Low quality due to scan or developing

[Pflabian]

Hi,

I recently got into film photography and I'm developing my film on my own at home. I'm shooting 400 Pan Kentmere film and using Ilford Ilfosol 3 as Film developer and Ilford Rapid Fixer as Film fixer. For Stop bath I just use tap water and I do not use a wetting agent. Developing wise, I just follow the times indicated on the packaging of the film.

For scanning, I use one of these Kodak Slide n Scan things, which I realize might not be the best quality.



The pictures always turn out rather bad, and have really low resolution. I attached a view pictures and wanted to ask if the developing process or the scanning process is at fault here, and if so what I should change about either of them. Maybe it is something entirely different? Is it just up to editing? Am I taking the pictures wrong? Apart from the low resolution bothering me, a lot of the pictures also have these mini artifacts, like the very many little black and white dots similar to the thing you used to see on TV when you were a kid.



I hope you guys can help me and thanks a lot in a advance!

 

[Gesture]

There are many aspects and I agree about that scanner.

You need to start by making sure you are using a short enough shutter speed to favor sharp images.

Next, you need to work out the best exposure and development protocol to get good negatives. There are many criteria, but I look for a negative with shadow detail and no blocked up highlights for starters. You should be able to read a newspaper behind the negative. In general, as you add more development, you increase contrast, grain size and tend to block up highlight details. For starters, try NOT to over-develop. Keeping all solutions at the same temperature is also important.

A good negative will "sing." Also, I would invest in a loupe designed for inspecting negatives. That way, you can get a better idea of sharpness, grain, etc.

You are not that far off. As I've argued many times on this forum, mastering 35mm film (esp black and white) is much more difficult than larger formats like 120.

Horenstein's book is good.

Black and White Photography: A Basic Manual Third Revised Edition Paperback – Unabridged, March 1, 2004

Good luck.

 

[Overrank]

What camera are you using (i.e. do you know your exposure is right in the first place) ?

 

[D Cox]

The shutter speeds are low for hand-holding. Try setting a higher ISO number or using a tripod.

Don

 

[Pflabian]

Hi thank you so much for your answer! I am using the Harman reusable camera, which has a shutter speed of 1 / 120. I am indeed very particular about all the solutions being 20 degrees Celsius. With all that being said, would you recommend shorter or longer development times? Should I try +- 30 seconds? Thank you very much for the book recommendation, and could you elaborate on what you mean by a good negative should sing?

Thanks so much in advance and have a lovely day!

 

[Pflabian]

I'm using a Harman Reusable camera, with a shutter speed of 1 / 120s. I am unfortunately not at all an expert on exposure, could you clarify what I should do different?

 

[Pflabian]

Shutter speed is 1 / 120s. Does using a higher ISO mean using different film right, with for example 800 instead of 400 what I am currently using?

 

[flektogon]

Well, the pictures are satisfactory sharp and contrasty, so this indicate a correct development and unshaken exposure. Just the details are not there, but a lot of grain. So, at first, try to use films with lower grain/sensitivity, like ISO 100. And then the scanning! To see how bad it is, just get one or two frames professionally scanned.

--
Regards,
Peter

 

[D Cox]

Hi thank you so much for your answer! I am using the Harman reusable camera, which has a shutter speed of 1 / 120. I am indeed very particular about all the solutions being 20 degrees Celsius. With all that being said, would you recommend shorter or longer development times? Should I try +- 30 seconds? Thank you very much for the book recommendation, and could you elaborate on what you mean by a good negative should sing?

Thanks so much in advance and have a lovely day!

If you click on the bottom left of a photo in this thread, you will see the EXIF data, including the shutter speeds. Check out the manual for the camera to see how to set shutter speeds.

 

[Svein Eriksen]

You use a fix focus and fixed exposure very basic camera and scan with a low end scanner. Don't know anything about the film.

With fixed exposure the scanner have to compensate for exposure errors. Negative film typically handle variations in exposure fairly well within limits, but it will still influence the end results.

This is equipment that's designed to give basic image quality. Typically used for 4x6 prints before digital and you'd probably get OK results for small prints and posting on Facebook. Looking at the results with high magnification on a computer screen will reveal all image quality problems.

No reason why you can't have fun and get some good results with this camera as long as you don't have unrealistic expectations. Try exposures in different conditions and find where the results are OK.

 

[Overrank]

I'm using a Harman Reusable camera, with a shutter speed of 1 / 120s. I am unfortunately not at all an expert on exposure, could you clarify what I should do different?

There isn’t really anything you can do differently as the shutter speed and aperture are fixed. To maximise the quality of your images I would probably use a film of around 200 iSO and try and ensure that you take pictures outside on a sunny day. That will mean that the scanner will have to do less to extract images from the negatives.



