Agitation. constant vs Intermittent. Opinions

Started 4 months ago | Discussions thread
just Tony
just Tony Veteran Member • Posts: 3,062
Re: Agitation. constant vs Intermittent. Opinions

DrBormental wrote:

Olympuse20 wrote:

Interesting. and thanks for the feedback. Excellent. developed both FP4 and HP5 in constant agitation and find both of these not to have the contrast as compared to TRI-X which has more contrast but I don't like the level of grain in TRI-X

You can expose and develop most films to a contrast level of your choice. Films by themselves do not "have contrast". Look at datasheets closely:

For example, Tri-X datasheet states: "The following starting-point recommendations are intended to produce a contrast index of 0.56", i.e. for different contrast index you'll need to adjust dev. time.

HP5 datasheet says the same thing: "adjust the recommended development times until the desired contrast level is obtained".

Sometimes manufacturers list different development times for different contrast index. You can develop HP5+ and Tri-X to look 100% identical. This is the primary reason why you should stop using monobath and switch to developer+fixer routine.

Films do inherently possess possible ranges of contrast. Kodak had several high contrast products: Technical Pan (which required a specialized developer to work down at normal contrast, and very specialized agitation at that), High Contrast Copy, and Kodalith. Kodalith was pretty darn binary.

The narrower the range of silver halide crystal sizes, the higher the contrast, in my understanding.

-- hide signature --

Wag more; bark less.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow