For the longest time my vision was to shoot the mixer like a product – white background, studio lighting, the works. For more interest I chose to use the glass block window in my dining room. It offered a second light source to the natural window light, back lighting the blender. Moreover, it offered a more structured grid pattern to juxtapose the curves of the mixer.

Photo shoot setup for Gilchrist No. 22

Equipment:

• Mamiya RZ67 ProII with Mamiya SEKOR-Z 110mm f2.8
• Ilford Delta 400; exposure compensation +1 at the meter; 2 sec exposures @ f8 / f5.6
• Tripod, double shutter release and bellows set to 110

Development:

• Pushed 1 stop with Ilford Ilfotech DD-X 1:4 using 4-6 inversions at the top of every minute
• Stop bath for 30sec
• Five minute fix using Ilford Rapid Fixer 1:4
• Water wash for 5 minutes
• Ilfotol rinse for 5 minutes
• Hang dry after film squeegee
• Cut in pairs and sleeves using lint free gloves

Scanning:

• Nikon 9000 ED
• NikonScan
• Scan Science wet scan

Seven of the ten shots were worth further review. About half needed considerable touch up to remove air bubbles caught by the fluid and film.

Lesson 1: Do not develop and then scan immediately. The film is not as flat as it should be causing the edges of the film to lift and air to form pockets.

Lesson 2: Slight surface tension, by applying tape to the edges of the glass and holder, can correct the introduction of bubbles.

The thin grip tape that lines the sides of the Nikon negative holder began the wrinkle, likely due to the slight overflow of Lumina from the mount. From what I can tell this did not have any effect on the scan, possibly do to the ability to focus the scanner. Regardless, the ripples seemed minimal and depressed with the weight of the glass mount.

Once the final scans were complete I imported them into Adobe Lightroom 2 as my digital negatives, performed basic adjustments and then edited the visual defects (dust, bubbles etc) in Adobe Photoshop. Adobe Lightroom 2 offers spot removal, but slows with the number of spots and does not do nearly as good a job as the healing brush in Photoshop. Finally, back in Lightroom to add the final polish.

As a test, I ordered 8×10 inch glossy prints on Fujicolor Crystal Archive paper. The images were exported as JPEG, highest quality, 300ppi and sent to myPhotopipe.com to get printed on their Noritsu or Chromira printers. The results were striking – the quality was  superb and clearly much larger prints could be made with minimal quality loss. Another excellent activity for a follow-on post.

Due to some shipping concerns many of the chemicals you might want to explore will require you to leave the house and explore your local photography store. There are plenty of places where “local” is hours away if it exists at all. If you enjoy ordering online out of convenience or necessity the following shopping list for black and white film development is online ordering friendly. All of these items are generally in stock at B&H Photo and Video. The shopping list below  is what I used to get myself set up having been out of wet darkroom for years. While this list is close to the minimum requirements, it values quality components over lowest budget.

Stock photograph of development tank and 35mm film

Creating a black and white film processing kit for 35mm and 120/220

This list is shared as a wish list over at B&H Photo and Video. That will get you the shopping list without reading all of my thoughts on each item.

Paterson Changing Bag 27” x 30” – This is where you will load the film into the processing tank. Make it stress free by getting a bigger bag. They all store folded up so going cheap here simply makes you stress out when the film or reel is uncooperative.

Paterson Triple Darkroom Timer – You will need to keep track of time and this three alarm timer makes the process flow. It allows you to set up to three steps of your film developing recipe making transition between key steps simple.

Paterson Universal Tank with Reel (Super System 4) – This version requires ~600ml of fluids to cover two roles of 35mm or one roll of 120/220. An alternative would be metal reels, but if you work with medium format film, the cool factor of metal is outweighed by not crimping your film during loading.

Paterson Auto Load Adjustable Reel for Super System 4 Tanks – If you work with 35mm film you will need an additional reel to take advantage of the capacity of the base tank.

Jobo Plastic Graduate 34oz – This is a little large but I like having extra space at the top of mixing containers. The only thing this will not measure accurately will be mixing wetting agent. It can be done, but you might want to get a smaller 25-50ml graduate if you like to be absolute.

Jobo 600ml Storage Bottle Kit (3 white, 1 black) – I tend to process one tank at a time and these bottles keep the exact amount of chemical required for the tank. They are small so you do not need lots of space to work.

