Problem with Pyrocat HD from PF

[jmontague]

I recently ordered Pyrocat HD from Photographer’s Formulary and the A solution looked like this:

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190815/1205318418157bf40916d431931257f4.jpg

PF was great and immediately sent replacement chemicals. However, I received a replacement today and it is exactly the same - milky, thick and separated. Has anyone else had this problem? I’m very frustrated.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[sanking]

This does not appear to be a common problem, never recall seeing it mentioned.

Try placing the container in a bain-marie of water at about 130-150º F for half hour or so, and then agitate the bottle up and down for a few seconds. Perhaps the chemiclas will go back into solution.

Sandy

[jmontague]

Thanks, Sandy. I’ll give that a try.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jmontague]

Heated the solution for 30 minutes at 130 degrees and shook it up. No change that I can see. I will see how it looks when cooled. Any additional thoughts are appreciated.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jim Noel]

I have read of too many problems with chems from PF. My solution is that I don't even consider ordering from PF. Imix from raw chemicals ordered from B&S.

[Keith Pitman]

If you have a scale and buy the components, it’s easy to mix up your own. (AKA, you too can be a mad scientist!)

[jmontague]

That’s what I’m going to do, Keith.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[esearing]

There seem to be several threads now about Pyrocat HD problems. I switched to Pyrocat M and mix myself. Fewer components , easy to make.

[Greg Y]

I'll just weigh in and say i've used chemicals from Photographers Formulary, notably Pyrocat HD & M without issue for decades.

[jp]

HDC is one ingredient easier than HD if you wish to mix it yourself.

Standard safety disclaimers apply for some of the chemicals when dry.... I mix it outdoors to avoid the powder in my darkroom.

[Vaughn]

I had the same problems, PF sent two replacement kits that I have not tried yet. I went back to B&S for a sure thing. Print material I'll take more chances on...negative processing, not so much.

[jmontague]

I also have had excellent results with prior purchases from Photographer’s Formulary, including my first Pyrocat HD kit. That is why this is a surprise and mystery. I just ordered raw chemicals and will mix my own going forward.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Steven Ruttenberg]

I had an issue where they had got a bad batch of chemicals. I was getting pinholes all over my films. HP5 was really bad Acros not so. And it only app eared with minimal agitation and 1 hour development. I am gonna start mixing my own.

[John Layton]

For me at this point the writing is very clearly on the wall, and I will go back to mixing my own from scratch. Apologies and "free" replacements will no longer prevail...I cannot and will not place any more negatives at risk!

I would only consider going back to a pre-mixed product if the supplier in question were to provide a full, accurate, and transparent accounting of exactly what went wrong, plus a full, accurate, and precise description of the steps they have taken to ensure that this will never happen again!

Sorry for the rant....but c'mon already!

[William Whitaker]

I would only consider going back to a pre-mixed product if the supplier in question were to provide a full, accurate, and transparent accounting of exactly what went wrong, plus a full, accurate, and precise description of the steps they have taken to ensure that this will never happen again!

+1

I support what John says and wish the supplier in question (PF) would at least address the problem. A post here would be nice, if able. But a notification on their own website would be better. And so far, I have seen none. No mention at all of the problem. And this thread appears to have drawn a lot of attention. Surely they must be aware that there is an issue afoot. Some sort of comment would be appropriate.

Personally I find it disappointing on several levels, not the least of which is that I hate it when a commercial concern which caters to our interest area has an issue, be it with quality control or something else entirely. I see this sort of thing as being quite damaging to customer confidence as well as overall business success. Ultimately it could lead to the loss of what has been a valuable resource.

[Corran]

+1 and +2 to the above.

Would it possibly be appropriate for a representative of the forum to send a detailed email to PF about the ongoing issues experienced by many on this forum, and ask for clarification? At this time, I have had no issues besides a chemical packet sent to me in the wrong amount back 6 years ago when I made my first order, but PF's Pyrocat (in Glycol) has been fine otherwise for my last 3 orders (one 1L kit and two 5L kits). I asked specifically for a fresh batch in my last order, which I am about 75% through.

I have negatives right now waiting to be developed in that Pyrocat and these threads are highly alarming. I personally have little interest in mixing my own if I can get quality kits on order from PF or someone else (let's not forget that B&S was not immune to problems either recently).

[Tim V]

Anyone experiencing problems with PF PMK?

