Promoting Pyro Stain on HP5

[RodinalDuchamp]

Hello group. I have used TXP for a few years and love it but the costs have lead me to try HP5 which offers similar traits at a lower cost. All in all the films are very interchangeable though I have noticed 2 significant differences. The first is that HP5 is more delicate than TXP, I get more fingerprints on it even though I don't handle it any more harshly than TXP.

The second is more significant. I use Pyrocat in a semistand development with my films. I noticed that TXP stains better (more staining) than the HP5. This hasn't caused problems per say yet, but there are some scenes where I know I need more staining to restrain the extreme high values. This leads me to my question and the reason for this thread. Are there ways to increase staining? Specifically for HP5?

What happens if instead of 1:1:200 I add more of the part B 1:1.5:200 - would a higher concentration of the B solution increase the stain?
I already presoak all films for 2 minutes, should I increase the presoak?

Any information, anecdote, or trick is much appreciated.

[Alan9940]

Don't know if my comments will be of any help so, hopefully, Sandy King will jump in on this thread.

I've never developed Tri-X in Pyrocat, but I have done a lot of HP5+ at 1:1:100 and 2:2:100. I use the latter dilution when developing for pt/pd. I can tell you that the stain in the 2:2:100 mix is more pronounced than the 1:1:100 that I use for silver printing; for HP5+. I'm curious why you use 200 parts water? Is this higher dilution intended to control extreme high values? I'm not sure how this higher dilution would affect the stain. You must be dealing with extreme contrast ranges because I shoot primarily in the desert southwest, USA, and I've never had a problem holding the high values with Pyrocat. As a matter of fact, if my intention is to develop with Pyrocat I place my important shadows where I want them and let the high end go where it may. You may just have to run some controlled tests, keep careful notes, and see what happens.

Good luck!

[Jim Noel]

Hello group. I have used TXP for a few years and love it but the costs have lead me to try HP5 which offers similar traits at a lower cost. All in all the films are very interchangeable though I have noticed 2 significant differences. The first is that HP5 is more delicate than TXP, I get more fingerprints on it even though I don't handle it any more harshly than TXP.

The second is more significant. I use Pyrocat in a semistand development with my films. I noticed that TXP stains better (more staining) than the HP5. This hasn't caused problems per say yet, but there are some scenes where I know I need more staining to restrain the extreme high values. This leads me to my question and the reason for this thread. Are there ways to increase staining? Specifically for HP5?

What happens if instead of 1:1:200 I add more of the part B 1:1.5:200 - would a higher concentration of the B solution increase the stain?
I already presoak all films for 2 minutes, should I increase the presoak?

Any information, anecdote, or trick is much appreciated.

You have gotten used to the excess stain which builds in TXP. The stain in HP5 is more appropriate in that there is very little, if any, in the shadows, but perfectly appropriate in the mid-tones and highlights.,

[koraks]

I haven't run any Tri-X though Pyro, but I printed a few HP5+ negs just yesterday that I had developed in pyrocat. Lots of stain, no doubt. I shot at box speed and developed some for 17 min at 1+1+100 and another roll at 20 minutes and the same concentration. I was surprised at how significant the increase in stain was, while the silver image hadn't gotten that much denser.
Not necessarily very useful perhaps, but at the very least I can assure you that HP5+ stains just fine in pyro.

[RodinalDuchamp]

You have gotten used to the excess stain which builds in TXP. The stain in HP5 is more appropriate in that there is very little, if any, in the shadows, but perfectly appropriate in the mid-tones and highlights.,

You may be absolutely right! I find the higher stain attractive for some night scene that require long exposure but may contain an area of constant light, a streetlamp for example. It is in those instances where I'd like some maximum staining.

[RodinalDuchamp]

Don't know if my comments will be of any help so, hopefully, Sandy King will jump in on this thread.

I've never developed Tri-X in Pyrocat, but I have done a lot of HP5+ at 1:1:100 and 2:2:100. I use the latter dilution when developing for pt/pd. I can tell you that the stain in the 2:2:100 mix is more pronounced than the 1:1:100 that I use for silver printing; for HP5+. I'm curious why you use 200 parts water? Is this higher dilution intended to control extreme high values? I'm not sure how this higher dilution would affect the stain. You must be dealing with extreme contrast ranges because I shoot primarily in the desert southwest, USA, and I've never had a problem holding the high values with Pyrocat. As a matter of fact, if my intention is to develop with Pyrocat I place my important shadows where I want them and let the high end go where it may. You may just have to run some controlled tests, keep careful notes, and see what happens.

Good luck!

