First shot with my MPP MkVII

[moggi1964]

I finally found time over Christmas to load some film and take a few shots with the 'new' camera. It hasn't stopped raining for a week so I decided to continue my indoors practice but this time to load some film and see what I got. I misread the lightmeter on the first two shoots and underexposed by a lot so this is sheet number three. I can barely move in my 'office' so I set up as best I could, loaded up Fomapan 200 and shot this at F/5.6 1 second using the 150mm SK Xenon F/4.5. I didn't do any camera movements either, just kept it simple.

Developed in Ilford DD-X 1:9 for 9 minutes.

 

[thronobulax]

Certainly a worthy first effort. Certainly much better than my first

Just a reminder - most panchromatic films like Foma will loose 1 full f-stop of effective speed under tungsten light. So if the daylight ASA is 200, the indoor (tungsten) ASA is 100.

Moreover, - depending on how you develop and what developer you use - you will also discover that few films really hit rated speed in conventional development. I have not used DD-X so I have no specific guidance here. By way of example, though, if using ID-11/D-76 or HC-110B, I would rate that film at ASA 50 indoors and underdevelop about 20% from the documented recommendations.

This is because ASA rating of modern film is sort of like mileage estimates on new cars - useful for comparing one against one another but not accurate for practical use. With most developers and standard agitations I have consistently found - after extensive testing - that the effective ASA is about 1/2 rated ASA if you want strong negatives. This causes the shadows to be fully exposed but runs the risk of blowing out the highlights, hence the slight underdevelopment. Again, I've not used DD-X so cannot comment.

This whole business has been discussed and documented in extensive detail under the rubric of "Zone System".

P.S. There are esoteric techniques for achieving full film ASA under daylight lighting but they are complex and not for the faint of heart. They also engender intense religious wars as to their effectiveness or value. You will see these named as "Stand", "Semistand", and "Extreme Minimal Agitation" techniques but they are primarily for the experienced practitioner. I mention them only because you may see reference to them here and elsewhere. You may safely ignore them.

 

[moggi1964]

Certainly a worthy first effort. Certainly much better than my first

Just a reminder - most panchromatic films like Foma will loose 1 full f-stop of effective speed under tungsten light. So if the daylight ASA is 200, the indoor (tungsten) ASA is 100.

Moreover, - depending on how you develop and what developer you use - you will also discover that few films really hit rated speed in conventional development. I have not used DD-X so I have no specific guidance here. By way of example, though, if using ID-11/D-76 or HC-110B, I would rate that film at ASA 50 indoors and underdevelop about 20% from the documented recommendations.

This is because ASA rating of modern film is sort of like mileage estimates on new cars - useful for comparing one against one another but not accurate for practical use. With most developers and standard agitations I have consistently found - after extensive testing - that the effective ASA is about 1/2 rated ASA if you want strong negatives. This causes the shadows to be fully exposed but runs the risk of blowing out the highlights, hence the slight underdevelopment. Again, I've not used DD-X so cannot comment.

This whole business has been discussed and documented in extensive detail under the rubric of "Zone System".

P.S. There are esoteric techniques for achieving full film ASA under daylight lighting but they are complex and not for the faint of heart. They also engender intense religious wars as to their effectiveness or value. You will see these named as "Stand", "Semistand", and "Extreme Minimal Agitation" techniques but they are primarily for the experienced practitioner. I mention them only because you may see reference to them here and elsewhere. You may safely ignore them.

Wonderful information. Thank you for taking the time to lay it all out.

I've got 46 sheets left so plenty of opportunity to try again and again and again.....

 

[thronobulax]

Wonderful information. Thank you for taking the time to lay it all out.

I've got 46 sheets left so plenty of opportunity to try again and again and again.....

By the way, all of what I wrote assumes several things:

• You are mixing developer with deionized or distilled water (for consistency and elimination of local water affecting outcomes)
• Your developer and other chemistry is fresh and not exhausted
• Your shutters and light meter are reasonably accurate
• Your thermometer is reasonably accurate
• Your timing device is reasonably accurate

N.B. In ancient times, these were not reliably the case and people had to take this all into account to find their 'personal ASA' for each film/developer combo. These days, this shouldn't be much of an issue. In any case, what we seek is repeatability, not absolute accuracy. If, say, your shutter is 1/2 f/stop slow at a given speed, that's fine so long as it is always off about that amount.

 

[David M]

Excellent toe in the water.
This is off-topic, but it looks like a very fine set of spanners.

 

[moggi1964]

Excellent toe in the water.
This is off-topic, but it looks like a very fine set of spanners.

Thanks.

They were a gift to my wife's Uncle in the USA.

Not monetarily valuable but I really liked the guy so this was my choice of item from his estate.