How to develop over-exposed film

Discussion in 'Darkroom Developing and Printing' started by uraniumcommittee, Dec 9, 2004.

  1. You must over-develop it. The common approach of reducing development
    of over-exposed film leaves you with very low contrast and a
    poor-looking print. By over-developing it, you get some contrast back.
    True, the neg will be very dense, but the prints will have better
    contrast.
     
    uraniumcommittee, Dec 9, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. This is the most useless and incorrect dreck you have posted to date!
    Except that you were one of the worlds best printers...THAT one will
    stand the test of time as being the most incorrect statement to ever
    cross the bandwidth of the net!

    Over exposed and over developed negs actually REDUCE contrast and if
    you knew anything about B&W, you would know that. Sheesh, try and get
    SOMETHING right once in a while.

    BTW, I'm STILL waiting for that print you promised about 3 months ago
    to show your "talent". Guess we both know you have none.
     
    ScarpettiKnowsNothing, Dec 10, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. uraniumcommittee

    jjs Guest

    (said softly) - Please use quoting, otherwise your post hang unsupported in
    the air to look like mad ravings.
     
    jjs, Dec 10, 2004
    #3
  4. Development controls contrast. Longer development means greater
    contrast. Overexposure causes loss of contrast. Increasing development
    of overexposed negatives will offer better contrast than
    underdevelopment of overexposed negatives.

    Try it and see.
     
    uraniumcommittee, Dec 10, 2004
    #4
  5. I'm getting some new enlarging equipment. After that.
     
    uraniumcommittee, Dec 10, 2004
    #5
  6. The question is what can you do with an overexposed negative to get the
    most contrast (assuming that's what is needed):

    1. Under-develop it
    2. Develop it normally
    3. Over-develop it

    Answer: 3
     
    uraniumcommittee, Dec 10, 2004
    #6
  7. Oppsy. sorry about that. New to the new Google format.
     
    ScarpettiKnowsNothing, Dec 10, 2004
    #7
  8. No shit Sherlock. But you get to the point, very quickly, that the
    increased dev. benefit doesn't work, and in fact decreases your
    contrast. With over exposed negs the best is to pull it a little...how
    much depends on how over it is. Next is continue with normal
    development. Worst is your suggestion.

    Now THOSE are facts, and I've got several hundred thousand rolls of
    development under my belt to back it up.
     
    ScarpettiKnowsNothing, Dec 10, 2004
    #8
  9. They just keep coming and coming and coming...the excuses that is.

    Wake me when you finally decide to do it, although I might be dead at
    the rate you are going.
     
    ScarpettiKnowsNothing, Dec 10, 2004
    #9
  10. I had not planned on this. The evenness of the illumination of the
    condenser is not quite right. The center is a little too hot. I'm going
    to try another head, and mess with the bulb a little.
     
    uraniumcommittee, Dec 10, 2004
    #10
  11. I had not planned on this. The evenness of the illumination of the
    condenser is not quite right. The center is a little too hot. I'm going
    to try another head, and mess with the bulb a little.
     
    uraniumcommittee, Dec 10, 2004
    #11
  12. That might work (1) if the slope of the film curve was a straight line
    indefinitely and (2) you did not have to deal with reciprocity failure
    when printing from an overdense negative.

    1. The real world limitation is that virtually every film develops a
    shoulder a couple of stops above the standard range of stops for which a
    negative is usually developed. Overexposure pushes the film in the
    direction of the shoulder to begin with and overdevelopment pushes it
    even farther in that direction. This itself reduces contrast. The
    corollary of your advice would be to underdevelop underexposed film.
    That won't work because the stops will all be pushed into the toe of the
    curve. So the traditional advice to underdevelop overexposed film is
    the only way to compensate so as to keep the negative's density range in
    the straight line part of the typical film curve.

    2. Besides being a real pain to deal with on the enlarger [focusing,
    length of exposure to obtain an image], overexposed, overdeveloped
    negatives strain the paper's reciprocity failure limits. When dealing
    with long exposures - 2+ minutes - there is also the concern about
    fogging from the safelight, a risk which may require the exposure to be
    done without the safelight on.


