A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » General Photography » In The Darkroom
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Film developers



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 13th 04, 12:53 PM
Phil Hobgen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Film developers

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


  #2  
Old September 13th 04, 02:19 PM
Martin Jangowski
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Phil Hobgen wrote:

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?


The main problem with two bath developers is that they plain don't work
as advertized. In theory, the first bath saturates the film with
active ingredients, while the second bath activates these ingredients
(usually with a more or less strong alkaline solution). If this
would be correct, there would be no developed silver in the first bath
(because nearly all development substances need a alkaline environment
to work) and it would be enough to saturate the film in the first bath
(it takes only a few seconds to saturate a gelatine layer with a
thickness of about 2/1000mm).

It is funny that nearly all recipes for two bath developers are in fact
single bath developers with a second alkaline bath. If you would drop the
second bath completely, your results would be identical (or at least
nearly identical) to single bath developers... so why bother? I made
sensitometric tests with the Stoeckler developer and divided-D23 and
found no major differences in density between standard D23 and divided-D23
or Stoeckler. The claimed "compensation" wasn't visible in my
measurements... no way to get a more or less visible shoulder with a film
that goes straight up with conventional developers like TMX.

So, after lots of experiments, I abandoned the idea... it just is more
hassle with no rewards.


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


Unfortunately, Barry Thornton isn't with us any more. If you can get
his books ("Elements" and "Edge of Darkness") buy them. They contain
lots of interesting information about this and are written in a anedotical
style I like very much.

Martin

  #3  
Old September 13th 04, 02:19 PM
Martin Jangowski
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Phil Hobgen wrote:

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?


The main problem with two bath developers is that they plain don't work
as advertized. In theory, the first bath saturates the film with
active ingredients, while the second bath activates these ingredients
(usually with a more or less strong alkaline solution). If this
would be correct, there would be no developed silver in the first bath
(because nearly all development substances need a alkaline environment
to work) and it would be enough to saturate the film in the first bath
(it takes only a few seconds to saturate a gelatine layer with a
thickness of about 2/1000mm).

It is funny that nearly all recipes for two bath developers are in fact
single bath developers with a second alkaline bath. If you would drop the
second bath completely, your results would be identical (or at least
nearly identical) to single bath developers... so why bother? I made
sensitometric tests with the Stoeckler developer and divided-D23 and
found no major differences in density between standard D23 and divided-D23
or Stoeckler. The claimed "compensation" wasn't visible in my
measurements... no way to get a more or less visible shoulder with a film
that goes straight up with conventional developers like TMX.

So, after lots of experiments, I abandoned the idea... it just is more
hassle with no rewards.


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


Unfortunately, Barry Thornton isn't with us any more. If you can get
his books ("Elements" and "Edge of Darkness") buy them. They contain
lots of interesting information about this and are written in a anedotical
style I like very much.

Martin

  #4  
Old September 13th 04, 02:29 PM
John
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 12:53:05 +0100, "Phil Hobgen"
wrote:

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.


Given Ilford's current states of affairs, I wouldn't count on
either. In fact I see that their prices here in America have risen a
good deal since my last purchase. Of course Galerie is still worth it.

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 ?


Ilford's developers are fine to use. Microphen is a good
speed-enhancing developer comparable to T-Max RS. ID-11 is virtually
identical as D-76.

That said, I still recommend purchasing your own chemicals and
mixing your developers from published formulas.

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?


Since it's a UK item I doubt any in the US have tried it and I
haven't heard about it until this post. Sounds like a PMK/Windisch
variant.

WINDISCH CATECHOL DEVELOPER

SOLUTION A
Distilled Water (195°F) 750ml
Sodium sulfite 80.0g
Catechol 12.5g
Water to make 1.0Ll

SOLUTION B
Distilled water 750ml
Sodium Metaborate 100.0g
Water to make 1.0Ll

PMK DEVELOPER

SOLUTION A
Distilled Water (195°F) 750ml
Metol 10.0g
Sodium Bisulfite 20.0g
Pyrogallol 100.0g
EDTA (optional) 5.0g
Water to make 1.0L

SOLUTION B
Distilled water 1400ml
Sodium Metaborate 600.0g
water to make 2.0L

From what I read (in my relative ignorance), a two bath developer approach
seems very attractive.


Do you mean two-bath or split stock ? The developer you
reference is a split stock not a two bath formula. A split-stock
combines the ingredients from a stock solution which is usually
diluted (1:5:100 for this variant) whereas a split stock has the
developing agent in the "A" bath and the alkali in the "B" bath.

