Who pulls and pushes there film

My professor has us using Kodak 400TX film and pulling it at 200 to get two more shades of grey. I was curious does any one else use this technique ( by pulling is when you set the ISO lower then the speed of the film while pushing is you set the iso higher then the film ) An do you guys know any pro's/cons to using this over just shooting at speed

It's an old technique we used when shooting film to get a negative that would be good enough to print. Works well if the lab processes it properly and can give you + 2 stops of exposure to work with. ASK Karl Wertanen about this as he still shoots film and is probably still using this technique at times.

I've had film pushed/pulled but not in a long time, although I shoot film. It seems like I didn't find it made that much difference or didn't like the results all that much to bother with it.

Are you doing B&W darkroom work? I'm just wondering if the reason your professor is having you do that is to give you more range of tones in your negatives to work with in the darkroom. I've sometimes bracketed shots to get lighter or darker negatives to make sure I had one to get a nice print from.

Ask your professor... maybe it's something to do with getting more gray tones, I'd be interested to know what the course is and what you're working on. I love shooting B&W film.

icepics wrote: I've had film pushed/pulled but not in a long time, although I shoot film. It seems like I didn't find it made that much difference or didn't like the results all that much to bother with it.

Are you doing B&W darkroom work? I'm just wondering if the reason your professor is having you do that is to give you more range of tones in your negatives to work with in the darkroom. I've sometimes bracketed shots to get lighter or darker negatives to make sure I had one to get a nice print from.

Ask your professor... maybe it's something to do with getting more gray tones, I'd be interested to know what the course is and what you're working on. I love shooting B&W film.

Yes its darkroom work and yes that was his reasoning to get the two more grey tones vs default 9

Pushing and pulling is usually combined with development changes. For instance increasing development time when pushing, and decreasing development time when pulling.

The numbers on the film box/cassette are merely suggestions. Personal film testing is required to determine a personal ISO. Many things can influence this so it may not be very accurate to use someone else's results. Even when using the same gear and film different photographers can get different optimal film speed results.

It is a very common practice to rate negative films one stop slower (over expose) than what it says on the box. This helps insure good shadow detail. With negative film the big concern is the shadows. Overexposed highlights can be burned in. Underexposed shadows are blank film, and there is no detail to be recovered. This is why the advice with neg film is to expose for the shadows and print for the highlights. The opposite is true with positive films: they are usually underexposed, and the issue with blank film is on the highlight end of the tonal range.

The main reason I would adjust exposure and processing isn't to capture more tones, but rather to create an easy to print negative. Prints can only display about 5 stops of full detail. That's less than the film is capable of recording. I would start by testing my film choice to determine my normal personal film speed and normal development time (normal dev time is referred to as "n"). Google "personal film speed testing" for lots of articles on how to do this.

Out in the real world I measure the difference in stops between my shadows where I wanted full detail and my highlights where I wanted full detail. If the difference is 5 stops then I expose and develop normally (my normal, not necessarily what Kodak or my buddy recommends). If the difference is more than 5 stops I would over expose and decrease development time. This compresses the tonal range and decreases contrast. For instance for 6 stops I would rate the film at a stop slower (over expose) than my normal film speed, and then decrease development by 1 stop or n-1. How much time is a stop's worth is determined in personal testing. For 7 stops I would over expose 2 stops and develop n-2. If there is less than 5 stops between important shadows and highlights then I would under expose and over develop in a similar manner: 4 stops = -1 exp & n+1, 3 stops = -2 exp & n+2. The goal here is to expand the tonal range.

Obviously this technique doesn't work well with roll film unless all the shots on the roll are made in the same sort of lighting. For shooting 35mm film I would roll my own 10-12 exposure rolls. One way to get around this if you are using longer rolls is to switch to a 2 bath compensating developer instead of single bath developer. Single bath developer contains both developer and activator. Compensating developer keeps them separate. First you soak the film in the developer. Then the developer is dumped out, and only the developer that has soaked into the emulsion remains. The activator is poured in, and begins to develop the film. Areas of the film that received more exposure (highlights) develop faster, and when the developer is deplete developing stops. While areas that had less exposure (shadows) continue to develop longer. It takes care of contrast and tonal range on its own even if the exposure rating or lighting contrast changes from shot to shot on the same roll.

Another reason for pushing is that there really isn't any film faster than ISO 800. If you read the fine print (or do personal testing) for most films rated over ISO 800 you will find it's a push to get ISO 1600 or 3200. That's what the little "p" stands for in Tmax 3200p. Kodak says it's ISO 1000 with Tmax developer, and ISO 800 with most other developers.

Henry Horenstein's books "Black and White Photography: A Basic Manual" and "Beyond Basic Photography: A Technical Manual" are excellent learning resources. They are fairly easy reading, and you should be able to find them cheap in a used bookstore or online. After you read the Horenstein books go for Ansel Adams' "The Camera", "The Negative", and "The Print".

