I finished photographing couple stage performances this evening and had one roll of TX (135) left on me. While I was driving back, a crazy thought came up...since my editors DO NOT LIKE grains, I thought it might be FUN (IN EVERY REBELLIOUS SENSE) to just shoot some street scenes with the TX at 12800. Oh yes, I feel much better after that...sometimes you just have to do the exact opposite of what your editors want; it's called stress relief. Now, I need some suggestions as to how I can process the roll. I have access to Xtol, Rodinol, and microdol. Since the roll is just for fun, I welcome every crazy suggestion you can think of...providing it will give me a printable neg, of course.

-- David (dna2367@hotmail.com), July 21, 1999

Answers

well, there probably isn't an enough image on the film to be printable...throw it away or shoot it again! want crazy grain rate it from 250 to 1600 develop in dektol.

-- trib (linhof6@hotmail.com), July 21, 1999.

David, those farging editors!!! they want nice grain... show them grain. I am not sure what a friend of mine did, but about 25 years ago he pushed Tri-x to 12800. I beleive ( but don't know for sure ) that pre develpoing, he treated the film ( after exposure ) with amonia fumes. Instead of throwing the film away, try an experiment. get yourself a 32oz. stainless steel developing tank. have a waterbath set to 105f. put about 6oz of household amoniain the bottom of the tank, place 2 empty 35mm reels in the tank and bring it up to 105f. AT NO POINT LET THE AMONIA COME IN CONTACT WITH THE FILM OR AREA IT WILL BE PUT. Next (and the tricky part) place a piece of the film in a reel ( in total darkness of course ), put it in the tank, and close the lid. (the amonia will super sensitise the film. ) I am not sure at what point your film will fog completely, but the longer you leave it exposed to the fumes, the higher the asa rating will be, and the greater risk of fogging it beyond compensating for. try starting at 3 min, and go up from there. every 45-1 min gently swirl the tank. DO NOT SPLASH THE AMONIA, IT CAN RUIN THE FILM. after the film has been treated process it in your xtol at 1:1 the time... ???? 15 to 20 min????. Just keep clipping and testing until you find the combo that works, and then do the rest of the roll. Good Luck, let me know what happens. Sean.

BTW if you happen to have an extra body, shoot some Kodak recording film (during a shoot , of course..) at 1000 asa, pick up some DK 50 dev, and process it for 6 min at 68f. Give the prints to your editor, and have your camera ready to capture his expressions! be sure to use a super fine grain film, so he will be sure to like the shots of himself!!

-- Sean (ZBeeblebrox42@yahoo.com), July 21, 1999.

Ha ha ha...I will give that a try Sean. Thanks for the tips. I think I should capture the expression with techpan??? Maybe do it with a 645 body??? She sure would love the fine details of stress lines.

-- David (dna2367@hotmail.com), July 21, 1999.

BTW, Sean's suggestion of using recording film inspired another crazy idea. I think I will shoot the show in Kodak high speed IR. Does anyone know what is the pushability of this film? How about the processing?

-- David (dna2367@hotmail.com), July 21, 1999.

Loose extrapolation from the Kodak website: 70F, 17min in fresh undiluted developer. (I found that Tmax 400 at 1600, in Xtol 1:2, 68F, 25-30min produces a decent negative).

I have found that IR films just don't push well at all. Of course, I only have used them for the IR spectrum, not for their orthocromatic properties. However, Kodak HIE is a grainy film. I'm not sure if HIE or TMZ (Tmax P3200) is grainier. Try TMZ at 25000, and let us know. :-)

-- Brian C. Miller (brianm@ioconcepts.com), July 22, 1999.

Will do...after I finish the rolls of show stuff.:-)

-- David (dna2367@hotmail.com), July 22, 1999.

oh yes let us know how that crazy thing turns out....hope you don't get hurt....

-- trib (linhof6@hotmail.com), July 23, 1999.

Hi, sorry to take so long to reply...too many other things going on. Finally, I got a chance to try out the suggestions. So, here are the results, without the ammonia, my negatives were very thin indeed...practically invisible. With the ammonia...well...I guess it could work if I didn't actually get elbowed by my friend/assistant. Needless to say, the splash of ammonia did a nice job of killing the negative. So, that's that. Though, as the saying goes, " if you don't succeed the first time, try and try again..." So, stay tuned for the next try...if you've got a way to drive your editor bananas, would you give up trying...??

-- David (dna2367@hotmail.com), August 04, 1999.