1999 11:37 PM
Subject: [Leica] Excuse me, I actually have photo question.


> Dear LUG:
>
> Would it be possible for anyone not engaged in the current exhibition of
> addled reasoning and righteous indignation to give me a few clues on
> what I might be doing wrong when processing HP5+ (rated at 400) in XTOL.
> I seem to be getting excessive grain and lowish contrast negs. I've been
> using 8.25 minutes at ~70 degrees. I'm not sure what to try next.
> Longer? Shorter? I'm a bit confused. My agitation doesn't seem to be
> that rigorous--I invert 4 times every 60 seconds after inverting
> 30seconds initially.  Any help would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Best,
>
>
> A. Ruby
>
>
> P.S. If you want to bitch about political issues an express a lot of
> moral outrage, why don't you debate something at least PLAUSIBLY related
> to the list group, like the fact that we all own cameras made by a
> company that may well have prospered from Nazi contracts during WWII, a
> company that as recently as 1994 included a photo by Leni Riefenstahl in
> their "Leica Magic Moments" book but conveniently omitted all mention of
> her propaganda filmmaking career under the Nazis in their bio of her. In
> fact, the bio reads as though none of this never happened, jumping from
> 1932, when her filmmaking career began, to 1962. Say what you will about
> the merits or liabilities of Riefenstahl as artist and collaborator, it
> is still shocking that a German company in the post-WWII era would
> demonstrate such a complete case of cultural amnesia. So if you want
> something to get into a state about and at least attempt to stay on
> topic, chew on that.
>