Last two HD orders from PF were fine for me, so touch wood...

[darr]

Today I processed 6-4x5" sheets and 2-120 rolls in Pyrocat-HD from PF with no issues.

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Been mixing my own from scratch from day one. Can't see buying water. The chemicals are cheap enough and I've never had a problem ever.

[mpirie]

The chemicals are cheap enough and I've never had a problem ever.
True Jim, assuming availability is not a problem.....but unfortunately, for many users outside the US, getting the raw chemicals IS a problem.....and PF may be the only way to get hold of dry Pyrocat HD.

Mike

[Peter Lewin]

Question: It appears that all of the problems with Pyrocat from PF are with the wet 2-bottle sets. Have there been any problems with the dry kits? I have never had a problem with either PMK or Pyrocat HD purchased from PF, but I am about out of Pyrocat-HD and these threads are making me nervous about purchasing my replacement.

[Vaughn]

Its is the dry kits I had problems with -- not the wet.

[jmontague]

Mine was with the wet kit. Both the original and replacement had the problem. Solution A was the issue, not solution B.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Vaughn]

Solution B would be pretty hard to mess up.

[jmontague]

Solution B would be pretty hard to mess up.

Agreed. Only one chemical to mix.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sirius Glass]

I bought Pyrocat HD in Glycol [liquid] from Photographers' Formulary in June and I have not had any problems.

[Steven Ruttenberg]

I usually get issues with pin holes. I just had 1 sheet get blasted with them and another was fine. Both developed at same time. I am sure part of it is operator error, but it seems to only happen with the pyro. Shame as I like how it works based on my limited experience. Mine was the wet. I have the chemicals for dry. I like it for semi-stand and 2 bath.

[Keith Pitman]

I usually get issues with pin holes. I just had 1 sheet get blasted with them and another was fine. Both developed at same time. I am sure part of it is operator error, but it seems to only happen with the pyro. Shame as I like how it works based on my limited experience. Mine was the wet. I have the chemicals for dry. I like it for semi-stand and 2 bath.

Are you using an acid stop bath? If so, what and what strength? Plain water is best for film, IMO.

[Steven Ruttenberg]

I have had the issues with both kodak stop bath at 1:63 and plain distilled water. I am wondering if I should use tray development for pyrocat. The semi-stand technique with a tube by Steve Sherman seems to work okay.

[sanking]

I usually get issues with pin holes. I just had 1 sheet get blasted with them and another was fine. Both developed at same time. I am sure part of it is operator error, but it seems to only happen with the pyro. Shame as I like how it works based on my limited experience. Mine was the wet. I have the chemicals for dry. I like it for semi-stand and 2 bath.


Nearly all of the issues associated with Pyrocat seem rooted in working procedures or operator error.

Any developer that contains carbonate can develop sufficient gas to cause pinholes in film emulsion, especially if development is followed by an acetic acid stop bath. A working solution of Pyrocat has pH of about 11, when you change the film from this environment to an acetic acid stop bath with pH 4 or below, the shock to the emulsion is great. A better choice would be a water stop bath rather than an acetic acid stop bath.

Pinholes used to be common with films and carbonate type developers but over the years emulsions have become much tougher and pinholes are very rare except with some old style traditional emulsions. But going from a very alkaline developing solution to a very acetic acid stop is capable of blowing holes in any emulsion.

A water rinse gives about 100% protection from pinholes.

Sandy

[agregov]

See below for my ordeal. I emailed Formulary back in the Spring wanting to give feedback and help them solve whatever issue is going on. Not heard a peep from them. Maybe an email from the forum might get their attention. I believe they figure it's operator error, as Sandy states. But in my case, I did nothing different except change from Formulary to Bostick Pyrocat HD and development times snapped right into place for me. Sandy, have you used any stock Pyrocat from Formulary in liquid form? It might take someone of Sandy's reputation to get their attention.

https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?53840-Pyrocat-HD-Failure-Images&p=1502485#post1502485

[Cor]

My 2 cents: I always mixed my own Pyrocat-HDC (in Glycol) from the same chemistry stocks per instructions from Sandy King. A couple of years ago I suddenly started to get problems with solution "A"..a white precipitate on top (a contradiction), whch I could not get into solution again.

So I switched to Pyrocat-HDC, no more problems.