Henry Peach wrote: Pushing and pulling is usually combined with development changes. For instance increasing development time when pushing, and decreasing development time when pulling.

The numbers on the film box/cassette are merely suggestions. Personal film testing is required to determine a personal ISO. Many things can influence this so it may not be very accurate to use someone else's results. Even when using the same gear and film different photographers can get different optimal film speed results.

It is a very common practice to rate negative films one stop slower (over expose) than what it says on the box. This helps insure good shadow detail. With negative film the big concern is the shadows. Overexposed highlights can be burned in. Underexposed shadows are blank film, and there is no detail to be recovered. This is why the advice with neg film is to expose for the shadows and print for the highlights. The opposite is true with positive films: they are usually underexposed, and the issue with blank film is on the highlight end of the tonal range.

The main reason I would adjust exposure and processing isn't to capture more tones, but rather to create an easy to print negative. Prints can only display about 5 stops of full detail. That's less than the film is capable of recording. I would start by testing my film choice to determine my normal personal film speed and normal development time (normal dev time is referred to as "n"). Google "personal film speed testing" for lots of articles on how to do this.

Out in the real world I measure the difference in stops between my shadows where I wanted full detail and my highlights where I wanted full detail. If the difference is 5 stops then I expose and develop normally (my normal, not necessarily what Kodak or my buddy recommends). If the difference is more than 5 stops I would over expose and decrease development time. This compresses the tonal range and decreases contrast. For instance for 6 stops I would rate the film at a stop slower (over expose) than my normal film speed, and then decrease development by 1 stop or n-1. How much time is a stop's worth is determined in personal testing. For 7 stops I would over expose 2 stops and develop n-2. If there is less than 5 stops between important shadows and highlights then I would under expose and over develop in a similar manner: 4 stops = -1 exp & n+1, 3 stops = -2 exp & n+2. The goal here is to expand the tonal range.

Obviously this technique doesn't work well with roll film unless all the shots on the roll are made in the same sort of lighting. For shooting 35mm film I would roll my own 10-12 exposure rolls. One way to get around this if you are using longer rolls is to switch to a 2 bath compensating developer instead of single bath developer. Single bath developer contains both developer and activator. Compensating developer keeps them separate. First you soak the film in the developer. Then the developer is dumped out, and only the developer that has soaked into the emulsion remains. The activator is poured in, and begins to develop the film. Areas of the film that received more exposure (highlights) develop faster, and when the developer is deplete developing stops. While areas that had less exposure (shadows) continue to develop longer. It takes care of contrast and tonal range on its own even if the exposure rating or lighting contrast changes from shot to shot on the same roll.

Another reason for pushing is that there really isn't any film faster than ISO 800. If you read the fine print (or do personal testing) for most films rated over ISO 800 you will find it's a push to get ISO 1600 or 3200. That's what the little "p" stands for in Tmax 3200p. Kodak says it's ISO 1000 with Tmax developer, and ISO 800 with most other developers.

Henry Horenstein's books "Black and White Photography: A Basic Manual" and "Beyond Basic Photography: A Technical Manual" are excellent learning resources. They are fairly easy reading, and you should be able to find them cheap in a used bookstore or online. After you read the Horenstein books go for Ansel Adams' "The Camera", "The Negative", and "The Print".

Great info. Thanks!

Henry Peach wrote: Pushing and pulling is usually combined with development changes. For instance increasing development time when pushing, and decreasing development time when pulling.

The numbers on the film box/cassette are merely suggestions. Personal film testing is required to determine a personal ISO. Many things can influence this so it may not be very accurate to use someone else's results. Even when using the same gear and film different photographers can get different optimal film speed results.

It is a very common practice to rate negative films one stop slower (over expose) than what it says on the box. This helps insure good shadow detail. With negative film the big concern is the shadows. Overexposed highlights can be burned in. Underexposed shadows are blank film, and there is no detail to be recovered. This is why the advice with neg film is to expose for the shadows and print for the highlights. The opposite is true with positive films: they are usually underexposed, and the issue with blank film is on the highlight end of the tonal range.

The main reason I would adjust exposure and processing isn't to capture more tones, but rather to create an easy to print negative. Prints can only display about 5 stops of full detail. That's less than the film is capable of recording. I would start by testing my film choice to determine my normal personal film speed and normal development time (normal dev time is referred to as "n"). Google "personal film speed testing" for lots of articles on how to do this.

