My film developing times [Archive] - Rangefinderforum.com

Chriscrawfordphoto

03-28-2010, 15:56

I've put up a page on my website where I've posted all of my tested film developing times with the EI I use and times for normal and N-1 (reduced contrast) developing for the three developers I use (Tmax, Rodinal, and D-76) and the various films that I have tested. I get asked a lot what times I use and how I develop to get the quality that I get, so I decided to post it up for everyone to see and use. N-Joy!

http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com/technical/developing.php

snausages

03-28-2010, 16:08

Very generous of you Chris.

I can vouch that Chris' development recipes yield terrific results.

Shac

03-28-2010, 16:28

Chris - Thank you. Very useful to help me zero in on mine
David

gb hill

03-28-2010, 16:41

Chris, your b&w work is incredible! Thank you for this!

charjohncarter

03-28-2010, 16:52

Yes, thanks, I haven't looked at your site yet, but as soon as I finish this stupid post, I will.

helenhill

03-28-2010, 16:58

its now 'BOOKMARKED'....Thanx :D
Cheers- h

jpa66

03-28-2010, 16:58

Hey man - thanks a lot. Your insights and experience on development has always been appreciated by me. Thanks for posting that stuff.

charjohncarter

03-28-2010, 17:01

I looked at the one developer that I use and the two (2) films that I also use. My times are a little bit longer but not a great variation from yours, thanks again.

Chriscrawfordphoto

03-28-2010, 17:16

I looked at the one developer that I use and the two (2) films that I also use. My times are a little bit longer but not a great variation from yours, thanks again.

Carter, are you scanning your film or printing in the darkroom? Those times are based on scanning in my Nikon LS-8000 but the negs I'm getting look very similar to my older negs that I developed back when I had a darkroom to print. Small time differences aren't that big of deal, your exact time will depend on what type of enlarger you have, what papers you print on, and what scanner and scanner software you use if you scan like I do.

Chriscrawfordphoto

03-28-2010, 17:17

I'm glad I could help everyone. I'm going to add to it some more later with some examples done with the different combos and my opinions on what films I like best on each developer.

robklurfield

03-28-2010, 17:18

thanks for the link and the charts. great website, btw.

maggieo

03-28-2010, 18:13

Cool beans, Chris!! Thanks!

charjohncarter

03-28-2010, 19:38

Carter, are you scanning your film or printing in the darkroom? Those times are based on scanning in my Nikon LS-8000 but the negs I'm getting look very similar to my older negs that I developed back when I had a darkroom to print. Small time differences aren't that big of deal, your exact time will depend on what type of enlarger you have, what papers you print on, and what scanner and scanner software you use if you scan like I do.

Neither, I copy my negatives with my own copying device.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3175/2860872771_b9d6ababfe.jpg

Juan Valdenebro

03-28-2010, 19:59

Chriscrawfordphoto

03-28-2010, 21:01

Hi Chris, your recommended time (last week) of 8.5 minutes at 20ºC for TMax100 under direct sun in Rodinal 1+50 was really close to my finding of 11 minutes at 18ºC... Thanks for a list of times I will trust any time...

Cheers,

Juan

Did the 8.5 minutes work for you? I told you that from memory and when I checked my motes, it should have been 8 minutes, which I have correct on my site now. 30 seconds probably won't be a huge difference though.

Chriscrawfordphoto

03-28-2010, 21:23

Neither, I copy my negatives with my own copying device.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3175/2860872771_b9d6ababfe.jpg

Interesting system! Do negs that print nicely in the darkroom look good shot with your system straight from the camera (after inverting) or do they need a lot of contrast added, like my film scans always do?

raytoei@gmail.com

03-28-2010, 21:48

Chris, thanks ! I save a copy in pdf format. I hope you continue to update it, both in the film development time and the scanning portion. raytoei

Chriscrawfordphoto

03-28-2010, 22:29

I just added the scanning page, which needs a lot more work. And I had forgotten to put the D-76 time for Neopan 1600, so its added now.

Juan Valdenebro

03-29-2010, 03:16

Did the 8.5 minutes work for you? I told you that from memory and when I checked my motes, it should have been 8 minutes, which I have correct on my site now. 30 seconds probably won't be a huge difference though.