Divided D-76

Solution A

Metol 2g
Sodium Sulfite 100g
Hydroquinone 5g
Pot. bromide 1g
Water to make 1.0L

Solution B

Borax 50g
Water to make 1.0L

But why then aren't they more popular?


Two-bath formulas have a nasty habit of compressing the tonal
scale.

Are equally
good or better results achievable in a single bath developer, if so what
would be a good choice?


I am now recommending D-76H for general usage with medium and
large format films and D-23 for 35mm. If you're buying
over-the-counter formulas then I would suggest Microphen and
Perceptol.


Regards,

John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.darkroompro.com
Please remove the "_" when replying via email
  #5  
Old September 13th 04, 02:29 PM
John
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 12:53:05 +0100, "Phil Hobgen"
wrote:

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.


Given Ilford's current states of affairs, I wouldn't count on
either. In fact I see that their prices here in America have risen a
good deal since my last purchase. Of course Galerie is still worth it.

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 ?


Ilford's developers are fine to use. Microphen is a good
speed-enhancing developer comparable to T-Max RS. ID-11 is virtually
identical as D-76.

That said, I still recommend purchasing your own chemicals and
mixing your developers from published formulas.

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?


Since it's a UK item I doubt any in the US have tried it and I
haven't heard about it until this post. Sounds like a PMK/Windisch
variant.

WINDISCH CATECHOL DEVELOPER

SOLUTION A
Distilled Water (195°F) 750ml
Sodium sulfite 80.0g
Catechol 12.5g
Water to make 1.0Ll

SOLUTION B
Distilled water 750ml
Sodium Metaborate 100.0g
Water to make 1.0Ll

PMK DEVELOPER

SOLUTION A
Distilled Water (195°F) 750ml
Metol 10.0g
Sodium Bisulfite 20.0g
Pyrogallol 100.0g
EDTA (optional) 5.0g
Water to make 1.0L

SOLUTION B
Distilled water 1400ml
Sodium Metaborate 600.0g
water to make 2.0L

From what I read (in my relative ignorance), a two bath developer approach
seems very attractive.


Do you mean two-bath or split stock ? The developer you
reference is a split stock not a two bath formula. A split-stock
combines the ingredients from a stock solution which is usually
diluted (1:5:100 for this variant) whereas a split stock has the
developing agent in the "A" bath and the alkali in the "B" bath.

Divided D-76

Solution A

Metol 2g
Sodium Sulfite 100g
Hydroquinone 5g
Pot. bromide 1g
Water to make 1.0L

Solution B

Borax 50g
Water to make 1.0L

But why then aren't they more popular?


Two-bath formulas have a nasty habit of compressing the tonal
scale.

Are equally
good or better results achievable in a single bath developer, if so what
would be a good choice?


I am now recommending D-76H for general usage with medium and
large format films and D-23 for 35mm. If you're buying
over-the-counter formulas then I would suggest Microphen and
Perceptol.


Regards,

John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.darkroompro.com
Please remove the "_" when replying via email
  #6  
Old September 13th 04, 02:29 PM
Mike King
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Phil,

In general I recommend staying away from proprietary, special application
developers for general use and frankly have never heard of Presysol.

AB developers like Diafine and various home-brews are great but rather
limiting. Their very consistency can restrict time temperature variations
to adjust contrast of your negatives while you are in the "just foolin'
around" stage.

And while it's great that you have chosen to shoot a "trio" of films from
the same maker, I am curious about your reasons to be shooting three films
in the first place. (Three VERY different films, I might add.) Without that
bit of data it's difficult to comment on the suitability of either your film
or developer choices. BUT, if I were buying something in a can or bottle
for you to use, I probably recommend (in no real order) D-76/ID-11 (easy to
home-brew if Kodak AND Ilford fold), HC-110 or the Ilford equivalent (a
liquid alternative for which many film makers publish data, or D-23 (not
available pre-packaged, as far as I know, but the world's easiest
home-brew).

Finally, it's been said before, but I'll say it again. If you are just
starting out, new to the black and white experience, you will learn more,
faster by sticking to just one film and one developer, and most likely after
many years of shooting black and white you'll find that one film and
developer combo are all you ever needed.

--
darkroommike

----------
"Phil Hobgen" wrote in message
...
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




  #7  
Old September 13th 04, 02:29 PM
Mike King
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Phil,

In general I recommend staying away from proprietary, special application
developers for general use and frankly have never heard of Presysol.

AB developers like Diafine and various home-brews are great but rather
limiting. Their very consistency can restrict time temperature variations
to adjust contrast of your negatives while you are in the "just foolin'
around" stage.