You are correct the scenes I would like to have deeper staining in are ones usually at night with a high contrast but here and there, like a lamppost or any other constant lighting in the scene. Definitely a very particular scene, requiring a particular type of development. I have always used 1:1:200 and higher dilutions even in semi stand for up to 30 minutes

[chris_4622]

The second is more significant. I use Pyrocat in a semistand development with my films. I noticed that TXP stains better (more staining) than the HP5. This hasn't caused problems per say yet, but there are some scenes where I know I need more staining to restrain the extreme high values. This leads me to my question and the reason for this thread. Are there ways to increase staining? Specifically for HP5?
Any information, anecdote, or trick is much appreciated.
I'm confused, you have a high contrast scene and want more stain? It seems like you are using dilutions and agitation methods to compensate for the high contrast mentioned in post #5. If that is the case more stain isn't necessary as the stain acts like density when printing.

Also I wouldn't worry about being able to see the stain, some films appear to have more than other brands. The best thing would be to try the HP5 and see how it prints.

[RodinalDuchamp]

I'm confused, you have a high contrast scene and want more stain? It seems like you are using dilutions and agitation methods to compensate for the high contrast mentioned in post #5. If that is the case more stain isn't necessary as the stain acts like density when printing.

Also I wouldn't worry about being able to see the stain, some films appear to have more than other brands. The best thing would be to try the HP5 and see how it prints.

Before this thread devolves I'd like to re-emphasize, I am looking for ways to increase stain. Once I can do that I can test xyz. I gave an example of a situation merely for discussion.

[Doremus Scudder]

Before this thread devolves I'd like to re-emphasize, I am looking for ways to increase stain. Once I can do that I can test xyz. I gave an example of a situation merely for discussion.

How much stain you get is a property of the film emulsion and the particular staining agent you are using. You can tweak it a little with changes in dilution and time, even agitation methods, but you aren't going to change the inherent characteristics much. Many films (TXP included) exhibit a lot of overall staining. This is not really desirable, as it blocks up the shadows a bit. The goal is to always keep overall staining to a minimum. BPF-200 was notorious for a lot of general stain; TXP is in the middle somewhere, TMY and TMX exhibit much less, and the negatives look much less colored. The stain is there, however. I often shoot TXP and TMY back-to-back in the same holder; two shots per scene. The negatives look markedly different, but they print just fine.

The stain we want is the proportional staining, which means, more silver in the image = more stain too. Ideally, then, the film base and deep shadows should be clear and neutral and the high-density areas should have the most staining. The silver image, however, masks the stain color, so the "ideal" stained negative will not look very green/yellow.

If you think that increased stain somehow has a compensating effect on the highlights (i.e., will keep more detail in them), then you are barking up the wrong tree. More stain = more contrast. The reason staining developers are so good for retaining highlight detail is the curve that results from the combination of silver+stain, which is a bit more shouldered than most curves from non-staining developers. My primary reason for using staining developers is the grain-masking effect of the stain and the edge effects you can get from them.

If you want more stain, you can always bleach and redevelop your negative. I do this routinely when I have the occasional negative that needs more contrast. Use a ferricyanide/bromide rehalogenating bleach and bleach the silver image away completely. If you've developed in a staining developer, all that will remain is the stain (you could compare the actual amount of stain in two different films this way; by bleaching the silver away and then looking only at the stain...). Anyway, after bleaching, redevelop the negative in a staining developer. You'll get the silver image back plus another dose of stain, doubling the amount of proportional stain. This method can be very gratifying for thin negs.

Best,

Doremus

[Michael Wesik]

If you think that increased stain somehow has a compensating effect on the highlights (i.e., will keep more detail in them), then you are barking up the wrong tree. More stain = more contrast. The reason staining developers are so good for retaining highlight detail is the curve that results from the combination of silver+stain, which is a bit more shouldered than most curves from non-staining developers.

+1

[Michael Wesik]

If you find that you need to harness your contrast/subject brightness range to a fine point, I would use Pyrocat divided. I've managed to reign in some wicked contrast with that methodology - like 14 stops - for silver printing.

[RodinalDuchamp]

How much stain you get is a property of the film emulsion and the particular staining agent you are using. You can tweak it a little with changes in dilution and time, even agitation methods, but you aren't going to change the inherent characteristics much. Many films (TXP included) exhibit a lot of overall staining. This is not really desirable, as it blocks up the shadows a bit. The goal is to always keep overall staining to a minimum. BPF-200 was notorious for a lot of general stain; TXP is in the middle somewhere, TMY and TMX exhibit much less, and the negatives look much less colored. The stain is there, however. I often shoot TXP and TMY back-to-back in the same holder; two shots per scene. The negatives look markedly different, but they print just fine.

The stain we want is the proportional staining, which means, more silver in the image = more stain too. Ideally, then, the film base and deep shadows should be clear and neutral and the high-density areas should have the most staining. The silver image, however, masks the stain color, so the "ideal" stained negative will not look very green/yellow.

