Film and developer for in camera negs for pt/pd

[Mexipike]

I'm looking to get back in to Platinum/Palladium printing, and I'd like to make in camera 4x5 negatives to print with. I'm fairly familiar with the digital negative process, and I'm sure that is probably the simpler path to easy quality. However, I'm tired of working with computers and printers all the time, so I want to just make my negs in camera, maybe just for the fun of it.

My favorite film tends to be 400 Tmax. Although, I'm open to other options, as the cost is almost double something like HP5. At first, I'll likely need to send my film to a lab, as I still don't have the right space dialed in for film developing. I'll send it to Edgar Prauss, who has all the standard Kodak developers. Would T-Max 400 do ok in HC-110 or D76, or any other Kodak dev, for a pt-pd neg? Would something like HP5 be better suited? Eventually I'd like to get a JOBO 3010 set up, and then I'll likely give Pyrocat HD a shot too. I do currently have BTZS tubes I could use for PyrocatHD, but my setup is still not super ideal for that right now. I'd give that a shot if the consensus is that's the best route.

So basically, TMY in non staining developers for PT/PD negs- good? Or stick to other films, or just use pyrocat for TMY?

I have searched around the threads on here, and I've found some good info, but I thought new opinions would be nice.

Any and all suggestions are appreciated!

Thanks,
John

[jurgenestanislao]

I'm looking to get back in to Platinum/Palladium printing, and I'd like to make in camera 4x5 negatives to print with. I'm fairly familiar with the digital negative process, and I'm sure that is probably the simpler path to easy quality. However, I'm tired of working with computers and printers all the time, so I want to just make my negs in camera, maybe just for the fun of it.

My favorite film tends to be 400 Tmax. Although, I'm open to other options, as the cost is almost double something like HP5. At first, I'll likely need to send my film to a lab, as I still don't have the right space dialed in for film developing. I'll send it to Edgar Prauss, who has all the standard Kodak developers. Would T-Max 400 do ok in HC-110 or D76, or any other Kodak dev, for a pt-pd neg? Would something like HP5 be better suited? Eventually I'd like to get a JOBO 3010 set up, and then I'll likely give Pyrocat HD a shot too. I do currently have BTZS tubes I could use for PyrocatHD, but my setup is still not super ideal for that right now. I'd give that a shot if the consensus is that's the best route.

So basically, TMY in non staining developers for PT/PD negs- good? Or stick to other films, or just use pyrocat for TMY?

I have searched around the threads on here, and I've found some good info, but I thought new opinions would be nice.

Any and all suggestions are appreciated!

Thanks,
JohnI shoot 14x17 negatives and I develop using Pyrocat HD, really like the clean results.

Currently shifted and testing our Pyro 510 for a simplified process, longer keep times for chemistry, and subtle enhancements on sharpness and shadow detail.

Important for me because I contact print in pt.

Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

[Alan9940]

I print pt/pd from digital negatives, but I can't imagine that 400 TMax wouldn't be a good choice given that this film's contrast is easily expanded. I would think any of the standard film developers would work, once you've determined a development time for the contrast needed. That said, I would definitely look into a staining formula like Pyrocat-HD.

[interneg]

D-76/ ID-11 is capable of doing the job with Tmax 400. HP5+ can also do the job just fine with D-76/ ID-11. A 'Universal' developer like PQ Universal can also deliver what you need more efficiently - as can things like D-19. None of this is complicated - it's just made that way by people who would rather make & market questionable developer formulae than process control a basic 2-step duplicate neg - learning how to make a 2-step duplicate neg will give you much greater freedom of process without worrying about only having to use original negs, or restricting the process by which an original neg can be printed (and without needing a computer to do so).

All that staining developers pretend to do is give you a neg that can be used for both silver & siderotype (except that they can't in reality). A lot of the willfully visible & effortful emphasis on banal aspects of process that people make about staining developers has a great deal to do with the essentially nugatory work (both scientifically and artistically) they produce as a result.