    Francis A. Miniter
     
    Francis A. Miniter, Dec 10, 2004
    #12
  13. OK, Alexis, what were you drinking last night?
     
    uraniumcommittee, Dec 10, 2004
    #13
  14. uraniumcommittee

    friend® Guest

    On 10 Dec 2004 11:42:34 -0800, wrote:

    *
    *ScarpettiKnowsNothing wrote:
    *> This is the most useless and incorrect dreck you have posted to date!
    *> Except that you were one of the worlds best printers...THAT one will
    *> stand the test of time as being the most incorrect statement to ever
    *> cross the bandwidth of the net!
    *>
    *> Over exposed and over developed negs actually REDUCE contrast and if
    *> you knew anything about B&W, you would know that. Sheesh, try and
    *get
    *> SOMETHING right once in a while.
    *>
    *> BTW, I'm STILL waiting for that print you promised about 3 months ago
    *> to show your "talent". Guess we both know you have none.
    *
    *Development controls contrast. Longer development means greater
    *contrast.

    it is true for certain time, after that dmin rises so much that the
    contrast goes down


    *Overexposure causes loss of contrast.

    incorrect; overexposure causes increased density. depending on a film,
    it MAY cause change of contrast, but MAY NOT.

    *Increasing development
    *of overexposed negatives will offer better contrast than
    *underdevelopment of overexposed negatives.

    Inceasing dev time for overexposed film does not make sense at all.
    The film should be developed normally, fixed and washed then ASSESSED
    by eye. Then bleached in soln containing acidified copper sulfate and
    sodium chloride (common salt). Washed, dried - then try to print. If
    OK, stop. If not OK, redevelop in soft working developer under control
    (until density/contrast are acceptable)
    Bleached negs, image formed by AgCl have more details than those
    formed by metallic Ag, can be successfuly printed. If you prfere,
    redevelop to desired contrast/density, refix and wash.

    I'll give you one good advice once given to me - an experiment is
    better than speculation.

    Try it and see.
    *
    *Try it and see.
     
    friend®, Dec 11, 2004
    #14
  15. uraniumcommittee

    Frank Pittel Guest

    Please, ignore the troll!!

    : This is the most useless and incorrect dreck you have posted to date!
    : Except that you were one of the worlds best printers...THAT one will
    : stand the test of time as being the most incorrect statement to ever
    : cross the bandwidth of the net!

    : Over exposed and over developed negs actually REDUCE contrast and if
    : you knew anything about B&W, you would know that. Sheesh, try and get
    : SOMETHING right once in a while.

    : BTW, I'm STILL waiting for that print you promised about 3 months ago
    : to show your "talent". Guess we both know you have none.


    --




    Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
     
    Frank Pittel, Dec 11, 2004
    #15
  16. uraniumcommittee

    Frank Pittel Guest

    Please, ignore the troll.



    : That might work (1) if the slope of the film curve was a straight line
    : indefinitely and (2) you did not have to deal with reciprocity failure
    : when printing from an overdense negative.

    : 1. The real world limitation is that virtually every film develops a
    : shoulder a couple of stops above the standard range of stops for which a
    : negative is usually developed. Overexposure pushes the film in the
    : direction of the shoulder to begin with and overdevelopment pushes it
    : even farther in that direction. This itself reduces contrast. The
    : corollary of your advice would be to underdevelop underexposed film.
    : That won't work because the stops will all be pushed into the toe of the
    : curve. So the traditional advice to underdevelop overexposed film is
    : the only way to compensate so as to keep the negative's density range in
    : the straight line part of the typical film curve.

    : 2. Besides being a real pain to deal with on the enlarger [focusing,
    : length of exposure to obtain an image], overexposed, overdeveloped
    : negatives strain the paper's reciprocity failure limits. When dealing
    : with long exposures - 2+ minutes - there is also the concern about
    : fogging from the safelight, a risk which may require the exposure to be
    : done without the safelight on.


    : Francis A. Miniter

    --




    Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
     
    Frank Pittel, Dec 11, 2004
    #16
  17. MOST of the time moderately severe overexposure will result in flat
    negatives when coupled with normal development, and useless negatives
    with reduced development. Reducing development will produce a thinner
    negative to be sure, but it will only exacerbate the low contrast and
    is not a good approach.

    Increasing development will add a little contrast. Reducing the final
    result will then allow for a thinner negative, just as you point out.

    A sub-proportional reducer is the way to go if normal development is
    used, a proportion reducer if over-development is used.
     
    uraniumcommittee, Dec 11, 2004
    #17
  18. Nothing. You?
     
    ScarpettiKnowsNothing, Dec 13, 2004
    #18
  19. oh brother. Give it a rest.
     
    ScarpettiKnowsNothing, Dec 13, 2004
    #19
  20. uraniumcommittee

    Frank Pittel Guest

    I thought you wanted to help get rid of the troll. If you do ignore him.

    --




    Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
     
    Frank Pittel, Dec 13, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.