And while it's great that you have chosen to shoot a "trio" of films from
the same maker, I am curious about your reasons to be shooting three films
in the first place. (Three VERY different films, I might add.) Without that
bit of data it's difficult to comment on the suitability of either your film
or developer choices. BUT, if I were buying something in a can or bottle
for you to use, I probably recommend (in no real order) D-76/ID-11 (easy to
home-brew if Kodak AND Ilford fold), HC-110 or the Ilford equivalent (a
liquid alternative for which many film makers publish data, or D-23 (not
available pre-packaged, as far as I know, but the world's easiest
home-brew).

Finally, it's been said before, but I'll say it again. If you are just
starting out, new to the black and white experience, you will learn more,
faster by sticking to just one film and one developer, and most likely after
many years of shooting black and white you'll find that one film and
developer combo are all you ever needed.

--
darkroommike

----------
"Phil Hobgen" wrote in message
...
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




  #8  
Old September 13th 04, 02:34 PM
John
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 08:29:42 -0500, "Mike King"
wrote:

Finally, it's been said before, but I'll say it again. If you are just
starting out, new to the black and white experience, you will learn more,
faster by sticking to just one film and one developer, and most likely after
many years of shooting black and white you'll find that one film and
developer combo are all you ever needed.


While I agree with you on most things, I will suggest the use
of two films. One high speed and one slow. I would subsequently
suggest the use of Pan-F+ and Delta 400 if using smaller formats such
as 35mm or 120.


Regards,

John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.darkroompro.com
Please remove the "_" when replying via email
  #9  
Old September 13th 04, 08:16 PM
Uranium Committee
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Phil Hobgen" wrote in message ...

I use Fuji and Ilford films and Paterson developers

Fuji Neopan 400 (EI 320) Paterson Acutol 1+14, 8 minutes @ 68F/20C
Fuji Neopan 1600 (EI 650) Paterson Acutol 1+15, 7,5 minutes @ 68F/20C
Ilford FP4 (EI 160) Paterson Acutol 1+15, 7,5 minutes @ 68F/20C
Ilford Pan-F (EI 50-64) Paterson Acutol 1+21, 9 minutes @ 68F/20C


Also:
Ilford HP5 (EI 320) Paterson Acutol 1+14, 8 minutes @ 68F/20C
Ilford Delta 400 (EI 320) Paterson FX-39, 1+14, 8 minutes @ 68F/20C


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.


I like Neopan 400 slightly better than HP5.


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 ?


Paterson.


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?


What the hell is that stuff?

From what I read (in my relative ignorance), a two bath developer approach
seems very attractive. But why then aren't they more popular?


Tough to control.

Are equally
good or better results achievable in a single bath developer, if so what
would be a good choice?


Paterson Acutol for conventional films, Paterson FX-39 for new technology films.


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

  #10  
Old September 13th 04, 08:16 PM
Uranium Committee
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Phil Hobgen" wrote in message ...

I use Fuji and Ilford films and Paterson developers

Fuji Neopan 400 (EI 320) Paterson Acutol 1+14, 8 minutes @ 68F/20C
Fuji Neopan 1600 (EI 650) Paterson Acutol 1+15, 7,5 minutes @ 68F/20C
Ilford FP4 (EI 160) Paterson Acutol 1+15, 7,5 minutes @ 68F/20C
Ilford Pan-F (EI 50-64) Paterson Acutol 1+21, 9 minutes @ 68F/20C


Also:
Ilford HP5 (EI 320) Paterson Acutol 1+14, 8 minutes @ 68F/20C
Ilford Delta 400 (EI 320) Paterson FX-39, 1+14, 8 minutes @ 68F/20C


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.


I like Neopan 400 slightly better than HP5.


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 ?


Paterson.


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?


What the hell is that stuff?

From what I read (in my relative ignorance), a two bath developer approach
seems very attractive. But why then aren't they more popular?


Tough to control.

Are equally
good or better results achievable in a single bath developer, if so what
would be a good choice?


Paterson Acutol for conventional films, Paterson FX-39 for new technology films.


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

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Toe speed of TMAX 400 (was fridge and heat problems) Richard Knoppow In The Darkroom 192 September 14th 04 01:59 AM
darkroom wannabe EC In The Darkroom 59 September 4th 04 01:45 AM
Is it Copal or copal? Then what is it? Nick Zentena Large Format Photography Equipment 14 July 27th 04 03:31 AM
Insane new TSA rule for film inspection [email protected] 35mm Photo Equipment 94 June 23rd 04 05:17 AM
The first film of the Digital Revolution is here.... Todd Bailey Film & Labs 0 May 27th 04 08:12 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:35 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.