If you think that increased stain somehow has a compensating effect on the highlights (i.e., will keep more detail in them), then you are barking up the wrong tree. More stain = more contrast. The reason staining developers are so good for retaining highlight detail is the curve that results from the combination of silver+stain, which is a bit more shouldered than most curves from non-staining developers. My primary reason for using staining developers is the grain-masking effect of the stain and the edge effects you can get from them.

If you want more stain, you can always bleach and redevelop your negative. I do this routinely when I have the occasional negative that needs more contrast. Use a ferricyanide/bromide rehalogenating bleach and bleach the silver image away completely. If you've developed in a staining developer, all that will remain is the stain (you could compare the actual amount of stain in two different films this way; by bleaching the silver away and then looking only at the stain...). Anyway, after bleaching, redevelop the negative in a staining developer. You'll get the silver image back plus another dose of stain, doubling the amount of proportional stain. This method can be very gratifying for thin negs.

Best,

Doremus


Duly noted, however I still want to experiment with staining - I guess at this point I can start by increasing solution B, temperatures, then testing agitation methods

[RodinalDuchamp]

If you find that you need to harness your contrast/subject brightness range to a fine point, I would use Pyrocat divided. I've managed to reign in some wicked contrast with that methodology - like 14 stops - for silver printing.

I am very interested in this! Do you have any useful links?

[Michael Wesik]

I am very interested in this! Do you have any useful links?

First off, be aware that by increasing Part B, temperature and/or using more aggressive agitation methods you'll also increase the overall density of your negs. Additional stain will inevitably come with more density.

The other thing that can happen with a lot of stain is uneven staining depending on how you process your film. My negs are really - like really, really - stained and I actually presoak my film for 20mins with agitation to remove all the dyes and annhilation layer. It took me years to figure that one out. I process my 8x10 and 11x14 film in tubes - BTZS style - without defect regardless of subject. My agitation method is super aggressive and unorthodox - a mix of rotary in hand with simultaneous shaking - but it works.

Divided Pyrocat is extremely versatile and really amazing for controlling contrast. I use it exclusively for any and all lighting conditions. Some scenes include shadows that ring in at EV4 with highlights at EV16+. The only thing I change is the dilution. The entire process - agitation, time, temperature - stays the same (the latter two of which aren't super critical in that a temp fluctuation of a few degrees doesn't have much of an impact). There's tons of discourse on the subject here as well as APUG.

This is a good intro to the subject: http://www.pyrocat-hd.com/html/TwoBathPyrocat.html

[RodinalDuchamp]

First off, be aware that by increasing Part B, temperature and/or using more aggressive agitation methods you'll also increase the overall density of your negs. Additional stain will inevitably come with more density.

The other thing that can happen with a lot of stain is uneven staining depending on how you process your film. My negs are really - like really, really - stained and I actually presoak my film for 20mins with agitation to remove all the dyes and annhilation layer. It took me years to figure that one out. I process my 8x10 and 11x14 film in tubes - BTZS style - without defect regardless of subject. My agitation method is super aggressive and unorthodox - a mix of rotary in hand with simultaneous shaking - but it works.

Divided Pyrocat is extremely versatile and really amazing for controlling contrast. I use it exclusively for any and all lighting conditions. Some scenes include shadows that ring in at EV4 with highlights at EV16+. The only thing I change is the dilution. The entire process - agitation, time, temperature - stays the same (the latter two of which aren't super critical in that a temp fluctuation of a few degrees doesn't have much of an impact). There's tons of discourse on the subject here as well as APUG.

This is a good intro to the subject: http://www.pyrocat-hd.com/html/TwoBathPyrocat.html

Thank you! I'd love to find out more about your specific process if you are willing to share.

[David Karp]

. . . The only thing I change is the dilution. The entire process - agitation, time, temperature - stays the same . . . .

It would be interesting to know what dilutions you use and in what situations you adjust them. It would also be interesting to know your workflow -- Agitation, time in each bath, temperature.

[Michael Wesik]

Thank you! I'd love to find out more about your specific process if you are willing to share.

Sure thing...

Attached are a few pictures of a the tubes I use. They're made from black PVC. I made the prototypes myself but then had a plastics welder fabricated the caps - the original caps were just a cap glued to a female coupling and they worked just fine. The whole thing is really easy to make. I can give you details on that if you need. The main things are to size the pipe a 1/2 inch longer than the film, sand the inside, and then after it's assembled - meaning the cap, pipe and male coupling - pour acetone in and slowly pour it out. You end up with a finish like glass which allows the neg to move slightly during agitation. You need one tube, two caps and a tightly fitting O Ring.

As far as the process goes, I use the following for 8x10 or 11x14 Tri-X, FP4 and HP5 all shot at 1/2 box speed...