Although I didn't try any developing time at 20ºC (I use 18ºC with Rodinal always) my best contact prints were from scenes exposed at ISO25 incident with yellow filter and developed for 11 minutes at 18ºC. I guess that's very close to your time...

And you were right: tone of TMax100 in Rodinal is fantastic! Now that I have seen how both 100 and 400 TMax films behave under harsh and soft lights, I guess I won't try any other film for long... I just hope Kodak keeps making them for many years, so I can shoot them and enjoy them for the rest of their lifespan... After comparing, for me TMax is as good as it gets!

Cheers,

Juan

sig

03-29-2010, 03:30

Thanks, I will try this

batterytypehah!

03-29-2010, 04:05

Many, many thanks, Chris. This is exceptionally generous. I think all of us would understand if you had kept this info a trade secret.

charjohncarter, that is one slick setup. I like the alpaca (?) figurine watching over it all.

charjohncarter

03-29-2010, 06:41

Interesting system! Do negs that print nicely in the darkroom look good shot with your system straight from the camera (after inverting) or do they need a lot of contrast added, like my film scans always do?

I adjust the shutter speed and F stop by looking at the histogram, and then it is usually just a convert and some levels. I hardly ever use curves. This old negative was a great print in 1971, and I recently did it over from the negative. This is the negative done with the digital copier:

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1203/531898025_b17fc244b4.jpg

Chriscrawfordphoto

03-29-2010, 11:17

I adjust the shutter speed and F stop by looking at the histogram, and then it is usually just a convert and some levels. I hardly ever use curves. This old negative was a great print in 1971, and I recently did it over from the negative. This is the negative done with the digital copier:

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1203/531898025_b17fc244b4.jpg

That looks very nice. The scanner I have produces very low-contrast results that need heavy curves adjustments to make them look good.

bmasonoh

03-29-2010, 11:33

This is very generous of you Chris. For a noob like me this type of info is worth its weight in gold. Thanks!

jan normandale

03-29-2010, 11:46

Chris, great spread sheet! I'm wondering if you have any jpgs of Tmax done in Tmax Developer and Tmax in Rodinal for comparisons

Slightly OT... what are your thoughts on HC110 if you have used it

Chriscrawfordphoto

03-29-2010, 12:00

Chris, great spread sheet! I'm wondering if you have any jpgs of Tmax done in Tmax Developer and Tmax in Rodinal for comparisons

Slightly OT... what are your thoughts on HC110 if you have used it

I don't really because I have used Tmax 100 in Rodinal a lot, and in D-76, but not in Tmax Developer. I have used Tmax 400-2 in Tmax Developer and D76. I did try one roll of Tmax 400-2 in Rodinal 1+50 but it was a little too contrasty. I guessed on the dev. time since AGFA's Rodinal datasheet times are for the old Tmax 400, not the new one. I developed a little long but never got around to trying again, as the results from D-76 and Tmax are so good with this film. I should try it again though

HC-110 is made for large labs to operate cheaply. Its only virtue is long life and low price. There are other developers that give better results. Tonality is similar to D-76 but with more grain.

radi(c)al_cam

03-29-2010, 12:09

you are really really cool, Chris.
thank you!

jan normandale

03-29-2010, 17:13

Chris thanks for the comments. I'm looking at your page now and at the bottom it shows Kodak Tmax Developer and Tmax

You wrote that you don't / haven't used Tmax Developer with Tmax 100. So you only use Tmax 400 with Tmax Developer and Tmax 100 only with Rodinal and D-76.

D-76 for Tmax 100 or Tmax 400
Rodinal for Tmax 100 only
Tmax Dev for Tmax 400 only

How about some jpgs from Tmax Developer and D-76 using the Tmax 400?

