Film developers

LR Kalajainen wrote

Dan Quinn wrote:
LR Kalajainen wrote

Glad to see I'm not the only divided-developer nut in the NG.

For film as well? I know of your A and B bath print processing;
A for agent, B for base.
I've just reviewed Howard Bond's two-bath for "Remodeling Paper
Curves". His best advice is a chilled inactive A followed by a B
water bath; a warm B will speed the process along.
He starts with 30 seconds in A then cycles with 20. "Three cycles
of loading ... with developer and placing in the water bath ..."
He prefers four cycles.
Have you ever done any "Remodeling"? Dan

No, I haven't read Howard's article. Where is it? Without having
read it, I can't really quite understand what he's proposing or what
the effects might be.

I don't use a water bath; apparently he does. And what's the
purpose of cycling in and out of Bath A if there is only agent
and no activator in A? Does he use a Bath C for the activator,
or is the full developer in Bath A, but chilled so that it acts
more slowly?

But do send me the reference for Howard's article on Recycling.



Remodeling Paper Curves, by Howard Bond; from PHOTO Techniques
Vol 1.
Chilled or as dilute as is workable; he mentions ice cubes, 55 F,
and 1:4. The remodeling is more pronounced if little or no development
takes place in the A bath.
A thought just now poped into my mind. What if the B bath were a
weak version of the B you use? Worth some thought and as I compound
all my own chemistry an easy idea to test.
Back to H. Bond. He starts with a grade higher paper and exposes
for good highlights but shadows will go too dark. So the water B
bath. I'm thinking of it as a method to control shadow density.
Quote; " The contrast of this higher-than-correct grade of paper
is retained in the highlight end of the curve and reduced in the
shadow end. "
A print from one of his Deardorff taken 11x14 photos
certainly underscores the value of his described
method of contrast control. Dan

LR Kalajainen wrote

Dan Quinn wrote:
LR Kalajainen wrote

Glad to see I'm not the only divided-developer nut in the NG.

For film as well? I know of your A and B bath print processing;
A for agent, B for base.
I've just reviewed Howard Bond's two-bath for "Remodeling Paper
Curves". His best advice is a chilled inactive A followed by a B
water bath; a warm B will speed the process along.
He starts with 30 seconds in A then cycles with 20. "Three cycles
of loading ... with developer and placing in the water bath ..."
He prefers four cycles.
Have you ever done any "Remodeling"? Dan

No, I haven't read Howard's article. Where is it? Without having
read it, I can't really quite understand what he's proposing or what
the effects might be.

I don't use a water bath; apparently he does. And what's the
purpose of cycling in and out of Bath A if there is only agent
and no activator in A? Does he use a Bath C for the activator,
or is the full developer in Bath A, but chilled so that it acts
more slowly?

But do send me the reference for Howard's article on Recycling.



Remodeling Paper Curves, by Howard Bond; from PHOTO Techniques
Vol 1.
Chilled or as dilute as is workable; he mentions ice cubes, 55 F,
and 1:4. The remodeling is more pronounced if little or no development
takes place in the A bath.
A thought just now poped into my mind. What if the B bath were a
weak version of the B you use? Worth some thought and as I compound
all my own chemistry an easy idea to test.
Back to H. Bond. He starts with a grade higher paper and exposes
for good highlights but shadows will go too dark. So the water B
bath. I'm thinking of it as a method to control shadow density.
Quote; " The contrast of this higher-than-correct grade of paper
is retained in the highlight end of the curve and reduced in the
shadow end. "
A print from one of his Deardorff taken 11x14 photos
certainly underscores the value of his described
method of contrast control. Dan

"jjs" wrote in message ...

"BUT so does stand development, so does dropping an
unwound length of film into a dark empty bottle of Kaiwan with D23 in
Trinidad."

BTW, John, what is Kaiwan? A Trinidadian rum? Somethine else?

Thanks, John

"jjs" wrote in message ...

"BUT so does stand development, so does dropping an
unwound length of film into a dark empty bottle of Kaiwan with D23 in
Trinidad."