The Set Up:

- two trays: one for "presoak" and one for a dummy neg (of the same size, unprocessed, film but soaked to remove all dyes and annhilation layers)

- fill up the tube to the top with distilled water as "prewet"

- pour out/mix Part A and Part B with distilled water (for 8x10 film I use about 300-350ml and for 11x14 I use about 600ml)...I always add a 3-4 drops of photoflo from an eye dropper into Part A with 8x10 and twice that much for 11x14. It releases the surface tension of the liquid and promotes very even draining in transition from Part A cap to Part B cap. As far as dilutions go, my N dilution is usually between 1+8 and 1+9. I should preface this that I typically split filter print all of my work with multiple filters - 00, 1/2, 2, and 5, for example. So my contrast index is something specific to my printing style. 1+12 gives a contraction of N-1 1/2 to N-2 and 1+15 gives a contraction of about N-3 to N-4. I've gone up to 1+20 in some cases. I've also gone to 1+3 for expansion which is about as strong as you can take this developer. Any stronger and the viscosity is such that you get uneven development and yes, that's a lot of chemistry. Generally speaking, I'm aiming for a neg with as much printable information as possible at the right contrast index. I don't really care about density as long as my highlights aren't denser than log 2.6....otherwise it's just time.

- I also have a large water bath - essentially a big tray full of water that fits the whole assembled pipe - for straight rotary processing in Part A

*Note - I keep all the water at about room temperature and minor fluctuations have very little, if any affect, on the final density/contrast

- then all your typical trays, 1/4 strength acid stop back, fix, etc...

The Process:

- presoak for 20mins with agitation 5-10sec per min (after which all the dyes and annhilation layer should be gone)...when developing in a tube or where your film is against/touching a surface, sometimes the annhilation layer comes off at different rates which affects staining.

- when complete, pick up the neg from the presoak as well as the dummy neg and place the live neg in front of the dummy neg, cradle them together like a taco, and insert both into the tube...after which you can remove the dummy neg by sliding it out slowly. This is by far the best way to do a wet transfer of film into a tube because the dummy neg protects it.

- the "prewet" water in the tube is poured out slowly and then the tube is turned upside down and screwed into the Part A cap.

- at this point I turn on the lights - they're rigged up to a foot switch and a construction light hanging from a screw in the ceiling

- the tube is turned over and placed directly into the water bath where normal rotary agitation is conducted for a 6 mins...I switch directions every minute and spin the tube at about 2-3 rotations per second...not fast...as slow as it takes rotate it constantly. Switching directions helps mitigate the build up of edge density on one side of the film that's exacerbated by the photoflo. You can actually go longer in Part A if you want. This is purely to soak up Part A into the emulsion. No development occurs at this point.

- after this, the tube is then turned upside down, the Part A cap is unscrewed and the tube is transferred and screwed into the Part B cap where the tube is turned over immediately to commence agitation by doing the following...I'll try to upload a video clip but imagine holding the tube in front of you so that it's parallel to the floor (on it's side...horizontal)...you start doing gentle shakes (about 2 per second) while rotating the tube slowly in your hands at one full rotation per 30sec. Being Canadian, I used some hockey tape on the end/bottom for extra grip. The idea is to circulate the chemistry somewhat aggressively but also completely randomly to promote even development...the slow in-hand rotation ensures that Part B is distributed to the back of the film. In fact, by the end one corner of the neg has always migrated to the edge of the tube. This is done for 6 mins. You could go shorter but I wouldn't go shorter than 3 mins. You want the emulsion to fully harden. Increasing or decreasing time in Part B also affects the overall density. More time means more density, contrast is held constant because it's dictated by the remaining Part A in the emulsion.

- the tube is then turned upside down, unscrewed from the Part B cap, and inserted immediately into the water bath that was used for the Part A rotary. I rotate it around a little and use this as a water stop. Some people like to use a water stop to promote edge effects. I've never felt that it's worth it, personally. I actually found that pouring water into the tube for a water stop caused uneven staining/development because some areas around the back of the film had pockets of Part B and continued to accumulate stain during the water stop.

- the neg is then removed from the tube and placed in 1/4 strength stop, the fix for 6-8 mins, then rinse, hypoclear for a few mins, was for 20-30mins then into fresh photoflo and hang to dry

That's pretty much what I do...I hope it reads ok...


161166

161167

[David Karp]

Thank you Michael.

[Michael Wesik]

Thank you Michael.

No prob...if I can figure out a way of attaching a vid clip of the agitation method I'll get that up too.

[RodinalDuchamp]

Sure thing...

Attached are a few pictures of a the tubes I use. They're made from black PVC. I made the prototypes myself but then had a plastics welder fabricated the caps - the original caps were just a cap glued to a female coupling and they worked just fine. The whole thing is really easy to make. I can give you details on that if you need. The main things are to size the pipe a 1/2 inch longer than the film, sand the inside, and then after it's assembled - meaning the cap, pipe and male coupling - pour acetone in and slowly pour it out. You end up with a finish like glass which allows the neg to move slightly during agitation. You need one tube, two caps and a tightly fitting O Ring.

