[pure-silver] Re: Pushing Arista Edu?
- From: "Eric Neilsen Photo" <ej@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2010 11:53:57 -0500
Pushing one's film is perfectly fine. At some point the in the process the
final image is the goal. If you accomplish this feat by extra development of
an underexposed frame, or sheet, so be it. It is a well known that magic
doesn't happen and light appears on your negative where once there wasn't
any "effective" exposure which is the case in weak, thin exposures that are
below the threshold of the film to see it. Are there trade offs and
compromises? of course there are. If Jean- David is suggesting that it is a
waste of time to push an under exposed roll, I find that to be less than
solid advice. I find it much easier to flatten an image out in printing,
rather than making an image to acceptable quality in local shadow detail.
My bottom line is if there is no image, there is no image. If there is some,
it is better to expand the shadow areas up so that you can play with it
later. One of the hardest things to do in printing is getting a good black
while hold good shadow detail from a poor, or thin negative. It is a good
idea to blow a few rolls on film developer test before you try to use any
new film on important stuff.
Eric
Eric Neilsen
Eric Neilsen Photography
4101 Commerce Street, Suite 9
Dallas, TX 75226
www.ericneilsenphotography.com
skype me with ejprinter
www.ericneilsenphotography.com/forum1
Let's Talk Photography
-----Original Message-----
From: pure-silver-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:pure-silver-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of BOB KISS
Sent: Saturday, July 31, 2010 11:03 AM
To: pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [pure-silver] Re: Pushing Arista Edu?
DEAR MARTIN,
As Baba and Jean-David said, one doesn't really increase the speed
of film. However, functionally speaking, I have used Diafine with some
success. It is a split dev and, as J-D said, it increases shadow density
(compensating dev) but also reduces the contrast in the shadow regions.
All this having been said, you can get some decently printable
results. I looked on the Massive Dev Chart and didn't find an entry for
Arista Edu 100 and Diafine. You should blow a roll on speed tests with
Diafine. See what is the highest speed that gives you a negative of
"printable quality" by your standards
On the other hand, the Massive Dev Chard did show a few options for
pushing it to 200. Click this!
http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.php?Film=Arista+EDU&Developer=&mdc=Sear
ch
CHEERS!
BOB
-----Original Message-----
From: pure-silver-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:pure-silver-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jean-David Beyer
Sent: Saturday, July 31, 2010 7:27 AM
To: pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [pure-silver] Re: Pushing Arista Edu?
Martin magid wrote:
> Has anyone pushed Arista Edu 100 one or two stops to 200 or 400 using
> D-76? If so, please post your method.
>
I never push film. It does not really increase the speed of the film.
Pushing seems to consist of developing the film longer, at a higher
temperature, or in a more active or more concentrated developer. All any
of that does is increase the contrast.
This can give the appearance of pushing the film, but the shadow detail
that is lost by underexposure does not appear by doing this. If the film
is developed normally to get the contrast you want, overdeveloping
merely raises the contrast, so what is there on the film will be too
contrasty. This may give a more acceptable appearance, using all the
zones of which the paper is capable, but it does not increase the speed
of the film.
About the only way the typical user can increase the apparent film speed
is to use two-solution development, soaking the film in the first
developer that lacks the the borax, Kodalk, or whatefer, until it is
saturated with developer, and then immersing it in the alkaline solution
until development is complete. I used to use D-25 for the first
solution, but developing it for a shorter time than necessary for normal
development and then completing development in the second solution.
Adding a little sulfite to the second solution is a good idea. I used to
use this as a compensating developer, but it does not compensate (in the
sense of rolling off the higher zones); it raises the density of the
lower zones. Trouble is that the contrast of the lower zones is reduced,
which is the opposite of what I normally would wish to achieve.
My solution, where higher speed from the film is required, is to use a
higher speed film in the first place. Or supplementary lighting (e.g.,
flash, reflectors, etc.).
--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org
^^-^^ 07:15:01 up 6 days, 10:07, 4 users, load average: 4.62, 4.56, 4.51
============================================================================
=================================
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.
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 5328 (20100731) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
http://www.eset.com
============================================================================
=================================
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.
=======
Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found.
(Email Guard: 7.0.0.18, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.15550)
http://www.pctools.com/
=======
=============================================================================================================
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:
