Large Format Film Negative With Ilford's Perceptol Developer

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 10 вер 2024
  • Spencer Pullen shows you his developed negative from his last large format photography shoot. In this video, he will show you how he crops and sets his white and black points in Adobe Camera RAW. Spencer will also discuss how he developed his film to achieve the results with Ilford's Perceptol black and white developer.
    Mixing Ilford's Perceptol Black and White Developer: • Perceptol - An Ilford ...
    Photographing with Ilford's Perceptol Developer: • Photographing for Ilfo...
    Check out my blog: spencerpullen....
    You can also reach me on Facebook: / spencerpullenphotography
    Instagram: / spencerpullenphoto

КОМЕНТАРІ • 35

  • @SteveONions
    @SteveONions 6 років тому +1

    Interesting result Spencer, not least the fact that those highlights held so well. I'm not surprised that D76 came out on top, it has been a standard for years.

    • @SpencerPullenPhotography
      @SpencerPullenPhotography  6 років тому

      D76 has done well for me, so why change what works? As always, thanks for watching!

  • @thomaspopple2291
    @thomaspopple2291 6 років тому +1

    I just recently switched to D76 so hearing you say you preferred it makes me feel like I made the right choice. I really like D76 for all the reasons you mentioned.

    • @SpencerPullenPhotography
      @SpencerPullenPhotography  6 років тому

      Thanks for watching! I have had really good luck with D76. It holds highlight and shadow detail well in high contrast scenes with FP4 for me. As I have been told it’s one of the “standard” developers that many folks have on the shelf.

    • @randallstewart175
      @randallstewart175 6 років тому +1

      Actually, it is THE standard developer, long ago adopted by the ASA as its reference developer against which all others are measured, for better or worse.

  • @jimb2500
    @jimb2500 Рік тому +1

    Hi Professor, Does Percpetol have a strong odor or fume to it when mixing?

    • @SpencerPullenPhotography
      @SpencerPullenPhotography  Рік тому

      It’s been a little while since I’ve used it. I don’t remember it having a strong smell. I believe D76 had a stronger odor. Thanks!

  • @steveh1273
    @steveh1273 6 років тому +1

    Turned out very well. It helps that scanning can see through a lot of density and then the factor that Photoshop can edit with lots of control. It is another story if printing in the darkroom where pesky highlights can cause burning issues. Yes, placing your shadows on zone 5 works well (you get the shadow detail and then lower the shadow values when you stretch the histogram),

    • @SpencerPullenPhotography
      @SpencerPullenPhotography  6 років тому

      Appreciate the comment! Scanning allows me to play with large format without having a darkroom. Also, as you mentioned a program like Photoshop adds another layer of control. Someday I would like to see what there is to making a silver print. Thanks!

    • @randallstewart175
      @randallstewart175 6 років тому +2

      Before you move into the darkroom, you might consider shooting some new negatives for the purpose. Your process plan here gives you huge margins for error when scanning. However, from the darkroom, you are over exposing your negs about 3 stops and then compensating for what would then be blown highlights by "pull" processing about 3 stops. With that extreme degree of image compression, your current negatives are going to prove hellish to print by "wet process".

    • @SpencerPullenPhotography
      @SpencerPullenPhotography  6 років тому

      I’ll make note of that before I give that a go. Thanks for the advice.

    • @jakobolszewski6034
      @jakobolszewski6034 6 років тому

      Randall Stewart: This is the reason that I am still not sure if I should start again with my own darkroom instead of hybrid process. The space and the gear is not an issue in my case but I recognize very well the former times in my darkroom as a teenager and I was not always happy with the results.

  • @jakobolszewski6034
    @jakobolszewski6034 6 років тому +1

    Very informative and interesting as always! I am not very surprised that the negatives have turned good. The difference of 2 stops (zone V instead of III for the shadows) can easily be compensated by FP4. It would be interesting to see how it works when the contrast range is much bigger. If you would like to go back for D-76 you can also try Xtol which is almost the same formula environmental friendly due to ascorbic acid instead of metol. At the moment it’s my favorite combination with the FP4 in the dilution 1:1 @ 80ASA. The grain is even smaller than using D76

    • @SpencerPullenPhotography
      @SpencerPullenPhotography  6 років тому +1

      Thanks for watching as always! I looked at Xtol and liked the characteristics that it has, however I'm a little leary since many have mentioned about the "sudden death" syndrome. Have you experienced this? Thanks!

    • @jakobolszewski6034
      @jakobolszewski6034 6 років тому +1

      The sudden death is not an issue anymore. It was an issue years ago short after the market launch of Xtol. As the result Kodak has slightly modified the formula. Old story thus. In my workflow I use only 2.5l of water (50%) to make the Xtol concentrate. It has several advantages: longer date of expiry (12 months +) even if I don’t really need that and it’s easier to store. Instead of 1:1 dilution you will need to proceed with 1:3 and 1:3 results in 1:5 and so on because it’s more concentrated.

    • @randallstewart175
      @randallstewart175 6 років тому +2

      Just to avoid confusing others, please note that phenidone is the replacement for metol in Xtol and its several copy-formulas. Xtol also adds ascorbic acid, which seems to preform a superadditive effect in combination with the primary developer(s). For those few who give a hoot about such matters, there's a couple of articles by Pat Gainer in the now-gone Photo Techniques magazine which explores and tests the alternative effects of ascordbic acid, salt, and other additives enhance the performance of B&W developers. That there is a positive effect was confirmed, but why or how it works was never worked out (or at least not published) prior to Gainer's passing.

    • @jakobolszewski6034
      @jakobolszewski6034 6 років тому

      Thanks for the clarification!

  • @granthobgood3028
    @granthobgood3028 6 років тому +1

    Love the update, and great image.

  • @cac7979
    @cac7979 6 років тому +1

    if i had talent like this i would never play poker:) good stuff mac

    • @SpencerPullenPhotography
      @SpencerPullenPhotography  6 років тому

      LOL! I'm a little better at this than poker. Appreciate you taking the time to watch. If you haven't seen some of my crazy adventures, you my like this one from Old Car City in Georgia: ua-cam.com/video/AldL-jY39us/v-deo.html

  • @peinmilan
    @peinmilan Рік тому

    As far as I understand you only used 1/4 of the recommended amount of stock developer per 8x10 sheet. (62ml instead of 250ml recommended) That might influence the quality of the negative.

  • @jmdavis45
    @jmdavis45 4 роки тому +1

    Why did you switch from Pyrocat?

    • @SpencerPullenPhotography
      @SpencerPullenPhotography  4 роки тому

      jmdavis45 I was curious to see what it could do. Was interested to see how other developers worked. It’s fun! Thanks!

  • @jamesmerecki3128
    @jamesmerecki3128 6 років тому +1

    Thanks for sharing Spencer...very informative. My personal favorite is D-76. Question, Have you ever encountered humidity issues with your Zone VI shooting in Florida (ex. lens fogging up) or the movement from a car with AC to an outside humid condition? I live in the northeast and shoot with a 4x5, but never really experienced humidity issues up here. thx again. Best, James

    • @SpencerPullenPhotography
      @SpencerPullenPhotography  6 років тому

      Thanks for watching! During the summer the lenses can get fogged up. Sometimes what I’ll do is drive to the location with the windows down. This helps equalize the temp. It’s not comfortable but helps when I get on location.

  • @buyaport
    @buyaport 6 років тому +1

    Interesting video. I would consider Fomapan 200 (rated at 100 ASA) instead of FP4+, as is it half the price and gives at least the same results, at least for me.

  • @keimahane
    @keimahane 6 років тому +1

    As always, great video. BTW, @7:08 did you say "I can bring my highlights down a 'scosh' if I wanna," as in the American slang way of saying sukoshi? I ask because my Navy buddies and I used to say that all the time while I was stationed in Yokosuka, Japan through the 80's and 90's. Just wondering, anyway, thanks for the video, keep up the great work.

    • @SpencerPullenPhotography
      @SpencerPullenPhotography  6 років тому

      Thanks for watching! You are correct. However, in this case, it’s meant as in “just a little”. Thanks!

    • @keimahane
      @keimahane 6 років тому +1

      Yes, that is how we used it too. It has been a while since the last time I heard it, so it stood out when I heard you say it :)

  • @Igaluit
    @Igaluit 6 років тому +1

    Seems large format negs don't need Perceptol at all.

    • @SpencerPullenPhotography
      @SpencerPullenPhotography  6 років тому

      After trying a few developers, they seem to do well with all developers. Thanks!

    • @Igaluit
      @Igaluit 6 років тому +2

      Yes, of course, but usually people who do 35mm work use it to be able to make larger enlargements without visible grain. I've used microphen instead of regular devs and worked just fine.

    • @jakobolszewski6034
      @jakobolszewski6034 6 років тому

      Igaluit: Interesting. Does Microphen provide better results in this matter for 135 film in your opinion?

    • @Igaluit
      @Igaluit 6 років тому +3

      I'ved used Microphen only when using Delta 3200. It gives nicer results for the negatives when and while enhancing film speed. It also seemed to do well with T-Max. It doesn't matter if it's in 135 or 120, the result is the same. If sharpness is more important, X-tol or ID-11/D-76, diluted 1:3 will give good results. More than that, it's Rodinal (which I used to use often), though I find the tones in the photographs are not as nice with it. That being said, it really comes down to finding the right (adjusted) film speed and development time for your film - in one developer. When you do that, things fall into place and printing or post-processing is a pleasure rather than a nightmare.