As far as the process goes, I use the following for 8x10 or 11x14 Tri-X, FP4 and HP5 all shot at 1/2 box speed...

The Set Up:

- two trays: one for "presoak" and one for a dummy neg (of the same size, unprocessed, film but soaked to remove all dyes and annhilation layers)

- fill up the tube to the top with distilled water as "prewet"

- pour out/mix Part A and Part B with distilled water (for 8x10 film I use about 300-350ml and for 11x14 I use about 600ml)...I always add a 3-4 drops of photoflo from an eye dropper into Part A with 8x10 and twice that much for 11x14. It releases the surface tension of the liquid and promotes very even draining in transition from Part A cap to Part B cap. As far as dilutions go, my N dilution is usually between 1+8 and 1+9. I should preface this that I typically split filter print all of my work with multiple filters - 00, 1/2, 2, and 5, for example. So my contrast index is something specific to my printing style. 1+12 gives a contraction of N-1 1/2 to N-2 and 1+15 gives a contraction of about N-3 to N-4. I've gone up to 1+20 in some cases. I've also gone to 1+3 for expansion which is about as strong as you can take this developer. Any stronger and the viscosity is such that you get uneven development and yes, that's a lot of chemistry. Generally speaking, I'm aiming for a neg with as much printable information as possible at the right contrast index. I don't really care about density as long as my highlights aren't denser than log 2.6....otherwise it's just time.

- I also have a large water bath - essentially a big tray full of water that fits the whole assembled pipe - for straight rotary processing in Part A

*Note - I keep all the water at about room temperature and minor fluctuations have very little, if any affect, on the final density/contrast

- then all your typical trays, 1/4 strength acid stop back, fix, etc...

The Process:

- presoak for 20mins with agitation 5-10sec per min (after which all the dyes and annhilation layer should be gone)...when developing in a tube or where your film is against/touching a surface, sometimes the annhilation layer comes off at different rates which affects staining.

- when complete, pick up the neg from the presoak as well as the dummy neg and place the live neg in front of the dummy neg, cradle them together like a taco, and insert both into the tube...after which you can remove the dummy neg by sliding it out slowly. This is by far the best way to do a wet transfer of film into a tube because the dummy neg protects it.

- the "prewet" water in the tube is poured out slowly and then the tube is turned upside down and screwed into the Part A cap.

- at this point I turn on the lights - they're rigged up to a foot switch and a construction light hanging from a screw in the ceiling

- the tube is turned over and placed directly into the water bath where normal rotary agitation is conducted for a 6 mins...I switch directions every minute and spin the tube at about 2-3 rotations per second...not fast...as slow as it takes rotate it constantly. Switching directions helps mitigate the build up of edge density on one side of the film that's exacerbated by the photoflo. You can actually go longer in Part A if you want. This is purely to soak up Part A into the emulsion. No development occurs at this point.

- after this, the tube is then turned upside down, the Part A cap is unscrewed and the tube is transferred and screwed into the Part B cap where the tube is turned over immediately to commence agitation by doing the following...I'll try to upload a video clip but imagine holding the tube in front of you so that it's parallel to the floor (on it's side...horizontal)...you start doing gentle shakes (about 2 per second) while rotating the tube slowly in your hands at one full rotation per 30sec. Being Canadian, I used some hockey tape on the end/bottom for extra grip. The idea is to circulate the chemistry somewhat aggressively but also completely randomly to promote even development...the slow in-hand rotation ensures that Part B is distributed to the back of the film. In fact, by the end one corner of the neg has always migrated to the edge of the tube. This is done for 6 mins. You could go shorter but I wouldn't go shorter than 3 mins. You want the emulsion to fully harden. Increasing or decreasing time in Part B also affects the overall density. More time means more density, contrast is held constant because it's dictated by the remaining Part A in the emulsion.

- the tube is then turned upside down, unscrewed from the Part B cap, and inserted immediately into the water bath that was used for the Part A rotary. I rotate it around a little and use this as a water stop. Some people like to use a water stop to promote edge effects. I've never felt that it's worth it, personally. I actually found that pouring water into the tube for a water stop caused uneven staining/development because some areas around the back of the film had pockets of Part B and continued to accumulate stain during the water stop.

- the neg is then removed from the tube and placed in 1/4 strength stop, the fix for 6-8 mins, then rinse, hypoclear for a few mins, was for 20-30mins then into fresh photoflo and hang to dry

That's pretty much what I do...I hope it reads ok...


161166

161167


Thank you for taking the time to write that out!