[Mexipike]

D-76/ ID-11 is capable of doing the job with Tmax 400. HP5+ can also do the job just fine with D-76/ ID-11. A 'Universal' developer like PQ Universal can also deliver what you need more efficiently - as can things like D-19. None of this is complicated - it's just made that way by people who would rather make & market questionable developer formulae than process control a basic 2-step duplicate neg - learning how to make a 2-step duplicate neg will give you much greater freedom of process without worrying about only having to use original negs, or restricting the process by which an original neg can be printed (and without needing a computer to do so).

All that staining developers pretend to do is give you a neg that can be used for both silver & siderotype (except that they can't in reality). A lot of the willfully visible & effortful emphasis on banal aspects of process that people make about staining developers has a great deal to do with the essentially nugatory work (both scientifically and artistically) they produce as a result.

Thank you for your input, I agree that likely I can get to where I want to go with standard, non staining developers. As far as enlarged internegs are concerned- I currently don’t have the kind of darkroom access required for that.

[Mexipike]

@interneg Thinking about it a bit more I would actually love to hear a bit more about your process for creating internegs. What film do you use? I may be able to rig up a simple contact printing space for creating internegs in my studio.

[Vaughn]

I have found that FP4+ developed in Ilford's PQ Universal Developer to be an excellent combo for platinum/palladium printing.

It was recommended by Terry King, who researched alt processes in England...however there is no promise that the present PQ Universal is exactly the same as the old. There might have been a tweak to the formula.

[paulbarden]

FP4 developed with one of the Pyro formulas will give you great results for alt printing processes. HP5 is far less suitable: it has much more film base density that only gets in the way of printing.

[interneg]

@interneg Thinking about it a bit more I would actually love to hear a bit more about your process for creating internegs. What film do you use? I may be able to rig up a simple contact printing space for creating internegs in my studio.

Ideally you should have an idea of the (silver, not ink) density range your particular print process variant requires. It will make your life much easier.

Procedures: start with pp.123-126 of a Kodak manual titled 'Copying and Duplicating in Black-and-White and Color' - it's on the internet archive, you'll need to sign in to borrow it.

Ilford Ortho Plus is a good substitute for both steps & is highly controllable through (very conventional - ie D-76/ ID-11, PQ Universal etc) developer choice. If you need to go outside the sizes Ortho Plus is available from stock in, then you need to make more trade-offs in terms of working with panchro or litho materials - or paying for a custom cut of Ortho Plus.

And if you want to use HP5+ in D-76 as a camera neg for pt/pd, there's a comprehensive table of starting points in Arentz covering all likely density ranges in common usage. The various staining developers fail because of exhaustion effects or development inhibition effects (from emulsion interaction) preventing the production of sufficient density - and D-76 will run out of steam eventually, in large part because of solvency induced inhibition effects - whereas a more aggressive Universal type of developer can produce more density before inhibition effects relevant to their specific formulations kick in (be that PQ or higher sulphite levels etc).

[Gary Samson]

FP4 developed with one of the Pyro formulas will give you great results for alt printing processes. HP5 is far less suitable: it has much more film base density that only gets in the way of printing.

I want to second Paul Barden's recommendation of Ilford FP4+ film and Pyrocat HD or PMK Pyro developers for making in camera negatives for alternative processes such as platinum prints, kallitypes, salt prints and albumen prints. I have used this combination for over thirty years with great success to make full tonal range prints by adjusting the developing time and EI of FP4+ to create a negative with the density range that each particular alt process requires. I would recommend reading Sandy King's article on pyro developers that can be found on the Unblinking Eye website for more information.

[Mexipike]

I'll definitely check out FP4. I just got my JOBO 3010 and a roller base sooner than I thought I would, so I can start experimenting soon. I just found a box of slightly expired TMAX 400 in my freezer, so I'm going to start with that for now, but when it runs out, I may give the FP4 a shot. For use with a roller processor and targeting pt/pd prints is Pyrocat MC favored over HD?

[Mexipike]

With a jobo for the goal of pt/pd prints, should I use the MC or HD version?