Yankee Filter Funnel 16oz with Fine Mesh Stainless Steel Filter – I got this mostly because there never a time where I want dust flowing into the tanks or bottles. Particles like that can attach themselves to your equipment leading to unexpected results.

Paterson Chemical Stirrer – You need something to stir the chemicals and they are all over priced.

Dot Line 2” DLC Stainless Dial Thermometer – While temperature is less critical in black and white, you still need to know the temperature of your chemicals since that is what takes all those generic instructions and plots it on a graph to set your development times. Without one of these if you wanted to maintain a certain temperature it would all be a big guess. This thermometer is short, but perfect for this size of bottle.

Chemicals – Out of convenience I prefer buying chemicals in liquid form. Unless the developer does not come that way, it ensures some level of consistency. I also subscribe to one use mixing. Stop bath and wetting agent can be reused without having significant impact on the final negative. Ilford stop bath will change colors as it exhausts.

• Ilford Ilfotec DD-X Developer
• Ilford Rapid Fixer
• Ilford Ilfostop Stop Bath for B&W
• Ilford Ilfotol Wetting Agent

Delta White Darkroom Cotton Gloves, 4 pair – These are perfect for keeping the oils and perspiration of your hands off of your film. They are inexpensive enough that throwing them out whenever you want won’t hurt your bank account.

Delta Stainless Steel Film Clips, 10 pack – These are pretty good because they require a small footprint to hold your negatives. They have enough weight and have hook letting you add weight or attach it to a string or wire to air dry.

Paterson Film Squeegee – This is one of those things that I use to have, but never loved. It can leave streaks, but it is an effective method for speeding up the drying process.

I am a believer of sticking within brands in an attempt to reduce compatibility issues. Brands of chemicals can be mixed. For example, Ilford DD-X is similar to Kodak’s TMAX developer. Getting started I think establishing a baseline is more important than using a favorite developer or trying something “new”. The minute you develop your first roll, you will see that developing black and white has many points of variability. This shopping list doesn’t include the kitchen sink, which is also required. Some people like distilled water based on bad experiences with dirty film. Create your setup and start processing black and white film to have more influence on your final image.

First, there is film selection. If you have a history shooting film, you already know that films have a variety of different characteristics such as color rendition and grain structure. While films have a published ISO, indicating the speed of the film, it is possible to shoot the film at a variety of speeds yielding a multitude of results. All of these attributes are unique to the analog world of photography. Digital enthusiasts buy software to emulate grain, but fail to enjoy the unique contribution film selection plays in the process of creating an image.

The second ingredient is the exposure of the film. Films are formulated to react at different film speeds or ISO/ASA settings. Often the grain size is implied by the speed – lower ISOs often result in finer grain. In a digital context, lower means less digital noise, however the two are not the same. When shooting film, the photographer can decide to shoot a film at a lower or higher speed than it is rated. For example a 400 speed film can be shot at 800. Film processing needs to be adjusted to accommodate this change, which results in yet another variant in how grain is structured (in the case of black and white film) or dye is shifted (in the case of color film).

Third, developer selection impacts the realization of the negative. People often read about cross processing where slide or color negative film is processed in the other’s chemistry. While color film offers less latitude, black and white film can be drastically impacted by developer selection. Some developers such as Kodak T-MAX and Ilford Ilfotec DD-X are said to create finer grain negatives from the respective brands’ films. Others such as Diafine are said to create a fantastic range of gray, excellent for scanning.

Finally, there is the actual film developing process. The recipe using the developer as part of creating the negative is a critical part of any film realization. Again, color offers less latitude when compared to black and white, but in any case the time the film is exposed to the chosen developer impacts the contrast, color and grain structure of the selected film. Color film is less tolerant of temperature shifts as well, so processing is more rigid overall. In all cases how the film was exposed impacts how long the film should be developed to compensate. That said, it is up to the film processor to decide the correct compensation for the intended effect.

Processing black and white film is relatively easy and while it has been several years since I did it, it was pretty much like riding a bicycle. Developing film, especially black and white, is a key part if creating the negative – outsourcing it relinquishes the creative dial to generics.