[sanking]

"presoak for 20mins with agitation 5-10sec per min (after which all the dyes and annhilation layer should be gone)...when developing in a tube or where your film is against/touching a surface, sometimes the annhilation layer comes off at different rates which affects staining"

Michael,

Thanks for this valuable observation. I have always believed that one gets better results with Pyrocat in tubes with the pre-soak, but limited my tests to five minutes or less assuming that the most important benefit was that it swelled the gelatin emulsion allowing it to more evenly imbibe the reducer. Your explanation that the very long soak removes the dyes of the antihalation layer goes a long way to explain some of the slight uneven staining people sometimes get in tubes with pyro staining developers. I had assumed that one could get rid of the antihalation dyes after processing the film, but it makes perfect sense that the dyes will come off at different rates in a drum or tube, so in theory a very long pre-soak makes sense not only with two-bath Pyrocat, but with regular single solution Pyrocat, and indeed with all other pyro hardening and staining formulas

Sandy

[Michael Wesik]

Thank you for taking the time to write that out!

Sure thing.


"presoak for 20mins with agitation 5-10sec per min (after which all the dyes and annhilation layer should be gone)...when developing in a tube or where your film is against/touching a surface, sometimes the annhilation layer comes off at different rates which affects staining"

Michael,

Thanks for this valuable observation. I have always believed that one gets better results with Pyrocat in tubes with the pre-soak, but limited my tests to five minutes or less assuming that the most important benefit was that it swelled the gelatin emulsion allowing it to more evenly imbibe the reducer. Your explanation that the very long soak removes the dyes of the antihalation layer goes a long way to explain some of the slight uneven staining people sometimes get in tubes with pyro staining developers. I had assumed that one could get rid of the antihalation dyes after processing the film, but it makes perfect sense that the dyes will come off at different rates in a drum or tube, so in theory a very long pre-soak makes sense not only with two-bath Pyrocat, but with regular single solution Pyrocat, and indeed with all other pyro hardening and staining formulas

Sandy

Hi Sandy,

I'm really glad that turned out to be valuable info after all the help you and others have given me over the years. The long presoak with agitation eliminated a number of different development issues from mottling to streaking.

Best,

Michael

[Steve Sherman]

Sure thing.



Hi Sandy,

I'm really glad that turned out to be valuable info after all the help you and others have given me over the years. The long presoak with agitation eliminated a number of different development issues from mottling to streaking.

Best,

Michael

That is interesting information Michael, while I'll rarely used HP 5 and most times don't have blank areas of even tone it is always useful to have tested information. Continued success !

Cheers.

[John Layton]

Pre-soak for 20 minutes? This sounds a bit on the long side. I find that about four minutes total...two minutes in each of two successive presoak trays - to be fine for removal of the anti halation layer.

...but am I missing something here?

[John Layton]

ps - my above post is in the context of pyro/pyrocat development. Usually with some sort of minimal(ish) agitation.

[Michael Wesik]

Pre-soak for 20 minutes? This sounds a bit on the long side. I find that about four minutes total...two minutes in each of two successive presoak trays - to be fine for removal of the anti halation layer.

...but am I missing something here?

The 20 min time was based on throwing an unexposed sheet of film - 8x10 or 11x14 Tri-X, FP4, and/or HP5 - into a tray of water and rocking it every minute until all layers are removed. You'll have a completely gray sheet of film when you're done. I've never experienced the process to happen any faster than 15 mins and the average was 20mins. The test of this was all done with the lights on, of course.

[Michael Wesik]

That is interesting information Michael, while I'll rarely used HP 5 and most times don't have blank areas of even tone it is always useful to have tested information. Continued success !

Cheers.

Hi Steve,

I conducted this testing with either "Ansel Adams test negs" exposed to Zone VI or VII or with scenes where blue cloudless sky occupied at least 2/3 of the image. The test negs were then scanned to determine the presence or absence of defect...and also checked with a densitometer.

[Steve Sherman]

Before this thread devolves I'd like to re-emphasize, I am looking for ways to increase stain. Once I can do that I can test xyz. I gave an example of a situation merely for discussion.

Can you tell us the final process ?? I believe the answer will be somewhat different if the process will be Silver or an Alt process requiring an Ultra Violet light source

SS

[Andrew O'Neill]

You shouldn't have to do anything special to get stain with HP5 and Pyrocat-HD. I get a very nice stain with 10ml + 10ml + 500ml water. For stand development, 5ml+5ml+1200ml water. Also, I do not presoak HP5 when I develop in tubes. I got streaks when I did.

[sanking]

You may be absolutely right! I find the higher stain attractive for some night scene that require long exposure but may contain an area of constant light, a streetlamp for example. It is in those instances where I'd like some maximum staining.

More staining will not help you in that situation. The reason pyro staining and hardening developers do so well in this type of situation is because of hardening, which prevents infectious development and minimizes the spreading of lights out of its place on the negative. Hardening is also the reason pyro staining and hardening developers are so sharp.

As some have already noted, the major benefit of staining is added contrast. It may also provide some grain masking but that is rarely needed with LF film.