Chriscrawfordphoto

03-29-2010, 17:24

Jan,

Here you go:

http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com/family-snapshots/leica/images/leica2.jpg
Tmax 400-2 in Tmax Developer 1+7

http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com/family-snapshots/leica/images/leica7.jpg
Tmax 400-2 in Tmax Developer 1+7

http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com/family-snapshots/leica/images/leica15.jpg
Tmax 400-2 in Tmax Developer 1+7

http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com/fine_art/portfolio/doll-house/images/fullsize/dolls40.jpg
Tmax 400-2 in Tmax Developer 1+7

http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com/fine_art/portfolio/abandoned/images/pics/lebanon-park.jpg
Tmax 400-2 in D-76 1+1

http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com/fine_art/portfolio/waynedale/images/imagefiles/elwoods-sign.jpg
Tmax 400-2 in D-76 1+1

http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com/fine_art/portfolio/waynedale/images/imagefiles/insert-politicians.jpg
Tmax 400-2 in D-76 1+1

http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com/fine_art/portfolio/mack/images/fullsize/mack-june08-1.jpg
Tmax 400-2 in D-76 1+1

http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com/fine_art/portfolio/people/images/pics/sara-dukes1.jpg
Tmax 400-2 in D-76 1+1

http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com/fine_art/portfolio/people/images/pics/cathie-rowand1.jpg
Tmax 400-2 in D-76 1+1

http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com/fine_art/portfolio/people/images/pics/sarah-turner1.jpg
Tmax 400-2 in D-76 1+1

jan normandale

03-29-2010, 17:37

Chriscrawfordphoto

03-29-2010, 17:51

thanks Chris. It's always tough looking at a screen but it looks like the D76 yields deeper darks than the Tmax Developer in the 400. Is that what you find?

BWT, fun shot of your son.. IIRC I saw your portrait a couple of years ago, I think he looks a lot like you

Developer doesn't affect how deep blacks are, you can always get deeper blacks by printing darker or using higher contrast paper, or using curves to darken the blacks in photoshop.

I think the difference you see if the difference in the tone curves you get with the two developers. Tmax Developer gives a very straight line with an abrupt short toe and no shoulder until its overexposed several stops (so the whites in a normally exposed neg will still be on the straight line section of the curve.

D-76 1+1 gives a more traditional tone curve to the Tmax 400 film, with a gentle longer toe and a shouldering off of the highlights that shows in the whites on a normally exposed and developed negative. This makes the D76 image look like it has more shadow detail and softer highlights than you get with Tmax Developer even if both films are exposed to give a zone I tone of .1 above base+fog, which is how film speeds are determined, and even if both are developed to identical contrast index.

jan normandale

03-29-2010, 18:26

heh Chris, I can see I'm going to have to do some studying if I want to continue this discussion with you.

;D

ldhayden@mac.co

03-29-2010, 18:47

I'll just reiterate the previous thanks from the other posts. Thanks for posting this information.

Chriscrawfordphoto

03-29-2010, 19:22

heh Chris, I can see I'm going to have to do some studying if I want to continue this discussion with you.

;D

hehe I have studied the chemistry behind how silver-based photography works. I'm one of those people who has to know absolutely everything and it frustrates me that no one can! Here's a cool factoid: grab a box of women's hair dye next time you go to Walmart or the drugstore. Look at the ingredients. Most contain 3 or 4 of the following chemicals:

p-phenylenediamine

1, 4 dihydroxy Benzene

1, 4 diaminobenzene hydrochloride (AKA p-aminophenol HCL)

m-methyl p-aminophenol sulfate

4-hydroxymethyl 4-methyl 1-phenyl 3-pyrozolidone

All of the aforementioned chemicals are organic chemicals used in photography as developing agents. The first one is used in color developers. The second is Hydroquinone. The third if the main ingredient in Rodinal. The fourth is Metol and the last one is Dimezone, a more stable form of phenidone used in most modern liquid developers. They're all used in hair dyes!

jan normandale

03-29-2010, 19:35

Chris I agree with your approach, I think the more you understand the better chance you have of getting the results you are looking for.

Thanks for the info!

maddoc

03-29-2010, 20:02

Good work ! I am interested to know, why you use Tmax in 1 :7 and not standard 1 : 4.

hehe I have studied the chemistry behind how silver-based photography works. I'm one of those people who has to know absolutely everything and it frustrates me that no one can! Here's a cool factoid: grab a box of women's hair dye next time you go to Walmart or the drugstore. Look at the ingredients. Most contain 3 or 4 of the following chemicals:

p-phenylenediamine

1, 4 dihydroxy Benzene

1, 4 diaminobenzene hydrochloride (AKA p-aminophenol HCL)

m-methyl p-aminophenol sulfate

4-hydroxymethyl 4-methyl 1-phenyl 3-pyrozolidone

All of the aforementioned chemicals are organic chemicals used in photography as developing agents. The first one is used in color developers. The second is Hydroquinone. The third if the main ingredient in Rodinal. The fourth is Metol and the last one is Dimezone, a more stable form of phenidone used in most modern liquid developers. They're all used in hair dyes!