BTW, John, what is Kaiwan? A Trinidadian rum? Somethine else?

Thanks, John

Dan Quinn wrote:
LR Kalajainen wrote

Dan Quinn wrote:

LR Kalajainen wrote


Glad to see I'm not the only divided-developer nut in the NG.


For film as well? I know of your A and B bath print processing;
A for agent, B for base.
I've just reviewed Howard Bond's two-bath for "Remodeling Paper
Curves". His best advice is a chilled inactive A followed by a B
water bath; a warm B will speed the process along.
He starts with 30 seconds in A then cycles with 20. "Three cycles
of loading ... with developer and placing in the water bath ..."
He prefers four cycles.
Have you ever done any "Remodeling"? Dan

No, I haven't read Howard's article. Where is it? Without having
read it, I can't really quite understand what he's proposing or what
the effects might be.

I don't use a water bath; apparently he does. And what's the
purpose of cycling in and out of Bath A if there is only agent
and no activator in A? Does he use a Bath C for the activator,
or is the full developer in Bath A, but chilled so that it acts
more slowly?

But do send me the reference for Howard's article on Recycling.




Remodeling Paper Curves, by Howard Bond; from PHOTO Techniques
Vol 1.
Chilled or as dilute as is workable; he mentions ice cubes, 55 F,
and 1:4. The remodeling is more pronounced if little or no development
takes place in the A bath.
A thought just now poped into my mind. What if the B bath were a
weak version of the B you use? Worth some thought and as I compound
all my own chemistry an easy idea to test.
Back to H. Bond. He starts with a grade higher paper and exposes
for good highlights but shadows will go too dark. So the water B
bath. I'm thinking of it as a method to control shadow density.
Quote; " The contrast of this higher-than-correct grade of paper
is retained in the highlight end of the curve and reduced in the
shadow end. "
A print from one of his Deardorff taken 11x14 photos
certainly underscores the value of his described
method of contrast control. Dan

Sounds reasonable. I've found a less messy way to do contrast control,
I think. Bond is talking about graded papers, which I rarely use any
more. Variable is so much easier. But my method of having a soft Bath
A plus a hard Bath A, and choosing between them depending on the desired
effect, e.g. a harder grade of paper developed in the soft Bath A, gives
an intermediate effect that is similar to what you/Bond are describing.

But with variable contrast, it's even easier. I have a color head on my
Beseler 45, so I begin by doing two exposures under the enlarger, one at
full yellow and one at full magenta (doesn't matter in which order), the
time for each determined by test strips. For Agfa MCC, it's usually
approximately equal, say 10 sec. each at f11 for an 8X10. Then I
develop in a homebrew BAth A similar to Ansco 120, followed by the Bath
B (carbonate). Contrast control is almost automatic. The full yellow
prevents highlights from burning out or the shadows going too dark; the
full magenta gives sparkle to the highlights and depth to the shadows
and good D-max. Plus, I get that extra zing in local contrast that
makes the print values appear to "sing." You can burn and dodge as
necessary; if you're trying to increase density but not change contrast,
then give equal amounts of time at both full yellow and full magenta.
If you want more or less contrast, give additional yellow or magenta as
needed. It takes a bit of playing to get your head around a new way of
working, but once you do, it becomes automatic. Sure cuts down on the
manipulation needed and no need for all the back and forthing between
developing baths. Almost too easy.

Larry

Dan Quinn wrote:
LR Kalajainen wrote

Dan Quinn wrote:

LR Kalajainen wrote


Glad to see I'm not the only divided-developer nut in the NG.


For film as well? I know of your A and B bath print processing;
A for agent, B for base.
I've just reviewed Howard Bond's two-bath for "Remodeling Paper
Curves". His best advice is a chilled inactive A followed by a B
water bath; a warm B will speed the process along.
He starts with 30 seconds in A then cycles with 20. "Three cycles
of loading ... with developer and placing in the water bath ..."
He prefers four cycles.
Have you ever done any "Remodeling"? Dan

No, I haven't read Howard's article. Where is it? Without having
read it, I can't really quite understand what he's proposing or what
the effects might be.