(having said that I think that adding a bit of contrast to your images would improve them, they are a bit flat)

 

[Scott_Eaton]

You need a scanner capable of manual curve correction, and/or do the invert in Photshop or any other decent desktop software.

Low end scanners are going to do a terrible job with all aspects of B&W film.

Your negs actully look pretty decent, although as a warning Ilfosol is the worst developer ever made in my opinion. It has chunky grain, terrible shadow detail and flat midtones, but will also brick highlights.

I can tell by your images you used Ilfosol because of the crushed shadows. Both Kentmere 400 and it's cousin HP5 have tremendous shadow detail at box speed.

 

[thisisbenji]

I think basically all steps of your process could use some improvements, but you've developed and scanned yourself! That's a huge milestone.

First, I would look to get a high quality point and shoot from the 90s from a thrift store. That will improve the quality of the exposures. Next, you need to figure out a better way to scan. Epson flatbed, Plustek 35mm scanner, or DSLR/Mirrorless scan. Then you need to actually use software such as Silverfast or even my favorite the Negative Lab Pro plugin for Lightroom. There's really a decent amount of tweaking at the point of the scan to get an image that pops (all of the decent film labs do this for you).

I would say, until you upgrade you gear, I wouldn't worry too much about your development process as you're likely doing it correctly.

 

[Autonerd]

Hi,

Hi -- and first of all, good on you for diving right in and developing your own!

I think your primary problem is the scanner. I use an Epson flatbed, which is not teh most high-end solution but I am happy with the results I get. (See Flickr page in sig; all of the film was scanned with the Epson.) The artifacts are also likely a result of your scanning.

The simple camera does limit exposure a bit, but all things considered I think the exposure looks OK. One skill one develops (heh) is to think about what looks good in a B&W photo. Pics with lots of light and dark tones, like the building and trees, make good subjects. But a (presumably) green bench against green grass and green bushes isn't going to look great. In color, it'd be a nice study in the different shades of green; in B&W it'll just look very gray.

Keep in mind it's not a "cheat" to fix these things in post. Unlike digital, or slides, with B&W film the negative is not the end product; it's one step on the way to the final print. Printing in the darkroom, we could change the brightness of the image by altering exposure on the enlarger; change contrast with our choice of paper or enlarger filters (for variable-contrast paper); and get more/less detail out of certain sections by dodging and burning (making paper masks to give areas of the photo more or less light). We can do all of these things with photo editing software like Photoshop or GIMP, which were originally built to emulate the darkroom processes.

For developing, info on the film box is fine, and most film types have data sheets showing times for different developers and temperatures. Search the Web for "[filmname] data sheet". Here's Kentmere 400:

https://www.ilfordphoto.com/amfile/file/download/file/1959/product/2136/

I would not alter the temperature; 68 degrees F (20C) is ideal.

I would suggest using a stop bath rather than tap water. Stop is reusable and adds only a couple of pennies to your development costs, and gives you more predictable results.

Don't despair, you are doing great especially considering your modest equipment. An upgrade on the scanner would give you the most bang for your buck.

I think you're doing fine with that simple camera, and if you decide to upgrade, you don't have to spend much money. For SLRs, consider a late-90s/early-2000s Minolta like the Maxxum 400si (Dynax 500si in Europe) Maxxum (Dynax) 5:

http://camera-wiki.org/wiki/Minolta_Dynax_500si

http://camera-wiki.org/wiki/Minolta_Dynax_5

You can buy them for next to nothing ($20 to $50 in the US -- with a lens!) and they are a great way to transition from full-auto shooting to manual shooting.

Keep it going, you're on the right track!

Aaron

EDIT: Reading the other replies, I have no experience with Ilfosol, and what Scott Eaton said makes sense. Could I suggest Kodak D-76 or Ilford ID-11? D-76 is a pain to mix (I assume the same for ID11, but if you can get through development you can definitely do it!) and it works nicely with everything. I am a big proponent of starting with the basic known-goods before moving on to fancier stuff.

--
My Flickr page: https://www.flickr.com/photos/aarongold/

 

[Autonerd]

If you click on the bottom left of a photo in this thread, you will see the EXIF data, including the shutter speeds. Check out the manual for the camera to see how to set shutter speeds.

I think those EXIF #s are from the scanner, not the camera...

 

[Gesture]

In the states, I would look at Freestyle Sales for generic D-76 developers. They have liquid or powder. Not familiar with Ilfosol, but ID-11 would be similar to D-76. If I remember, it is phenidone vs metol based.