On Thursday, May 2, 2002, at 12:56 PM, Evan Hanson wrote:
Aaron you're a genius the words I was looking for but couldn't
find are my base isn't clear enough. What causes that?
Overdevelopment of some kind. How is your agitation? Are you
aggressive at all? Are you precise with dilution
My answers interspersed below.
Aaron Reynolds wrote:
Overdevelopment of some kind. How is your agitation? Are you
aggressive at all? Are you precise with dilution and temperature? If
you're already pretty relaxed when agitating, and your temperature is
bang on, I'd suggest shaving 10%
On Friday, May 3, 2002, at 12:11 PM, tom wrote:
One flip is about 1 or 1.5 seconds of agitation, amounting to 2 or 3
secs of agitation per minute. I've never seen a recommendation for
less than 5 secs of agitation per minute unless you're doing something
weird like stand developing.
Sure
I don't recommend a pre soak. It has, for me, upset the development
time and i could never get consistent results. It has been said that
when the film has received a pre soak, uptake of developer may not be
consistent.
I'd like to get some comments regarding consistent, or inconsistent,
I never heard of that one before, now I have several things to
try this weekend. Just like I tell my kids you learn something
new everyday.
Evan
Aaron Reynolds wrote:
Sure you have, you just saw me recommend it! ;)
Pre-soak is a good tip that I forgot to throw in. Evan, definitely
On Friday, May 3, 2002, at 10:26 AM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
I don't recommend a pre soak. It has, for me, upset the development
time and i could never get consistent results. It has been said that
when the film has received a pre soak, uptake of developer may not be
consistent.
I have
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Shel Belinkoff
I don't recommend a pre soak. It has, for me, upset the development
time and i could never get consistent results. It has been
said that
when the film has received a pre soak,
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Aaron Reynolds
On Friday, May 3, 2002, at 12:11 PM, tom wrote:
One flip is about 1 or 1.5 seconds of agitation,
amounting to 2 or 3
secs of agitation per minute. I've never seen a recommendation
On Friday, May 3, 2002, at 03:12 PM, tom wrote:
Yeah, but you use a Jobo and agitate constantly!
I do now, and I also recognize that many developers are worthless in the
Jobo for precisely that reason. I love Rodinal in hand tanks. I hate
Rodinal in the Jobo.
-Aaron
-
This message is
My experience is that I was unable to get consistent results. I'd soak
the film for X minutes, develop, and get a result. If it were
satisfactory, I'd try it again, but the results would be different. It
just didn't work for me. Maybe I didn't find the magic combination of
pre soak time and
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Aaron Reynolds
On Friday, May 3, 2002, at 03:12 PM, tom wrote:
Yeah, but you use a Jobo and agitate constantly!
I do now, and I also recognize that many developers are
worthless in the
Jobo for
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Shel Belinkoff
My experience is that I was unable to get consistent
results. I'd soak
the film for X minutes, develop, and get a result. If it were
satisfactory, I'd try it again, but the results
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Evan Hanson
Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 10:04 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: REPOST:Best Soup for Tri-X Plus-X
Ok guys sorry about yesterday but it appears my mail server
crapped out on me
Shel and Aaron inquired about by current chemistry. But I am
going to try XTOL.
Evan
Then you saw our responses? Why are you asking again?
tv
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
On Thursday, May 2, 2002, at 10:37 AM, tom wrote:
Then you saw our responses? Why are you asking again?
Well, I for one asked what he was using now, and that info has been
added to his repost.
Ok, so, Evan, how do your negs look right now? How clear is the base?
How heavy is the
HC-110 gives some very nice blacks with Plus-X.
Haven't used it with Tri-X as yet.
--
Collin Brendemuehl, KC8TKA
---
Get over it.
Dr. Laura
--
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions.
A film developer doesn't deliver nice blacks - that's a result of
paper choice and developer. However, perhaps you should define what
nice blacks are so we can be sure we're thinking of the same thing.
Collin Brendemuehl wrote:
HC-110 gives some very nice blacks with Plus-X.
Haven't used it
I get real nice blacks when I underexpose
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Shel Belinkoff
Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 9:38 AM
A film developer doesn't deliver nice blacks - that's a result of
paper choice and developer.
Aaron you're a genius the words I was looking for but couldn't
find are my base isn't clear enough. What causes that?
Highlights are ok but I would like to pull more detail from the
shadows. I know it's there because when I spring for the pro-lab
shadow areas have show their details better.
19 matches
Mail list logo