The funny thing is that I kept this bottle of HD and use it when I re-devlop in Pyro after bleaching a negative..it still works after a littleswirling to get a 'suspension"..

best,

Cor

[Steven Ruttenberg]

Nearly all of the issues associated with Pyrocat seem rooted in working procedures or operator error.

Any developer that contains carbonate can develop sufficient gas to cause pinholes in film emulsion, especially if development is followed by an acetic acid stop bath. A working solution of Pyrocat has pH of about 11, when you change the film from this environment to an acetic acid stop bath with pH 4 or below, the shock to the emulsion is great. A better choice would be a water stop bath rather than an acetic acid stop bath.

Pinholes used to be common with films and carbonate type developers but over the years emulsions have become much tougher and pinholes are very rare except with some old style traditional emulsions. But going from a very alkaline developing solution to a very acetic acid stop is capable of blowing holes in any emulsion.

A water rinse gives about 100% protection from pinholes.

Sandy

The biggest offender for film was HP5. Next round I will try water stop bath and see how that does. The problem was worse for semi-stand over a 1 hour period. However, this last time I tried with Tmax100 as semi-stand worked out fine from what I can tell.

[sanking]

Sandy, have you used any stock Pyrocat from Formulary in liquid form?

https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?53840-Pyrocat-HD-Failure-Images&p=1502485#post1502485


I have used the stock liquid form in glycol, and never had any trouble with it. Some of the chemicals in the -HD formula, especially metabisulfite and bromide, need a lot of heat to go into solution in glycol, but they are not really necessary in the glycol formula anyway so even if not in solution in the stock solution the working solution should work fine.

However, I have been mixing and using only the -HDC formula for at least 6-8 years. -HDC substitutes ascorbic acid for the metabisulfite and bromide with same results, and all of the chemicals go into solution in glycol easily at 150º F.

Sandy

[Peter Lewin]

I'm reviving this old thread because I believe I just encountered a similar problem (milkiness & white precipitate, NOT pinholes or other issues). I received my new "Pyrocat-HD in Glycol" liquid 2-bottle set from PF two days ago. Because of this thread I had kept some unimportant negatives to test the new batch. Immediately upon mixing up the working solution (usual 10:10:1000) it turned milky and white, with what looked like white particles in suspension. I tray developed the test batch of 3 negs and they look flat and dull. Borders are clear, so it isn't fogging. I will contact PF on Monday, but wondered if anyone else had encountered problems during the 5 months since this thread went dormant, or has any suggestions. (Based on Sandy's post just above, I guess it could be chemicals not in solution in the glycol, but would that account for the milky/suspension appearance of the working solution?)

[Jim Noel]

Problems such as those mentioned here do not go away until changes are made by the supplier. My suggestion is to follow Sandy's example, it works well for him.

[darr]

I received an order for a couple of Pyrocat HD Liquid kits in early September 2019. Last used the chemicals a couple of days ago with no problems.

[esearing]

My first batch of Pyrocat M is now 7 months old and still going strong. Stored in half filled brown bottle indoors 68-72*. It has similar staining properties as Pyrocat HD and similar use that requires very minor tweaks to dilution depending on your agitation and time preferences. It also makes a nice 2nd pass developer after bleaching if you want a warm tone that is not as brownish as sepia toners.

Stock A 1 liter
Distilled Water at 120F 750 ml
Metol 2.5g
Sodium Metabisulfite 10g
Pyrocatechin 50g
Water to make 1000ml

PART B - same as one used for HD
Distilled Water . 700 ml
Potassium Carbonate . 750 g
Distilled water to make. 1000 ml

[Peter Lewin]

Jim, Esearing: I was hoping to avoid having to mix my own developer, I like Pyrocat-HD and my two prior batches from PF were trouble free. If I go to "mix my own," it would be Pyrocat-HDC; the biggest issue (since I'm a bit lazy) is that I would have to go to three sources for the raw chemicals, PF for the photo chemicals, auto supply for the glycol, and a pharmacy for the ascorbic acid. But if I can't sort out the issues for the pre-mix with PF, that is the way I will have to go.

