This is one of the rare threads I have read in a long time.
I must admit that I do not understand the need for testing--as long as one understands exposure/development relationships. And I would assume that, more or less, those reading a thread like this would (or should) know exposure/development relationships as readily as they can count from one to ten
My recommendation is to pick a developer--any developer--based on your reading here or on anything else. Then go expose film and make prints. If the negatives are not right and you cannot get a satisfactory print--and you understand exposure/development relationships--you will know what corrections to make for the next time.
And if the photographs do not come out--so what! At least you will have had the pleasure of making photographs.
And don't change your developer or film or paper unless you are unsatisfied with your work. If you are unsatisfied, then try something else. But by all means make pictures.
I have seen too many aspiring photographers spend far too much time making tests--of film, developers, paper, etc.--or testing cameras and lenses. A few of them never get around to really making pictures.
I understand that the more scientifically minded above us may get more pleasure in the testing procedures than in the making of meaningful photographs, and if anyone reading this fits into that category--well then, by all means continue to do what brings you the most pleasure. But for those who aspire to make meaningful photographs, consider doing any testing only after you are dissatisfied with the results you are getting.
As stated previously in this thread, there are no magic developers. The magic is in one's vision.
Michael A. Smith
Bookmarks