I don't see the need for a compensating time so much for printing as for film development.
I have my own dip and dunk method for film development, and using my Zone VI compensating time, my batch to batch consistency is really excellent. During calibrations, I use 12 sheets of film developed in three batches of four each for each zone. Looking at my densitometer based graphs, there's no evidence that the graphs cross three different developments. For me, this consistency is important to get effective results.
If one is printing a negative from notes they've collected previously, and they want to get exactly the same result, then I can see that a temperature compensating time AND a compensating enlarging timer would both be important.
But for me, printing is an iterative process. I will always check the print for the result I want as I print, versus relying on a previous time. If one needs any compensating effect during printing, it's enough for me to occasionally check the developer temperature periodically and then heat or cool the developer appropriately during the printing session.
Another comment, even when using my developing compensating timer, I try to make sure that I'm within about a degree F (or maybe a little more) of my desired temperature of 70 degrees. My Zone VI timer has two settings, one for film and one for paper. Compensation for these is based on two different logarithmic relationships from a family of logarithmic relationships. That doesn't mean that they are necessarily the "perfectly correct" logarithmic relationship for each type of development. Any problem that the original Zone VI choices for these two relationships might cause is minimized by at least staying reasonably close to my desired temperature. My compensating timer can make up the difference within that range.
Bookmarks