I am not familiar with the Lauder print developer, but if it is "like" Dektol, it should be a good standard developer. (Formulating a basic MQ or PQ print developer is not difficult, so I would imagine it would be more than adequate for basic developing). I would recommend that you get to know it well before doing a lot of switching around.
As far as using Selectol Soft or another soft-working developer in addition to the standard, higher-contrast developer goes, you would only need such split-development techniques if you need to achieve an intermediate paper grade on graded paper or if you print with VC paper and filters. However, if you have a color head or some other kind of continuously variable light source, you can simply "dial in" the intermediate contrast grades.
I use graded paper almost exclusively and use the Hard/Soft developer combination often. I find that having two trays works better than mixing the two as some recommend (this latter is similar to the Beer's variable contrast developer, which you might research).
I find that I can get many different nuances of contrast by varying the time the print is in the different developers: a soft-working developer by itself can be just the thing, as can using just the harder developer. However, if an intermediate contrast is desired, split the developing time between the soft and hard developers. Always use the softer developer first to prevent contamination and optimize the contrast control.
I usually start with splitting a three-minute developing time in half and adjust from there. If more contrast is needed, the print spends less time in the soft developer and more in the hard. There are infinite variations on this, and it is a good tool for fine-tuning contrast. I find that if I use both both developers on a print that the minimum time in either should be longer than 30 seconds with agitation to prevent mottling. Again, you really don't need to do this if you have a continuously variable light source.
When I worked in a public darkroom, I found it fairly easy to mix up a small amount of Selectol Soft or Ansco 120 in a separate tray and work as above, using my personal soft developer and the community standard developer.
As far as fixer bleaching your highlights goes: any fix used properly will not bleach the highlights. Acid fixes can bleach highlights with extreme overfixing. If your fixer is visibly affecting the highlights, check you dilutions and times and adjust accordingly (again, basic fixers are not hard to formulate, so I doubt that the chemicals themselves are at fault). TF-4 is a good product, but I found it to be more expensive and a bit smellier than the normal, non-hardening rapid fixer I use (Ilford Hypam or Rapid Fix at print strength, two-baths for 2 minutes in each bath for fiber-base prints. I don't like the economy or the rapid exhaustion of the fixer with the stronger dilutions recommended by Ilford.)
Many use different developers to subtly change the tone of the print, others are searching for that "deep black," etc. I have found, however, that a clean-working MQ or PQ print developer will deliver all the density a paper has to offer as well as give a good tonal range as long as the negative is tailored to the process.
As far as image tone goes, this is where you may want to experiment some with different developers. That said, I find that the papers themselves have more and greater variations in tone than the developer usually lends, plus, I tone my prints. For me, finding a paper that tones to a color and contrast I like is more important than the tone the developer itself gives. (An aside here: softer developers are usually "warmer" than standard ones since most contain only Metol as the developing agent. You will see the difference if you try controlling contrast with a combination of soft and hard developers.) I have found that some glycin developers prevent or hinder the toning of prints in selenium.
Hope that the above helps a bit.
Best,
Doremus Scudder
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by jwarren116
Bookmarks