Pyrocat HD in Glycol, Step bt Step Mixing Instructions

**sanking** · 16-Jun-2006, 23:33

Originally Posted by Andre_941

Sandy, that is good news, all. Perhaps Pyrocat in glycol will become the new standard.

I know that is the case for their Pyrocat HD in water kits, but certainly not the case for their Wimberly WD2D+ kits, many of which sit on dealer shelves after Photographers Formulary ships them.

Sandy,

Thanks again for diverting your time to look into all this.

Andre,

Just one more bit of information. All of the liquid kits from Formulary have a batch number that indicates when the kit was actually mixed. This goes back for years. So if you have a question about the acutal date of mixing of either your Pyrocat-HD or Wimberly WD2D+ kit you can contact Formulary with the batch number on the kit to find out on what date it was actually mixed.

Sandy

**steve simmons** · 18-Jun-2006, 19:34

What is it about this formula that makes it so unstable that batch dates, special mixing, etc, seems necessary. The old ABC pyro was also unstable, the B solution would change over time, but I thought the newer formulae improved on this problem. I have not heard of this stability and dating problem with W2D2 or the plus version or with PMK.

steve simmons

**Jorge Gasteazoro** · 18-Jun-2006, 20:16

Would you leave it alone? Are you going to come and mess this thread too? There is nothing unstable about Pyrocat, it lasts longer than PMK, but people want to make large quatities and be able to store them for years, this is the capability that glycol gives to Pyrocat. You are really becoming tiresome!

Originally Posted by steve simmons

What is it about this formula that makes it so unstable that batch dates, special mixing, etc, seems necessary. The old ABC pyro was also unstable, the B solution would change over time, but I thought the newer formulae improved on this problem. I have not heard of this stability and dating problem with W2D2 or the plus version or with PMK.

steve simmons

**steve simmons** · 18-Jun-2006, 20:22

Given all the threads about Pyrocat and the mixing and stability probloms this is a fair question. PMK is very stable. I have kept the A and B solutions going for years just adding a new batch to what was about to run out. This is one of the qualities of the PMK and W2D2 formulae. I hope the Pyrocat group won't try and divert attention from the problems by engaging in personal attacks. The question I asked is a fair one and not personal. Lets keep the answer on a high level and not drop into personal insults.

steve simmons

**Jorge Gasteazoro** · 18-Jun-2006, 21:03

YOu are the only one who sees many threads, there have been a few and they have been mostly operator error. There is no diverting here, there is mostly you trying to make something out of nothing. Now, you ruined the previosu thread, you plan on ruining this one too?

As I said in the previous thread, I just developed a negative last week with Pyrocat HD that was 6 months old and mixed with tap water. BTW, when I used PMK, it never lasted more than 3 or 4 months before it went bad...I dont see where you get this years of service.

Originally Posted by steve simmons

Given all the threads about Pyrocat and the mixing and stability probloms this is a fair question. PMK is very stable. I have kept the A and B solutions going for years just adding a new batch to what was about to run out. This is one of the qualities of the PMK and W2D2 formulae. I hope the Pyrocat group won't try and divert attention from the problems by engaging in personal attacks. The question I asked is a fair one and not personal. Lets keep the answer on a high level and not drop into personal insults.

steve simmons

**brook** · 18-Jun-2006, 21:11

I just finished off a liter of PyrocatHD I mixed in 4/04, for the last year it sat about 1/4 full, with nothing to slow down oxygination, no marbels, no nitrogen, nothing. It performed as well as the day I mixed it. It also worked as well as a fresh batch I just mixed.
In my experience, and thats all I have to go on, none of the pyrogallol based developers , even freshly mixed, do what Pyrocat HD does every time with working solutions mixed with tap water. Like many, including Gordon Hutchins from what i remember, PMK is worthless for Azo.

I have no axe to grind or bone to pick here, the stuff just works.

**steve simmons** · 18-Jun-2006, 21:16

This is the second thread in the last week or so discussing problems with this formula and giving all kinds of fixes and tweaks. The Book of Pyro has been out for 15 years and sold thousands of copies. There has never been this much talk about problems with it. John Wimberly came out with the W2D2 about 1978 and there were never this many problems with it or his one newer verson W2D2+.

Many of us have been using Pyro/Metol based formulae for 20+ years and found them to be very stable. If the pyrocat group wants to ignore this experience and chase something else that is fine. But for those looking for a more stable and user friendly formula I suggest one of the W2D2 formulae or PMK.

steve simmons

**Jorge Gasteazoro** · 18-Jun-2006, 22:05

Originally Posted by steve simmons

Many of us have been using Pyro/Metol based formulae for 20+ years and found them to be very stable. If the pyrocat group wants to ignore this experience and chase something else that is fine. But for those looking for a more stable and user friendly formula I suggest one of the W2D2 formulae or PMK.

steve simmons

What is there to ignore? I have been using Pyrocat HD for 5 years, not once has it failed. The only one insisting there is a problem is you! The only reason you did not see the same about PMK is because it came out before the internet, otherwise I bet you there would have been many threads about PMK failure. WD2D+ is the tweaked old formula with EDTA, it has a little bit better shelf life but nothing anywhere near to that of Pyrocat.

Enough of this vendetta you are carrying, you wont listen to any reason just so you can keep harping about something you know nothing about since you have admited you dont know how to use Pyrocat, given your reported "tests". So, can you move on? Enough of your crap, you dont believe anything it is said about Pyrocat, fine publish it in your magazine, but stop crapping all over this site....

**Jay DeFehr** · 18-Jun-2006, 23:47

I'm always interested in a discussion of staining developers, and their various properties, but I'm not interested in any personal rancor or hysterics, so I will confine my remarks to the subject of staining developers, and hope others will do the same.

Pyrocat HD, by some reports, lasts virtually forever, made up in tap water and stored in partially filled containers, and never varies in performance from freshly mixed until expired. By other reports, it is extremely sensitive to water quality, storage conditions, and contamination, lasts only a few weeks made up in distilled water and stored in completely full glass bottles, and its performance varies with the phase of the moon. I personally don't lend much creedence to either claim, and believe the truth to lie somewhere between, with a definite advantage to those who practice sound lab procedures.

As I've commented before, PMK contains 2X the concentration of sulfite that Pyrocat HD does, and pyrogallol is less sensitive to oxidation, both of which, I believe contribute to PMK's excellent longevity. I also believe that making up Pyrocat HD at 2X the standard concentration would increase the life and stability of the A solution when made up in water.

Making a two solution staining developer up in glycol is just a good idea, plain and simple. It is a simple and effective way to ensure the stability and longevity of a stock solution, and permits the omission of sulfite altogether, which can be beneficial. I think there is a distinction to be made between developers formulated to be made up in water, and modified to be made up in glycol, and those formulated specifically to be made up in glycol, such as Hypercat. I hope that statement is not read as inflammatory, but simply as point to be considered.

If I might respond to Mr. Simmons suggestion-

But for those looking for a more stable and user friendly formula I suggest one of the W2D2 formulae or PMK.

I would counter that those looking for the most stable, user-friendly staining developer consider 510-Pyro. 510-Pyro is the only single solution staining developer of its kind, and is as stable and easy to use as HC-110 or Rodinal, or more so, but with many important benefits that staining developers have to offer. 510-Pyro also offers many benefits over other pyrogallol developers, including PMK and WD2D, and is as close to an all-purpose staining developer as I've seen.

I look forward to reasoned replies.

Jay

**tim atherton** · 19-Jun-2006, 08:03

Originally Posted by steve simmons

This is the second thread in the last week or so discussing problems with this formula .

steve simmons

I just re-read the beginning of this thread - where does the poster ask about problems...? In fact until you start in with your trolling I can't see any mention of problems?