I've only read through a few of the posts pertaining to Scott's photo. My first thought is that Scott needs to calibrate his system, adjusting his exposure to the meter reading, and the development time/temp/agitation to the thermometer reading and the accuracy of the timer used, and so on. The rudimentary meter in the K1000 may have been unduly influenced by the large, bright expanse of the wall, giving an underexposed result to the entire photo. That there's no shadow detail on the neg lends some credence to the theory.
Scott, what color is the wall? Shel > [Original Message] > From: William Robb > > Thanks, Paul. Unfortunately, there is no shadow detail on the neg. I > > believe it's been over-exposed and over developed. Shel responded > > with a lengthy critique and I'll try to address those issues in my > > response to him. So stay tuned. > > Underexposed, and over developed. > Anyone who follows the manufacturer's instructions runs into this problem, > methinks. >
