[pure-silver] Re: Suggestions needed from the real experts here

Mark

I guess you ignored my note too? Oh, well.





Regards



Ralph W. Lambrecht

http://www.darkroomagic.com







On 2006-06-23 04:39, "Mark Blackwell" <markb1958@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Richard Knoppow" <dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2006 5:17 PM
> Subject: [pure-silver] Re: Suggestions needed from the real experts here
> 
> 
>> 
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Mark Blackwell" <markb1958@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> To: <pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2006 8:34 AM
>> Subject: [pure-silver] Re: Suggestions needed from the real experts here
>> 
>> 
>>> Yes I sure it is, but that for this batch isn't really an option.  I
>>> called Kodak this morning.  For those interested for Tri X its 10% and
>>> for T Max its 5%.  Took about 2 mins off and we will see on the contrast.
>>> I knew that there was a general rule of thumb, but couldn't remember what
>>> it was.
>>> 
>>> When I print them we will see but the negs at least look workable.
>>> 
>>   Is this developing time? If so, its way off. The change in time for a
>> given change in contrast varies with the film and is less for T-Max than
>> conventional grain films but, on average, its around 25% to 33% reduction
>> for a one paper grade difference in contrast. This is equivalent to about
>> 3/4 stop speed to maintain equal densities. To push or pull film the
>> difference is a little greater. Again, it varies with the film but for
>> conventional films, and most, but not all, developers its about 1.4X the
>> time for pushing or about 0.7x for pulling. A 5 or 10 per cent change in
>> time will have very little effect on either contrast or equivalent speed.
>>  OTOH, Tri-X has probably more than ten stops of overexposure latitude so
>> 2 stops with normal contrast development will still give you perfectly
>> good tone rendition in the print. It will just take longer to expose the
>> prints.
>> 
>> ---
>> Richard Knoppow
>> Los Angeles, CA, USA
>> dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Thanks for the help Richard.  Next time I might just develop normally and
> test that out too.  In fact sometime soon I might do it on purpose to see
> what happens  I am sure it won't be the last time the dummy behind the
> viewfinder makes a mistake. LOL  A drop in contrast might actually help this
> particular subject, but a higher contrast paper is an option if needed.  I
> ended up using recommended development time x .80 for the Tri X and x .90
> for a role of T Max that was also done the same way per kodak
> recommendation.  Even if it was bad advise, its worth knowing that too.
> 
> One thing I will say that I was a bit surprised at these days.  First the
> Kodak site had a phone number to call with a question.  Second someone
> answered the phone promptly, politely and answered my question.  No long
> waits.  Only one or two menu items to get to a person.  I like a lot of
> different bw films, but I am going to buy a lot more Kodak because of the
> fact that they took my call and answered a question.
> 
> ==============================================================================
> ===============================
> To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your
> account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,)
> and unsubscribe from there.


=============================================================================================================
To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your 
account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,) 
and unsubscribe from there.

Other related posts: