Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?

[Mike1234]

Sandy... I would love to see a larger example of the full print. I always strive to retain textural detail as well as tonal range/subtleties... and that image is special.

[Ken Lee]

The image to which Sandy refers, can be seen here.

If your browser lets you zoom in (usually by increasing the size of the font), you can see that the Photoshop ruler displays the size in inches 43.. 44... 45.. off the screen. Thats a big print from a small negative.

(To zoom in/increase font size on Windows, try pressing both the control key and the plus-key at the same time, namely CTRL/+
To zoom out/decrease font size on Windows, press the control key and the minus-key at the same time, namely CTRL/-

On the Mac, it's Command/+ and Command/-)

[Jay Decker]

Well I'll be a monkey's uncle !...

Zone 13 is way beyond what any sane photographer would waste a sheet of film and still expect to capture useable texture. I didn't know that the film could hold that many zones...

All of these negatives scanned so easily, I had to increase contrast to make them feel like light. The amazing thing to me, is that there was no need for stand, semi-stand, flash, dilution, HDR merging, blending, multiple exposures... no incantations or rituals of any kind !...

Thanks so much for sharing this technique ! It's been around for a long time, but it took me until now to pick it up.

I go away for the weekend, Ken tries the recipe, and I miss all the hoopla!

Like Sandy, I use divided Pyrocat for roll film all the time. I decided to use it for my adventure into 8x10, because I going to be shooting Galli style, i.e., old, funky, fast glass and a Packard Shutter, which might not afford one the most precise, accurate, or repeatable exposure duration control (see the example below). Figure that even a maroon like myself might be successful at 8x10 with Sandy's development magic bullet.

Despite his modesty, Sandy deserves the credit for this one... it is not magic, but it is pretty close!



More info on the Galli Shutter

[Jay Decker]

Best of Both Worlds? Maybe for me...

Please don't take this as an invitation to start digital v. analog photography discussion/feud/spitting match/...

I assume that many of you listen to Brooks Jensen's podcasts. If you don't, you might want to consider listening to Brooks' podcasts, he has thought more deeply about a lot of photography things more deeply than most of us. The last two podcasts (podcasts 555 and 556, published in early September of 2009) have been on some of the benefits of capturing digitally in the field and performing more of the creative work image making process in the digital darkroom. Following the vein of Brooks' train of thought, I have this comment on the hybrid process with compensating development...

Like Ken Lee mentioned early in this thread, compensating developers allow you to capture a wider brightness range that can be easily scanned and exploited in the digital darkroom to yield many of the benefits that Brooks discusses in the referenced podcasts. The bottom line for me is that LF B&W film capture with compensating development captures wonderful tonality and detail (texture) that I can not afford in digital capture, at least yet, and it does it relatively easily. By relatively easily, I mean that I do not have to nail an exposure and development combination to achieve good results. But, instead I have to be close on the exposure and just follow one development recipe to achieve good results. Which puts good technical results within the grasp of regular guys (maybe more properly read: "hacks like me") who would rather spend their weekends trying to create meaningful photographs rather than practicing technique in hopes of one day having achieve sufficient proficiency to start making meaningful photographs.

I still have a long way to go both in the craft of LF photograhy and I have yet to make a meaningful photograph, but with this hybrid process I can see the light at the end of the tunnel regarding the craft of LF photography... if you have figured out what it takes to make a meaningful photograph, please let me know.

[Chuck Pere]

For traditional darkroom users is there any downside to using a split developer technique for all types of lighting? For them would it be better to use it only in high contrast situations?

[Ken Lee]

Perhaps others can, but I haven't fully established to my satisfaction, that Divided Pyrocat HD is best for all situations, hands down.

However, I plan to use it exclusively for now, and see... what develops. In scenes with normal lighting, it seems to have produced images with normal contrast. In scenes with extreme contrast, it does the same. As I asked before: "How do it know ?"

[Robert Hughes]

I LOVE that Maroon Galli shutter! What a great solution!!! Now, if only I could get one with one of Frank P's models attached... she could even come clothed, for shipping I guess.

[sanking]

For traditional darkroom users is there any downside to using a split developer technique for all types of lighting? For them would it be better to use it only in high contrast situations?

It depends on what type of process the traditional darkroom user is using. If printing with VC silver papers I don't believe there would be much of a downside because you could adjust contrast with filters. On the other hand, there would be a definite downside to printing with a process (fixed grade silver papers for example, or vandyke) that did not allow for much control of contrast in the printing stage. Regardless, if I were only printing in the wet darkroom I would recommend using full exposure and development controls to get the best negative possible to start with.

For scanning I have not found any downside in the use of two-bath developers regardless of the type of lighting in the scene. Low contrast scenes witll give negatives of lower contrast and high contrast scenes will give negatives of higher contrast, but the tones can adjusted in Photoshop as long as you are able to scan with detail in the highlights.

Sandy King

[David Karp]

I can attest that Sandy is correct regarding traditional printing with VC papers. Using a divided developer for your negatives works very well. I have also used it for some contact printing of WP negatives on graded papers (Kentmere Bromide grades 2 and 3) with good results. Normal scenes develop to normal contrast, just as do the normal scenes included in a roll of 120.

The toughest situation for divided development is very dull lighting. In those situations, I have intensified the negative in selenium, which works well.

[eddie]

Regardless, if I were only printing in the wet darkroom I would recommend using full exposure and development controls to get the best negative possible to start with.
.

Sandy King

what do you mean here sandy? you would use other developing formulas?

i print in my DR cause my scanner hates me. now if i get some love from my scanner with this technique i may never be forced back to the DR. BUT if i use the wet DR on VC papers this will work nicely?

i will try it for sure....sounds great.

thanks

eddie