Overexposed HP-5: How Do You Preserve Contrast?

greenspun.com : LUSENET : B&W Photo - Film & Processing : One Thread

Oops-- I accidently overexposed some HP5 by 1-1/2 stops. (8x20 negs, taken 90 miles away, so going back and doing it right is not an option). If I reduce the development, the contrast will be lowered. Grrrr. I'd like not have to resort to intensification afterwards.

Ok, folks, what sort of never-fail tactics have you used to maintain contrast when developing overexposed negatives?

-- Reinhold Schable (rschable@quik.com), May 27, 2002

Answers

You might consider using a developer which is known to lose a stop of speed, such as Microdol-X 1+3 or, even better, in ABC Pyro.

-- Willhelmn (wmitch3400@hotmail.com), May 27, 2002.

Reinhold,

About two weeks ago, I accidentally overexposed a sheet of HP5 and also overdeveloped it by 2 minutes. I was able to make beautiful prints from it anyway. The reason is that I developed it with PMK. You've probably heard this before but With PMK it is very hard to block up highlight detail. Conventional developers will not adequately handle your negative. I would develop it in PMK for 11 to 12 minutes at 21 deg. Celsius. I would also expose a negative the way you exposed your subject negative and test develop it. It is very hard to appreciate Pyro developers until you have tried them in contrasty situations. The above recommendation of another Pyro developer is also a good one. I wish you success.

Greg

-- Greg Rust (kgeicrust@aol.com), May 27, 2002.


two possibilities: try perceptol normally, or id-ll minus athird of the normal developing time. perceptol because you lose film speed anyway, or id-ll+ because its as reliable as the sunrise and sunset. i prefer off-the-shelf chemicals anyway, especially those made by the film manufacturer. jim

-- jim meisenbach (pacifica011@insightbb.com), May 27, 2002.

I overexpose most of my negatives... so I guess what you've done isn't that strange! (you haven't underexposed by 1.5 stops!!) I'd use my normal developer, maybe dropping the time a little (say 10%) and print through the denser neg with longer exposure times.

As was mentioned, pick a methos, do a test using something less important!

Is "8x20" inches?

-- Nigel Smith (nlandgl@unite.com.au), May 28, 2002.


Don't do anything weird; develop normally. Many would say that HP5+ is an EI 160-200 film anyway. The curve shape is fairly straight out about 14-15 stops at least in most "standard" developers so you wouldn't block up the high end.

If in doubt, shoot a test neg and develop it first.

-- John Hicks (jhicks31@bellsouth.net), May 28, 2002.



Two alternative suggestions:
1) Use T-max developer and develop normally. This developer gives an extended straight line portion to the film curve. The negs will be dense, but they should print normally, without the highlights blocking up; with just an increase in your printing time.
Option 2: Follow Ilford's recommendation for downrating HP5plus. Ilford recommend using Perceptol at stock strength. The times they give are for ratings of 50, 100, and 200 EI. The 50 and 100 EI times are both 9 mins @ 68 F; and the 200 rating time is 11 minutes. I guess you could interpolate the +1.5 stop time as 10 mins.
Good luck! Let us know the results.

-- Pete Andrews (p.l.andrews@bham.ac.uk), May 28, 2002.

Thanks, everyone for your suggestions. I was so grouched about the overexposure mistake that my brain shut down, and you've helped to kick start it again. At this moment I'm weighing the following...

The suggestions to make some overexposed test negatives is well received. Thanks.

I normally develop by inspection, using a Pat Gainer vitamin C developer for my larger negatives. (Yep, Nigel, that's 8x20 inches). So far, I have no experience using Pyro when developing by inspection.

Greg: have you developed by inspection using Pyro, and how would the image look, compared to traditional chemistry? I'm concerned that the Pyro stain might not be easily interpreted during inspection.

I'd also forgotten about the extremely high shoulder on these films (thanks, John); yours, Petes' and Nigels' suggestion to develop normally, ignore the extra density and print through is a practical one. It reminded me of another tactic that I've used in the past... good old Farmers Reducer. The right concoction (can't remember which one at the moment, got to check the books...) will correct for overexposure, rather than correct for over development. That ought to make a more "normal" negative.

We'll see how it goes...

-- Reinhold Schable (rschable@quik.com), May 28, 2002.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