I don't use a water bath; apparently he does. And what's the
purpose of cycling in and out of Bath A if there is only agent
and no activator in A? Does he use a Bath C for the activator,
or is the full developer in Bath A, but chilled so that it acts
more slowly?

But do send me the reference for Howard's article on Recycling.




Remodeling Paper Curves, by Howard Bond; from PHOTO Techniques
Vol 1.
Chilled or as dilute as is workable; he mentions ice cubes, 55 F,
and 1:4. The remodeling is more pronounced if little or no development
takes place in the A bath.
A thought just now poped into my mind. What if the B bath were a
weak version of the B you use? Worth some thought and as I compound
all my own chemistry an easy idea to test.
Back to H. Bond. He starts with a grade higher paper and exposes
for good highlights but shadows will go too dark. So the water B
bath. I'm thinking of it as a method to control shadow density.
Quote; " The contrast of this higher-than-correct grade of paper
is retained in the highlight end of the curve and reduced in the
shadow end. "
A print from one of his Deardorff taken 11x14 photos
certainly underscores the value of his described
method of contrast control. Dan

Sounds reasonable. I've found a less messy way to do contrast control,
I think. Bond is talking about graded papers, which I rarely use any
more. Variable is so much easier. But my method of having a soft Bath
A plus a hard Bath A, and choosing between them depending on the desired
effect, e.g. a harder grade of paper developed in the soft Bath A, gives
an intermediate effect that is similar to what you/Bond are describing.

But with variable contrast, it's even easier. I have a color head on my
Beseler 45, so I begin by doing two exposures under the enlarger, one at
full yellow and one at full magenta (doesn't matter in which order), the
time for each determined by test strips. For Agfa MCC, it's usually
approximately equal, say 10 sec. each at f11 for an 8X10. Then I
develop in a homebrew BAth A similar to Ansco 120, followed by the Bath
B (carbonate). Contrast control is almost automatic. The full yellow
prevents highlights from burning out or the shadows going too dark; the
full magenta gives sparkle to the highlights and depth to the shadows
and good D-max. Plus, I get that extra zing in local contrast that
makes the print values appear to "sing." You can burn and dodge as
necessary; if you're trying to increase density but not change contrast,
then give equal amounts of time at both full yellow and full magenta.
If you want more or less contrast, give additional yellow or magenta as
needed. It takes a bit of playing to get your head around a new way of
working, but once you do, it becomes automatic. Sure cuts down on the
manipulation needed and no need for all the back and forthing between
developing baths. Almost too easy.

Larry

By now you've scared the original poster away.

One dose of this ng, and he prolly took up knitting...

Excelsior, you fatheads!
-Chris-

By now you've scared the original poster away.

One dose of this ng, and he prolly took up knitting...

Excelsior, you fatheads!
-Chris-

Originally Posted by Phil Hobgen

Hi,

I am trying to establish for myself a set of 35mm films and developers that
I can work with - so that I can then concentrate on my taking technique and
compare results against a consistent baseline.

I am settling on Ilford PanF/FP4/HP5 as a set of films that will cover all
my needs. I'm hoping these aren't going to disappear, or radically increase
in price any time soon.

From reading on this NG and other sources it would seem that using Ilford's
own chemicals probably isn't sensible based on price and performance. But
what to choose ?

I am tempted to try Prescysol from
http://www.monochromephotography.com/developer.htm but I haven't found any
independent reference to it - does anyone have experience of using it?

From what I read (in my relative ignorance), a two bath developer approach
seems very attractive. But why then aren't they more popular? Are equally
good or better results achievable in a single bath developer, if so what
would be a good choice?

I'm in the UK, so I'd be particularly interested to hear from fellow Brits -
but all advice and opinions are welcome!


Cheers

Phil

-------------------------------------------
Phil Hobgen

for email please delete the dash
and take out the trash

Any of those films developed in Ilford Perceptol diluted 1:3, absolutely beautiful.