Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/12/09

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

Subject: [Leica] Negatives aren't turning out right. Or how I want them, at least...
From: chs2018 at med.cornell.edu (Chris Saganich)
Date: Tue Dec 9 08:01:19 2008
References: <493D7E22.1090908@gmail.com> <F2AB2D7C-FD49-4CA4-96B8-4423B2F7314C@mac.com>

Yea, TriX just does that under high contrast conditions, see example:

The outside light is bleeding from Roy's black dreads:

<http://www.imagebrooklyn.com/street_pages_2007/bs146.htm>

With less contrast on an indoor scene it isn't as noticeable with full 
development,

<http://www.imagebrooklyn.com/street_pages_2008/bs010.htm>

and again in the harsh California light

<http://www.imagebrooklyn.com/street_pages_2008/bs022.htm>

In these cases I exposed to get shadow details but didn't contract the 
development time.  I supposed that would just be over development then.  If 
you want to keep shadow detail in the harsh light without the bleeding 
effect then contract the development by at least 30 percent.  If that 
doesn't work move to a lower contrast developer like this:

<http://www.imagebrooklyn.com/street_pages_2008/bs077.htm>
<http://www.imagebrooklyn.com/street_pages_2008/bs050.htm>

Same triX and direct sunlight on the pumpkin.  And very harsh light on the 
second example but the effect isn't as noticable.  I also found that a 
lower contrast lens has a similar effect:

<http://www.imagebrooklyn.com/street_pages_2007/bs007.htm>

Same TriX overdeveloped but using a rigid summicron.



Chris


At 04:59 PM 12/8/2008, you wrote:
>I have an intuitive feeling
>that you're negatives are very dense
>some combination of overexposure and/or overdevelopment
>
>Fond regards,
>George
>
>george@imagist.com
>http://www.imagist.com
>http://www.imagist.com/blog
>http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist
>
>
>
>On Dec 8, 2008, at 2:05 PM, Yama Nawabi wrote:
>
>>already explained the problem in the description of my flickr
>>photos, so please click the following links for the problem:
>>
>>http://flickr.com/photos/helloyama/3093611810/
>>http://flickr.com/photos/helloyama/3092808595/
>>http://flickr.com/photos/helloyama/3093649582/
>>
>>
>>trying to get tones that look more like this:
>>http://bp2.blogger.com/_hrIwoHYnxgA/R58lE07mgiI/AAAAAAAAE-4/ 
>>hQFaLCM3FW0/s1600-h/IMG11757s.jpg
>>http://bp2.blogger.com/_hrIwoHYnxgA/R58lc07mgpI/AAAAAAAAE_w/ 
>>lwghJ3RXF_k/s1600-h/IMG11751s.jpg
>>http://bp2.blogger.com/_hrIwoHYnxgA/R58jV07mgLI/AAAAAAAAE8A/ 
>>TIIoNF6WWxw/s1600-h/IMG11797s.jpg
>>
>>he doesnt photoshop, or anything. i've even been using his times,
>>agitation, and scanning method. everything is the same, yet my negs
>>are ****ty and his ain't. anyone got any hints?
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>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

Chris Saganich MS, CPH
Senior Physicist, Office of Health Physics
Weill Medical College of Cornell University
New York Presbyterian Hospital
chs2018@med.cornell.edu
http://intranet.med.cornell.edu/research/health_phys/
Ph. 212.746.6964
Fax. 212.746.4800
Office A-0049








"I am the radiation"  

In reply to: Message from mknawabi.lug at gmail.com (Yama Nawabi) ([Leica] Negatives aren't turning out right. Or how I want them, at least...)
Message from imagist3 at mac.com (Lottermoser George) ([Leica] Negatives aren't turning out right. Or how I want them, at least...)