Out in the real world I measure the difference in stops between my shadows where I wanted full detail and my highlights where I wanted full detail. If the difference is 5 stops then I expose and develop normally (my normal, not necessarily what Kodak or my buddy recommends). If the difference is more than 5 stops I would over expose and decrease development time. This compresses the tonal range and decreases contrast. For instance for 6 stops I would rate the film at a stop slower (over expose) than my normal film speed, and then decrease development by 1 stop or n-1. How much time is a stop's worth is determined in personal testing. For 7 stops I would over expose 2 stops and develop n-2. If there is less than 5 stops between important shadows and highlights then I would under expose and over develop in a similar manner: 4 stops = -1 exp & n+1, 3 stops = -2 exp & n+2. The goal here is to expand the tonal range.

Obviously this technique doesn't work well with roll film unless all the shots on the roll are made in the same sort of lighting. For shooting 35mm film I would roll my own 10-12 exposure rolls. One way to get around this if you are using longer rolls is to switch to a 2 bath compensating developer instead of single bath developer. Single bath developer contains both developer and activator. Compensating developer keeps them separate. First you soak the film in the developer. Then the developer is dumped out, and only the developer that has soaked into the emulsion remains. The activator is poured in, and begins to develop the film. Areas of the film that received more exposure (highlights) develop faster, and when the developer is deplete developing stops. While areas that had less exposure (shadows) continue to develop longer. It takes care of contrast and tonal range on its own even if the exposure rating or lighting contrast changes from shot to shot on the same roll.

Another reason for pushing is that there really isn't any film faster than ISO 800. If you read the fine print (or do personal testing) for most films rated over ISO 800 you will find it's a push to get ISO 1600 or 3200. That's what the little "p" stands for in Tmax 3200p. Kodak says it's ISO 1000 with Tmax developer, and ISO 800 with most other developers.

Henry Horenstein's books "Black and White Photography: A Basic Manual" and "Beyond Basic Photography: A Technical Manual" are excellent learning resources. They are fairly easy reading, and you should be able to find them cheap in a used bookstore or online. After you read the Horenstein books go for Ansel Adams' "The Camera", "The Negative", and "The Print".

NO, GREAT posting!

Arkangel might have to print out Henry's post and take it to class to show his professor. I need to hunt out my copies of that Adams trilogy and do some re-reading, I didn't understand the zones then but with experience now they might make sense. Maybe...

I have found with B&W that if I shot the whole roll in the same lighting I could crank out prints fairly quickly once I had determined the exposure time (in the enlarger). And if a negative's too thin there's just nothing there to work with, if it's a little dense I've been able to get some detail out of the negative. Matt you're a much more technical photographer than I am, and more experienced in the darkroom - thanks for sharing the info. that you do.

icepics wrote: I need to hunt out my copies of that Adams trilogy and do some re-reading, I didn't understand the zones then but with experience now they might make sense. Maybe...

I found the AA trilogy made a lot more sense to me after I read the Horenstein books. He keeps it simpler, and doesn't cover every little technical aspect like AA. I commonly see them for $5 or $6 at my local used book stores.

Zones are sort of like the histogram from the old days. Instead of trying to keep track of 256 different tonal steps it was kept down to 9 to 11 steps. Easier to handle without a computer. Zone 5 is middle gray. Each zone is a one stop difference. So zone 4 is one stop darker than zone 5. Zone 6 is one stop brighter than zone 5. Paper can display approx 5 zones/stops of full detail, so zones 3 through 7. Zones 2 and 8 start to lose some detail. Zones 1 and 9 lose even more. By the time you get to zones 0 and 10 it's pretty much black or white with no details. Film can capture more than 5 zones of full detail, but in order to get them in the print requires compressing the tonal range. This can be accomplished by burning in the highlights, but it's easier to compress the tonal range in development once rather than burning every print.

If you shoot a black towel, and expose as the meter recommends, then you are placing it in zone 5, and printed normally it should come out middle gray. If you want it to look black, but with full detail (able to see each little thread) then you would place it in zone 3 by reducing exposure from what the meter recommends by 2 stops. When I was shooting print film my simple metering strategy for a scene/subject was to meter the darkest area where I wanted full detail, and reduce exposure by 2 stops.

The development time changes were to compress or expand the tonal range so that the brightest highlights where I wanted full detail came out as zone 7.

Our wedding was a small family gathering at my parents' house. I did not hire a pro. I took care of the posed portraits myself. I set up a 4x5 camera on a tripod, and after setting everything up I had a cousin trip the cable release when I was in the pics. I was shooting Tmax 100. I metered off of my black pants, and added 2 stops of exposure. Obviously my mind was on other things as I should have subtracted 2 stops. So I put my black pants in zone 7 when I wanted them in zone 3, or in other words I had rated the Tmax 100 at ISO 6!!! The next day as I was thinking about our wedding day I suddenly realized my mistake. I was able to adjust the development time to compensate and the pics came out fine, although the negs were a bit more dense than I would normally like.