My initial test compares the results of a dry and wet scan of the same negative. The image was captured with a Mamiya 7ii, 80mm f4 outfit. It was an extended exposure, taken at dusk. The film is 120 Kodak TMAX 400 developed at LTI New York City. The scan was performed with the same settings – 4000dpi; scale 100%; 16bit; multi-sample 1x; CCD Scan Mode set to superfine; scan image enhancer on; custom focus, black and white points. This resulted in NEF (RAW) files on disk exceeding 550MB files. Slight differences in crop are responsible for the file difference.  The wet scan fluid is Scan Science’s Lumina – a full review to come!

To keep things as simple and neutral as possible the screen shots that follow are from Nikon Scan. No processing has been performed on either, what we see is what was captured and saved. Snagit was used to capture the screens and the only modification is cropping out the main user interface of Nikon Scan. To properly view this comparison you will need to see the large versions of the following images (~2MB PNGs) by clicking the smaller versions below.

The first image shows the dry scan (left) and the wet scan (right). Each is at 8% with the scan settings area of the image view displayed to show all things that could be recorded are equal. Notice the greater tonal depth on the wet scan specifically in the shadows. Notice the crisper detail in the bricks, especially around the chimney top.

The next image zooms into the chimney at 33.33%. The details apparent at 8% are now very clear. Notice the dust caught in the wet scan. I didn’t realize how much was there. Compressed air and lint-free tissues are now in hand for future scans. An anti-static brush is on my B&H wish list.

This following image is the same view zoomed to 100%. This shows without question, the wet scan on the right more detailed and has greater dynamic range.

The differences were so dramatic that I questioned if the focus points were the same. The default focus point is middle negative. The following image compares both at approximately middle image. At this 100% view the differences are subtle, but present. Again, notice the richer darks on the right and greater overall range. What is muddy gray on the left is a stronger gray tone on the right. The grain structure from the window (upper right) is simpler and smoother when comparing the two scans.

This final image is found on the left middle of the image and offers yet another point of comparison. It shows the bricks and window frame of an apartment. Again, notice the overall dynamic range, but more importantly, review the detail seen in the brick.

If you caught me a couple of weeks ago, I would have told you that wet scanning might be a gimmick. I wasn’t convinced from what I could find and while the 9000 ED is a great scanner it isn’t a drum scanner, so I didn’t presume the comparison in process was transferable. At the very least, it can be said, that for black and white negatives, wet scanning is a must. The quality is apparent with almost no detailed review. The effort added to the overall workflow is relatively small and the cost is nominal when compared to all the other things photo geeks spend money on.

Finally, this is the image after being imported into Adobe Photoshop Lightroom. I adjusted the crop slightly to align the horizon (noticeable at the top). Basic treatment includes conversion to grayscale, Recovery set to 12 and Clarity to 80. Tone curve is set to the Medium Contrast setting. No additional sharpening was applied. A slight vignette is added at an Amount of -15. I then edited a copy in Adobe Photoshop to review and remove a few dozen dust threads and two air bubbles at 100%. While I was there I removed the distracting light in the lower right. I am not sure I would say I am done, but my intent was to show a “clean” version of the image for review. The JPEG export was done at 100% quality, sRGB, 75ppi and 2000 pixels on its largest edge. The version below is a reduced size, remember to view the full sized version by clicking the image.

Courtyard at dusk, Park Slope, Brooklyn, New York

So, if mailing off your prints is not something that is palatable, you need to find someone local. Luckily for me, there are two labs walking distance from where I work on Madison Avenue – Duggal and LTI. They both do great work, but I like the people, vibe and price at LTI. I have no doubt Duggal does a great job for their higher volume clients, but I always felt out of place walking in there and everyone always seemed too busy. LTI is a further walk but they make the time to get your order right without taking any longer than necessary. They service some big names and do not make me feel insignificant. I am after all an amateur, but I do not know anyone that wants to be treated less than professional.

My basic order is often as follows:

• Process, print, scan.
• Push 1 stop.
• Glossy with white border.
• TIFF format.

I figure, prints are not much more than contact sheets and they are larger and easier to review. Even though I have an Epson Workforce 600 All-in-One printer, my time is worth something, so I rather they scan them with their machine. They provide the images on FTP or CD which makes archiving easy. Pushing a stop is usually to compensate for over exposing and wanting to bring back some of the highlights. Until recently I did not have a film scanner, so their scans were my digital originals, hence the file format being TIFF. Regardless of the photo labs quick scan quality, why start out with a JPEG!