Sandy

[bob carnie]

More staining will not help you in that situation. The reason pyro staining and hardening developers do so well in this type of situation is because of hardening, which prevents infectious development and minimizes the spreading of lights out of its place on the negative. Hardening is also the reason pyro staining and hardening developers are so sharp.

As some have already noted, the major benefit of staining is added contrast. It may also provide some grain masking but that is rarely needed with LF film.

Sandy

I agree with Sandy , from Gordon Hutchings book on Pyro I gleaned the most important feature of his PMK formulea was the hardening effect which stopped highlights from blooming. I think this is very much underrated.

I also use a two bath method , whereas I use 1 litre of mixed developer for the first half of development and a second litre of mixed developer for the second half. I have found better shadow density by doing this. I have always done a two minute pre wash and from what I gather may be the only person still capturing the first bath and using it as a stain at the end of process.

We all come at this from various vantage points and skill sets... but remember Brassai did cigarette exposure and probably never worried about stain or lack of. It seemed to work for him.

[RodinalDuchamp]

More staining will not help you in that situation. The reason pyro staining and hardening developers do so well in this type of situation is because of hardening, which prevents infectious development and minimizes the spreading of lights out of its place on the negative. Hardening is also the reason pyro staining and hardening developers are so sharp.

As some have already noted, the major benefit of staining is added contrast. It may also provide some grain masking but that is rarely needed with LF film.

Sandy

Thank you Mr.King for responding to this thread. I will note that I increased my pre soak time to 5 minutes on my last session and it had a positive effect, the staining is more pronounced than with the 2 minute pre soak. I did also switch over to Pyrocat HD in Glycol and maybe that formula stains differently? In any case I am satisfied with the results from this new process/material combination.

[Steve Sherman]

[QUOTE=bob carnie;1377459
I also use a two bath method , whereas I use 1 litre of mixed developer for the first half of development and a second litre of mixed developer for the second half. I have found better shadow density by doing this. I have always done a two minute pre wash and from what I gather may be the only person still capturing the first bath and using it as a stain at the end of process.[/QUOTE]

I would suggest it's not so much about shadow density as it is shadow separation. I've used both PMK and Pyrocat HD extensively and without plotting graphs but reading areas on a densitometer Pyrocat's separation in the mid tones is superior. The film's curve appears to be steeper than an identically exposed PMK negative

Cheers

[Andrew O'Neill]

Pyrocat's separation in the mid tones is superior. The film's curve appears to be steeper than an identically exposed PMK negative

I totally agree with this. That is one reason why HP5 and Pyrocat-HD are a great match.

[John Layton]

I need to chime in again regarding pre-soak scenarios. Twenty minutes in a single (pre-soak) bath seems, to me, a bit excessive. But perhaps, being a single bath, the levels of dissolved anti-halation backing become high enough to slow the rates of further dissolution - and therefore this extended time is necessary?

[Michael Wesik]

I need to chime in again regarding pre-soak scenarios. Twenty minutes in a single (pre-soak) bath seems, to me, a bit excessive. But perhaps, being a single bath, the levels of dissolved anti-halation backing become high enough to slow the rates of further dissolution - and therefore this extended time is necessary?

If you test and discover a faster method I'd love to know what that is. I'm sure there would be variance with different film formats and, of course, you could agitate the presoak bath more aggressively or more frequently. My approach was to find a methodology that worked, and when I found that I just stuck to it. Time was pretty much irrelevant and I didn't test beyond that. The main thing is that you're getting even negs and good results.

[John Layton]

Michael...my earlier-mentioned system of incorporating two two-minute presoaks in succession was devised out of the concerns implied with my above post. But I'm really flying by the seat of my pants here - and remain intrigued by the relationship of (the thoroughness of) anti halation backing removal and the amount of useful image stain. So...when I have a chance, I'll try one longer bath and compare results.

[Steve Sherman]

If you test and discover a faster method I'd love to know what that is. I'm sure there would be variance with different film formats and, of course, you could agitate the presoak bath more aggressively or more frequently. My approach was to find a methodology that worked, and when I found that I just stuck to it. Time was pretty much irrelevant and I didn't test beyond that. The main thing is that you're getting even negs and good results.

I'll offer this observation, I always presoak but never for more than 5 minutes. Also, I'm often fooling with dilutions and frequency of agitation to maximize adjacency effects and find when my dilutions get very weak I do get uneven development, second the Pyrocat always comes out darker than it goes in which is clearly an indicator that more of the anti halation layer remains after my presoak. Michael Wesik's findings and suggestions certainly point towards the longer presoak having value.
Thx for the heads up Michael !