[Merg Ross]

I'm reviving this old thread because I believe I just encountered a similar problem (milkiness & white precipitate, NOT pinholes or other issues). I received my new "Pyrocat-HD in Glycol" liquid 2-bottle set from PF two days ago. Because of this thread I had kept some unimportant negatives to test the new batch. Immediately upon mixing up the working solution (usual 10:10:1000) it turned milky and white, with what looked like white particles in suspension. I tray developed the test batch of 3 negs and they look flat and dull. Borders are clear, so it isn't fogging. I will contact PF on Monday, but wondered if anyone else had encountered problems during the 5 months since this thread went dormant, or has any suggestions. (Based on Sandy's post just above, I guess it could be chemicals not in solution in the glycol, but would that account for the milky/suspension appearance of the working solution?)

I alerted PF to this thread when it was started in August. I received an email from Mikkie at PF in mid-November acknowledging the concerns.

Perhaps you will learn more when you contact them.

[esearing]

I personally believe the problem lies with the bad batches of phenidone not the metibisulfate or bromide. Others have stated quality control issues with weights and measures. IF you use 500ml in less than 6 months then the kits are fine. If you want to expand your mind and possibilities - mixing chems is easy and can be found in a just a few sources. I too am lazy so have to force myself to get out and shoot, experiment, and enjoy the adventure of film and printing. But there is magic when it all comes together.

[Peter Lewin]

Necessary update: While I still cannot explain the "milky" or "cloudy" appearance of the working dilution of pyrocat-hd, it is working correctly. When I first used my new batch, the appearance of the working solution put me off (I'm used to the working solution appearing clear) and my negatives looked flat. I decanted the solution "A" to see if I was getting the separation and appearance that the OP did at the start of this thread, but mine was perfectly clear and uniform (as it should be). So I went "back to the drawing board" and recalibrated my processing. I tried 4 different developing times and then made proper proofs to see what I was getting. I now have a shorter development time and a new proper proof time, and everything looks good.

In hindsight I realize how easy it is to become "sloppy" as long as one can still make respectable prints. I had fallen into the habit of using my scanner to make "contact sheet like" prints from 4 negatives in a PrintFile sheet, which is almost the opposite of a "proper proof" since the scanner software readjusts density and contrast automatically; when I printed, the combination of a VC head and VC paper allowed me to compensate for over-development without thinking about it too much. Re-testing and proofing in the darkroom made it clear how much my times had drifted from where they should be. Lesson learned.

[Doremus Scudder]

Peter,

Don't be too hard on yourself. It's easy and comfortable to expect that your developer will work the same way every time. It's what we've come to expect from packaged developers from Kodak and Ilford. I learned the hard way, like you, that with developers mixed from scratch or in kits from PF and others, that one must keep an eye on the developer activity from batch to batch.

I once had a whole batch of weak negatives (100+) due to my not noticing that some of the metabisulfite in the PMK solution B had precipitated out due to cold storage conditions in the winter, I have since begun to mix PMK part B in twice as much distilled water just to ensure that all of the metabisulfite goes into solution; I just use twice as much now when mixing from stock. Luckily, I can still print the weak batch on higher contrast settings.

I find that I have to tweak development times slightly almost every time I mix up a new batch of PMK. It seems that small differences in the chemicals (age, purity, etc.) and dilution (it's hard sometimes to get all the metabisulfite into solution) result in changes in developer activity from batch to batch. I've also found that variations in water hardness has a noticeable effect on developer activity with PMK. Harder water results in more activity (I actually had two different developing times for the two different locations I used to work in; water hardness in Vienna required a 10% reduction in development time vis-à-vis my times in Oregon).

Best,

Doremus

[Mark Sampson]

The chemists and researchers at Kodak (and the other big photo companies) put a great deal of time and effort, mostly decades ago, into making sure that their developers and other photo chemicals were both consistent and long-lived. The scale of their manufacturing helped that too.
PF does a pretty good job given the size of their business and their resources.
It's incumbent on all of us, though, to be careful and consistent in our own practice, in order to get the best results.
A couple of anecdotes, not data points:
1) last spring I processed a batch of film which came out extremely (unusably) thin. Was my developer going bad? I thought that might be the case... until after the next batch (which used up my Pyrocat part A) came out fine. But there was some Part B left... the unmistakable answer that previously, I'd left the part B out of the developer. Good way to get thin negs!
2) despite the concerns stated in this thread, I bought more Pyrocat (in glycol) from PF. I've been shooting more lately, and so processing more, and the developer is working just as predicted. (Any faults in my negatives are all my own doing.) I'll buy more when I run out.