Wimberly WD2D+ and Jobo Rotary Processing = Heaven!

[Andre Noble]

Hello,

I just wanted to report my complete success with rotary processing (Expert 3010 drum) of Ilford FP4+ sheet (rated @ appx ASA 50) using Wimberly WD2D+ pyro at 1:1:50 at appx 69F for 7 minutes, slowest, and unidirectional rotation setting on a Jobo CPP2.

Midway throught the development phase, I emptied the developer and poured in a fresh batch. I did this out of capacity concerns for the limited volume (appx. 500ml) of highly dilute pyro developer developing 9 sheets of 4x5 film.

The traditional concern about using WD2D+ in rotary processing is excessive aerial fogging.

However my negatives came out absolutley stunningly clean - meaning negligible base fogging and good eveness of development. I attribute this to one or all or the following: 1) Jobo at slowest rotation speed. 2) Unidirectional rotation. 3). Fresh (the second half of the originally mixed batch) developer midway through.

I hope this is useful to others. Andre

[Eric Woodbury]

Andre, Thanks for the report. Glad to here about the low fog. Are you going to try the WD2H+, a newer version of what you have? It looks to me like it is about the same thing but with a sequestering agent and an antifog, with more carbonate.

[Andre Noble]

Hello Eric,

That's the first I heard of the new Wimberly WD2H+. I still have a copy of the Photo Techniques article from April/March 2003 where John Wimberly details his extensive testing of WD2D+. If he formulated the new version, I may look into it.

[Greg Blank]

I've been doing Pyro this way for years and its what I advise people when they contact me regarding Jobo.

Hello,

I just wanted to report my complete success with rotary processing (Expert 3010 drum) of Ilford FP4+ sheet (rated @ appx ASA 50) using Wimberly WD2D+ pyro at 1:1:50 at appx 69F for 7 minutes, slowest, and unidirectional rotation setting on a Jobo CPP2.

Midway throught the development phase, I emptied the developer and poured in a fresh batch. I did this out of capacity concerns for the limited volume (appx. 500ml) of highly dilute pyro developer developing 9 sheets of 4x5 film.

The traditional concern about using WD2D+ in rotary processing is excessive aerial fogging.

However my negatives came out absolutley stunningly clean - meaning negligible base fogging and good eveness of development. I attribute this to one or all or the following: 1) Jobo at slowest rotation speed. 2) Unidirectional rotation. 3). Fresh (the second half of the originally mixed batch) developer midway through.

I hope this is useful to others. Andre

[Kirk Keyes]

I too use Wimberley's new WD2H developer in a Jobo. I have a nitrogen tank set up to flush air out of the Jobo tank while developing. You don't need to dump halfway with the nitrogen purge. I'm really happy with the results.

[Greg Blank]

Hey Kirk;

Would you mind posting a picture or two it might be good for folks to see how that's accomplished. I've heard of this being done for some time, so I for one am interested how it's set up.

Take care

I too use Wimberley's new WD2H developer in a Jobo. I have a nitrogen tank set up to flush air out of the Jobo tank while developing. You don't need to dump halfway with the nitrogen purge. I'm really happy with the results.

[Andre Noble]

Kirk, BTW when I dumped the WD2D+ developer halfway and replenished with fresh, I totally did not expect it to result in such a clean process as it did. You might consider it instead out of safety concerns of possible accident of too much nitrogen displacing the oxygen in a small darkroom?

[Kirk Keyes]

Andre -

It's a pretty small tank of nitrogen that I used - I think it's a "B" sized cylinder that has a volume of about 17 liters. At 2500 psi, that's about 100 cubic feet. I've got it out in the basement, which is about 9000 cubic feet. So the 100 cubic feet is a bit more than 1% of the volume. I think I can loose 1% oxygen content without concern. And since there is a regulator and I adjust the flow to about 1 liter/minute, there's no worry while using the tank for film processing.

By the way - I walked into a walk-in refrigerator at work last fall, and someone had placed a couple pounds of dry ice into the room. I walked to get a sample, and after about 60 seconds, I was getting really pissed off when I couldn't find the sample (more than usual!) and somewhat anxious and my chest started getting tight, and I noticed a funny taste in my mouth. I walked out, and asked a second person to see if the air smelled funny in there with me, and then we got a third opinion... Not the smartest thing to do, but we figured out there must be CO2 in there and put an oxygen meter - it read 17% oxygen (21% is normal for sea level). 17% equivalent to about 8,000 or 9,000 ft of elevation, and I have no idea what it would have been when I first went in the cooler. Anyway, I've some first hand experience with being nearly accidentally asphixiated from oxygen displacement...

[Kirk Keyes]

Greg - I'll try to get some photos posted later today.

[johnwimberley]

I'm pleased that you all are interested in, and using, my pyrogallol film developer formulae. I'd like to clarify the differences between the WD2D, WD2D+ and WD2H developers. But first, I've long been skeptical of rotary processing with pyro, having seen terrible results from a number of users who were convinced all was well. With the majority of negatives, tonal variations in the subject matter mask uneven development, although it is present like noise in a stereo system that you can't hear through the music, but the experience is subliminaly degraded. To evaluate evenness, it is necessary to photograph a completely even light source. I use a small light bulb suspended several feet directly above a sheet of film in my darkroom, controlling exposure by turning the light on and off with my enlarging timer.

WD2D was first published in PhotoGraphic Magazine in 1977. It was the first pyrogallol formula for films with post WWII technology. Later, during the 1990's, most printing papers were variable contrast, and to counter their lack of highlight separation, I formulated a variation called WD2D+. It was designed to produce greater tonal separation in the high values. The formula for WD2D+ has never been published in accordance with my agreement with Photographers' Formulary who manufactures it.

In 1990 I needed a formula that could produce reliable, 4-zone contrast expansions, while retaining a superb tonal scale. The resulting formula is WD2H, and it's included in the latest, 3rd edition of Steve Anchell's excellent "The Darkroom Cookbook." Sadly, the published formula contains a major omission. "Solution A" should include: Sodium Bisulfite 20 grams, which is added after the Metol and before the Pyrogallol. WD2H is also great for normal and minus contrasts, and I've used it for all my work during the past 8 years or so.

Here is the correct formula for WD2H. The development times are for Ilford FP4+, tray processed with continuous agitation:

Solution A:
Distilled water, 750.0 ml
Benzotriazole, 0.2g
Metol, 6.0g
Sodium Bisulfite, 20.0g
Pyrogallol, 60.0g
EDTA Tetrasodium Salt, 5.0g
Distilled water to make, 1.0 Liter

Solution B
Distilled water, 750.0 ml
Sodium Carbonate, monohydrate 110.0g
Distilled water to make, 1.0 Liter

To Use:
Working dilution for normal and reduced contrast:
Distilled water, 1600.0 ml
Solution A, 25.0 ml
Solution B, 25.0 ml

N-2, EI 32, develop 7 minutes. N, EI 64, develop 9.5 minutes.

Working dilution for increased contrast:
Solution A, 25.0 ml
Solution B, 50.0 ml

N+2, EI 84, develop 6.5 minutes. N+4, EI 100, develop 12 minutes.

BTW, WD2D stands for Wimberley Developer number 2 version D.