Chriscrawfordphoto

03-29-2010, 20:11

Good work ! I am interested to know, why you use Tmax in 1 :7 and not standard 1 : 4.

Developing times for most films are just too short with the 1+4 dilution. Kodak's recommended time for TMY-2 in Tmax Developer 1+4 is only 6.75 minutes. I like to keep times closer to ten minutes because I have had uniformity problem with shorter times on occasion. That's pretty much it. I have not seen a difference in image quality between the 1+4 and 1+7 dilutions, it gives longer dev. times that I like, and it makes a bottle of developer last longer since you use less of the concentrate...although thats of minimal importance. If you have a choice between quality and money, quality is ALWAYS more important. These chemicals are not horridly expensive anyway. In this case, I save money and get good quality.

maddoc

03-29-2010, 20:17

Chris, thank you ! So I presume, that you use 1 :7 as one-shot developer then ?

Chriscrawfordphoto

03-29-2010, 20:21

Chris, thank you ! So I presume, that you use 1 :7 as one-shot developer then ?

Yeah. I forgot that you can use the 1+4 more than once, but I never do that with any developer. One shot gives more consistent results, even with developers that can be reused. The 1+7 can't be reused though, not strong enough.

maddoc

03-29-2010, 20:26

I agree, using it as one-shot (1 : 7) should give more consistent results. At the moment, I am trying the Tmax 1:4 / re-using route. It looks like as results are quite consistent, even with the slightly exhausted developer (and compensating according to Kodak's recommendations).

Chriscrawfordphoto

03-30-2010, 10:11

I forgot to add the dev. time for Ilford Delta 3200, so thats up, and I have begun adding example images from the different film and developer combinations

robinsonphotography

03-31-2010, 22:30

What a fabulous resource. Just souped some negs (Tri-x and Tmax) with your rodinal times, they turned out great!!

Chriscrawfordphoto

03-31-2010, 23:53

Just added time for two-stop push of Tmax 400 in Tmax Dev. And added Tmax 400 example pics

jmilkins

04-01-2010, 03:49

thank you :cool:thank you :Dthank you !:angel:

Anthony Harvey

04-08-2010, 15:34

Let me add my thanks to all the others, Chris. The new section to your website is already very helpful. But perhaps this is the right time to also say how much I value your contributions to this forum, in words and pictures. Your photos have great aesthetic qualities, not only in composition and tone but also in your choice of subject and in the feeling that is part of the photo. As to your words, I’m always pleased when I see your atavar for the next post in the thread cos I know that something thoughtful and interesting is about to appear. Like many others I expect, I’m always using members’ search to find your posts.

Kind regards,
Anthony

jmcd

04-08-2010, 16:37

Chriscrawfordphoto

04-08-2010, 16:45

Thanks for the great chart, Christopher.

You mention that your N-1 is for sunny days and high contrast. Just to make better sense of your chart (and I might have missed your mentioning it), what kind of light produces your Normal—soft directional or overcast producing soft and/or no shadow?

Normal developing gives a good negative where if you place your darkest area you want full detail retained in on Zone III your brightest white you want detail in should fall on Zone VII. That is what the normal dev. times manufacturers give is designed to do. It works for studio light where you can control light ration and it works most of the time in overcast daylight and soft light with faint shadows. Ansel Adams talked about doing two-stop contractions in very contrasy/harsh light which you do get here most parts of the USA in summer. My testing has shown that N-2 developing doesn't give good results with modern films, makes them look very muddy in the midtones, so I do the N-1 dev. even for very harsh light and I use low contrast paper (if I was in the darkroom) or I maniuplate the contrast in Photoshop if the N-1 developing doesn't reduce contrast enough on the neg.

I carry a spotmeter or use the built in spotmeter on my cameras that have it and use the zone system for exposure and developing. Most people do not and don't understand it well, so I gave the general advice to just use N-1 times for sunny days and that gives great results most of the time.

Chriscrawfordphoto

04-08-2010, 16:46