Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/07/18

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] A Questionable Haze?
From: hoppyman at bigpond.net.au (Geoff Hopkinson)
Date: Fri Jul 18 07:26:42 2008
References: <48800A3A.9060307@gmail.com><443F36DF-B2EA-49FE-814E-464E38E273AD@comcast.net> <488049BC.9080706@gmail.com>

Yama, a thread on XTOL is bound to follow! Not that that's a bad thing. I
was converted especially by Marty in the group here. Marty has pro lab
experience and has done a lot of systematic and measured testing. Of course
there is a huge group of experienced XTOL users here. You will have endless
fun as you try more dilutions as well. 1:3 gives really yummy long
highlights. (this is Fuji Neopan 400)

http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/gh/a/Vic/MV4.jpg.html

http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/gh/a/2_001/B08.jpg.html

 

A couple of thoughts to kick off the XTOL discussion

 

Your couple of pics here look overly contrasty to me; overdeveloped???

If you are scanning your negs you may find that underdeveloping is helpful.
I ended up at 10 -20% below the recommended times.

Temps here are almost always higher than your 68 degree ideal as well. I use
a Jobo temp controlling bath and just put a bunch of water with ice packs in
it until I get to perfect starting temp. Your bottles of chemicals and the
tank all sit in the cooling bath and I take the temp from the developer.

Go here for lots of data

http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.html

Photoflo dilution is not critical. A couple of drops in a final rinse is
fine. It's only a wetting agent (detergent) to reduce drying marks.

 

Cheers

Geoff

http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman/e

http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/gh/

-----Original Message-----
Subject: Re: [Leica] A Questionable Haze?

 

I think my problem might just be in the agitation. Im using someone 

else's development times as a start, and he goes for 3 times every 

thirty seconds. Total develop time is 9 minutes and 30 seconds, in XTOL 

1:1 with Tri-x at ASA 400.

 

I think I like the high contrast, but maybe I will try 45 seconds when I 

shoot ASA 400. The temperature of the room is usually around 23C. I bet 

it would be cooler in the winter, however I am in sunny southern 

california, and temperatures here average about 85F lately.

 

Thanks for your help. I will definitely do the photo-flo solution, 

however i really am not sure how much to dilute.

 

 

Leonard Taupier wrote:

> Hi Yama,

> 

> I'm not sure what the "haze" is but I have a couple of questions.

> 

> During development what is your agitation or inversion timing. Your 

> prints look a little too high contrast. There is no detail in the dark 

> hair.

> Do you use a stop bath between development and fixing?

> What film, what developer?

> A 3 degree rise in temp seems high in a 9 minute period but except for 

> a slightly denser negative it shouldn't cause a problem. I would only 

> worry if you were developing color. What's the temperature in your room?

> 

> I would use a 30 sec dip in a Photo-Flo solution and then hang the 

> film to dry. Don't use a squeegee. That can lead to emulsion scratches 

> with some films and also lead to spotting on the negatives after they 

> dry.

> 

> Len

> 

> 

> On Jul 17, 2008, at 11:12 PM, Yama Nawabi wrote:

> 

>> I'm still going at the "street photography" thing (however subjective 

>> that may be) and loving it. This was an attempt at a hipshot, which 

>> seemed to work pretty well. Exposure was good to my eyes, however, I 

>> notice when I scan in these negatives, they look a little funny.

>> 

>> I have gotten rid of that milky white look by fixing my negatives 

>> longer, this was a problem I used to have before. However, I do not 

>> really know how to maintain my developer temperature. The temp went 

>> up from 20 C to 23 C and I had developed at ASA 400 (9 min, 30 

>> seconds). Fixed for 10 minutes. The other change I had done during 

>> this develop was using a film squeegee, however I doubt that really 

>> had caused this haze.

>> 

>> What I am trying to figure out is whether this developing error had 

>> caused that funny black haze above the asian lady's head ( in the 

>> left side of the photo )

>> 

>> http://flickr.com/photos/helloyama/2672482550/

>> And here is another example, to the left of the lady w/ the 

>> stroller's head.

>> http://flickr.com/photos/helloyama/2671662789/

>> 

>> Anyone have any clues? Danke

>> 

>> -- 

>> ------------

>> Yama Nawabi

>> www.helloyama.com

>> 

>> 

>> _______________________________________________

>> Leica Users Group.

>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information

> 

> 

> _______________________________________________

> Leica Users Group.

> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information

 

-- 

------------

Yama Nawabi

www.helloyama.com

 

 

_______________________________________________

Leica Users Group.

See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information


Replies: Reply from drodgers at casefarms.com (David Rodgers) ([Leica] A Questionable Haze?)
In reply to: Message from mknawabi.lug at gmail.com (Yama Nawabi) ([Leica] A Questionable Haze?)
Message from len-1 at comcast.net (Leonard Taupier) ([Leica] A Questionable Haze?)
Message from mknawabi.lug at gmail.com (Yama Nawabi) ([Leica] A Questionable Haze?)