[Barry Kirsten]

I wonder if the different experiences described here may be due to water differences. In my experience, I've never had problems with 3-5min. pre-soak, for either PMK or Pyrocat HD, but I'm in the country and on bore water which has a fairly high calcium level which *may* enhance pre-soaking. Probably the only way to compare would be to pre-soak in distilled or deionized water.

[bob carnie]

I wonder if the different experiences described here may be due to water differences. In my experience, I've never had problems with 3-5min. pre-soak, for either PMK or Pyrocat HD, but I'm in the country and on bore water which has a fairly high calcium level which *may* enhance pre-soaking. Probably the only way to compare would be to pre-soak in distilled or deionized water.

Yes , water source can be a huge game changer for process in all cases.

[Michael Wesik]

Michael...my earlier-mentioned system of incorporating two two-minute presoaks in succession was devised out of the concerns implied with my above post. But I'm really flying by the seat of my pants here - and remain intrigued by the relationship of (the thoroughness of) anti halation backing removal and the amount of useful image stain. So...when I have a chance, I'll try one longer bath and compare results.

Hi John...Sorry if I misunderstood your post. Perhaps I don't understand what your concern was/is? As long as the base stain is even, my thought is that it's all useful image stain because your contrast index and the stain proportional to density wouldn't change.


I wonder if the different experiences described here may be due to water differences. In my experience, I've never had problems with 3-5min. pre-soak, for either PMK or Pyrocat HD, but I'm in the country and on bore water which has a fairly high calcium level which *may* enhance pre-soaking. Probably the only way to compare would be to pre-soak in distilled or deionized water.

Totally agree. Differences in water - varying PH levels and the presence of heavy metals, for example - can undoubtedly have an effect. Consequently, I've always used distilled water for mixing all developers (stock and working) as well as for presoaks.


I'll offer this observation, I always presoak but never for more than 5 minutes. Also, I'm often fooling with dilutions and frequency of agitation to maximize adjacency effects and find when my dilutions get very weak I do get uneven development, second the Pyrocat always comes out darker than it goes in which is clearly an indicator that more of the anti halation layer remains after my presoak. Michael Wesik's findings and suggestions certainly point towards the longer presoak having value.
Thx for the heads up Michael !

Sure thing, Steve.

[sanking]

A historical review of the literature on development in tubes, both in Jobo as well as BTZS and other types of drums/tubes shows a problem of uneven development. This is true of both traditional developers like D76 as well as pyro staining/hardening developers such as Pyrocat and PMK. I remember that one workshop instructor recommended the use of D76 1:4 instead of straight or 1:1 in drums to minimize or reduce the uneven development caused by flow of the developer over the ribs of drums when developed on a motor base. The result of the weaker dilution was to increase time of development to get to an equivalent CI. With a stronger dilution and shorter development time I would sometimes see even lines that resulted from contact of the film with the ribs in the drum. In my own work with Pyrocat I used long pre-soak times and dilute solutions of the developer to lengthen time of development in an effort to eliminate this problem. Back then many of us suspected that the cause of uneven development was the coating on the base of the film, but no one, so far as I know, understood the issue well enough to suggest a very long (5+ minutes) pre-soak. In fact, many made fun of the pre-soak entirely, claiming that it was totally useless, suggesting that the real cause of uneven development was due to increase speed of the solution over the film at the area of the ribs.

Thanks to the passage of time, and the careful experiments of Michael Wesik, we can now fully understand the importance of the pre-soak.

Sandy

[Michael Wesik]

A historical review of the literature on development in tubes, both in Jobo as well as BTZS and other types of drums/tubes shows a problem of uneven development. This is true of both traditional developers like D76 as well as pyro staining/hardening developers such as Pyrocat and PMK. I remember that one workshop instructor recommended the use of D76 1:4 instead of straight or 1:1 in drums to minimize or reduce the uneven development caused by flow of the developer over the ribs of drums when developed on a motor base. The result of the weaker dilution was to increase time of development to get to an equivalent CI. With a stronger dilution and shorter development time I would sometimes see even lines that resulted from contact of the film with the ribs in the drum. In my own work with Pyrocat I used long pre-soak times and dilute solutions of the developer to lengthen time of development in an effort to eliminate this problem. Back then many of us suspected that the cause of uneven development was the coating on the base of the film, but no one, so far as I know, understood the issue well enough to suggest a very long (5+ minutes) pre-soak. In fact, many made fun of the pre-soak entirely, claiming that it was totally useless, suggesting that the real cause of uneven development was due to increase speed of the solution over the film at the area of the ribs.

Thanks to the passage of time, and the careful experiments of Michael Wesik, we can now fully understand the importance of the pre-soak.

Sandy

Sandy, I never would have arrived at this conclusion were it not for all of your and Steve Sherman's guidance on film development. It can be a maddening process of trying to reverse engineer the cause of uneven development, especially with a staining developer. The accumulated insight and experience that people share on this forum is a really amazing thing. I'm happy to be able to contribute!