Ilford Delta 400 on HC-110
- Thread starter benwal
- Start date
Hi,
Dark negs = Overexposed as you said or it could be overdeveloped.
Though not an exact science, overdeveloper = contrasty with lesser midtones.
overexposed, more grey and not contrasty, the picture could be more grainy as a
result and less sharp.
The problem with the above is that most of us turn
on AutoExposure during scanning, making it hard to
evaluate the scan. Furthermore, scannings requires
adjustments in Photoshop, ie. the curves segment.
Making an educated guess without seeing your negatives
or your scan process, I would say over-exposed is more likely.
You have to adjust in PS curves.
cheers!
raytoei
Dark negs = Overexposed as you said or it could be overdeveloped.
Though not an exact science, overdeveloper = contrasty with lesser midtones.
overexposed, more grey and not contrasty, the picture could be more grainy as a
result and less sharp.
The problem with the above is that most of us turn
on AutoExposure during scanning, making it hard to
evaluate the scan. Furthermore, scannings requires
adjustments in Photoshop, ie. the curves segment.
Making an educated guess without seeing your negatives
or your scan process, I would say over-exposed is more likely.
You have to adjust in PS curves.
cheers!
raytoei
Hi, I am not sure if you could share with us another shot? It's rather difficult to judge tones by just one shot.
I maybe wrong to say this, but the shot looks perfectly fine to me. You could have taken the shot in a flat lighting situation, oAsif could be taken in a situation where the majority of the chromatic values are the same. Eg. The skin tone of the lady could be the same chromatic value with her background (dark tanned skin on earth tone colored bricks). Hence resulting to flat tones. If you'd see her dark sarong, presumably black, the tone looks correct there.
Then again it's just my observation. Shooting b&w are not as easy as colour, as you have to observe tones instead of colour when you are out shooting.
Hope this helps.
I maybe wrong to say this, but the shot looks perfectly fine to me. You could have taken the shot in a flat lighting situation, oAsif could be taken in a situation where the majority of the chromatic values are the same. Eg. The skin tone of the lady could be the same chromatic value with her background (dark tanned skin on earth tone colored bricks). Hence resulting to flat tones. If you'd see her dark sarong, presumably black, the tone looks correct there.
Then again it's just my observation. Shooting b&w are not as easy as colour, as you have to observe tones instead of colour when you are out shooting.
Hope this helps.
benwal
Member
Thanks guys for all the advice and comments... gives me more to think about.
Ray, I think I did overexpose. I actually trusted the metering on the Voigtlander for these few rolls, which I'm quite sure by comparing with my lightmeter, is not accurate. So there could be a case of exposure problems.
Clipper, interesting observation. There were quite a lot of the same chromatic value, thought the light was definitely not flat. I was concerned about how strong the light and shadows were actually, which explains my shock when the shots came out like this.
i love film, I'll be correcting these shots on photoshop in the end, to save some of them that I think are nice.
Thanks again
Ray, I think I did overexpose. I actually trusted the metering on the Voigtlander for these few rolls, which I'm quite sure by comparing with my lightmeter, is not accurate. So there could be a case of exposure problems.
Clipper, interesting observation. There were quite a lot of the same chromatic value, thought the light was definitely not flat. I was concerned about how strong the light and shadows were actually, which explains my shock when the shots came out like this.
i love film, I'll be correcting these shots on photoshop in the end, to save some of them that I think are nice.
Thanks again
benwal
Member
On another note, I encountered something very strange today.
I shot a roll of 120 Tmax400. Very sure I loaded the film correctly into my Mamiya.
When I was developing, the first step i took was to rinse the film in the developing tank with water. When I poured the water out it was DARK BLUE!
Imagine my shock! Half of me wanted to just stop developing then and there, but i carried out the whole process.
The result? A whole roll of BLANK negs! I can see the faint lines seperating the frames but nothing else!
Could it be that rinsing with water is bad??? I felt like I washed away the photos!
Anyone faced the same problems before?
Cheers, but not so cheerfully anymore,
Larry
I shot a roll of 120 Tmax400. Very sure I loaded the film correctly into my Mamiya.
When I was developing, the first step i took was to rinse the film in the developing tank with water. When I poured the water out it was DARK BLUE!
Imagine my shock! Half of me wanted to just stop developing then and there, but i carried out the whole process.
The result? A whole roll of BLANK negs! I can see the faint lines seperating the frames but nothing else!
Could it be that rinsing with water is bad??? I felt like I washed away the photos!
Anyone faced the same problems before?
Cheers, but not so cheerfully anymore,
Larry
hi. i use tmax 400 all the time. i pre-rinse it for about 5mins, and yes the water is dark blue.
this is the anti-halation layer which prevents the light from bouncing back from the emulsion layer.
i do not have any problems. i would suggest you check your chemicals or your mamiya.
this is the anti-halation layer which prevents the light from bouncing back from the emulsion layer.
i do not have any problems. i would suggest you check your chemicals or your mamiya.
benwal
Member
Sigh.... I found out the reason. I loaded incorrectly into the magazine...
Thanks though... now I know blue water is normal.
Thanks though... now I know blue water is normal.
Similar threads
