Next Step in Developing Journey

[Bob Kerner]

I've been developing my 35mm and 6x6 work in a Patterson tank for a few months now (did this years ago...stopped and re-started this summer) and I'm pretty confident in my basic skills using Ilford DDX in the dilutions called for on the data sheets. I shoot HP5 and Delta 400. I haven't screwed anything up yet! I'm happy with my results and ability to be consistent when working with the chemicals.

Where to next in the developing journey? Different developer, change dilutions........I'm ready for the next creative learning lesson.

I don't have a darkroom and have never printed my work in a darkroom. Planning to take a lesson at the community darkroom over holiday break. So the only "no go" is any chemical process that will turn my kitchen into a hazmat zone! and it needs to work in a developing tank.

I'd like to be able to continue to use my Ilford Stop and Fixer with whatever new developer I might add.....hate to waste that stuff or have too many chems sitting around.

Thank you.

[Alan9940]

IMO, if you're satisfied with the results you're getting now, don't change anything. Nothing wrong with the combos you've chosen.

[Bob Kerner]

My thoughts were to experiment with things like Pyro to see how that changes things…be experimental rather than following the standard Ilford recipe.

[tundra]

I've been developing my 35mm and 6x6 work in a Patterson tank for a few months now (did this years ago...stopped and re-started this summer) and I'm pretty confident in my basic skills using Ilford DDX in the dilutions called for on the data sheets. I shoot HP5 and Delta 400. I haven't screwed anything up yet! I'm happy with my results and ability to be consistent when working with the chemicals.

Where to next in the developing journey? Different developer, change dilutions........I'm ready for the next creative learning lesson.

I don't have a darkroom and have never printed my work in a darkroom. Planning to take a lesson at the community darkroom over holiday break. So the only "no go" is any chemical process that will turn my kitchen into a hazmat zone! and it needs to work in a developing tank.

I'd like to be able to continue to use my Ilford Stop and Fixer with whatever new developer I might add.....hate to waste that stuff or have too many chems sitting around.

Thank you.


After only a few months, switching film and/or developer is ill advised. While you may have the mechanics of development dialed in, there is likely still work to do to determine your "personal ASA" for the film you are using. This takes into account your meter, your thermometer, your way of metering, your way of agitating and so forth.

Film development is a balancing act between shadow detail, managing highlights, mid-tone local contrast, and sharpness. It is also somewhat affected by whether you plan to silver print, alternative print, or scan the negatives.

It's best to approach these using a single film and developer until you have utterly nailed control of those variables, then start trying other developers. It is common for people starting new or returning after years of inactivity to become excited about all the new techniques and chemistry at their disposal, but - until you have mastery of one combination - this just adds more variables and makes control actually harder to achieve.

[Michael R]

Bob,

Really, I completely agree with Alan. The best advice I could probably give you would be to run - quickly - before the recommendations start rolling in, and focus instead on the printing.

On the other hand, I don’t want to totally discourage experimentation because if we’re all honest here, in the end for almost everyone to some degree, part of this hobby is trying different materials, chemicals and sometimes gizmos. It’s fun, and it’s not anywhere near as difficult to “dial in” a film or developer as some would have you believe. So, while it is certainly sound advice to leave well enough alone, changing a film or developer is not the major overhaul it is occasionally made out to be. In fact it is quite trivial.

To answer your last question first, your stop bath and fixer can be held constant.

Regarding developers and films, in my opinion if you want to try something different it makes the most sense to (1) decide on some sort of particular direction away from what you currently have, and (2) only change one thing at a time, otherwise it is aimless and you can’t tell what’s going on.

One thing you could try is changing the film. For example since you’re using Delta 400 and HP5, you might want to try a slower film that will have finer grain/higher sharpness - although the degree to which the differences are visible will of course depend on how much you enlarge the negatives. Alternatively if you need the higher speed, you could give Kodak TMY-2 a try. That film is the most advanced thing we have when it comes to high speed with the graininess and sharpness of slower films.

On the developer side, since DDX is a fine grain developer, if you want to try something different you might consider something that gives the impression of higher sharpness (think more “bite”) with the tradeoff of increased graininess. Experimenting with more dilute DDX would be similar.

Regarding film development, just know in advance there are gigantic mountains of nonsense out there.

Michael

[jnantz]

look into getting sprint photochemical. they are made in New England ( and have been since the 1970s ) and most schools ( high schools and colleges ) use them because they are dependable, work like they are supposed to and are easy to use ( they are liquid concentrates that you dilute 1:9 ). you can get gallon cubes or 1L bottles shipped to you directly from sprint, or your local photo store might stock them.

[Bormental]

I disagree with those who recommend not changing anything. The underlying idea behind such advice is solid: it's worth going deep into a specific film+developer combination and becoming really good at it, instead of jumping around and never mastering anything. But in the beginning it's good to experiment. For example, HP5 and DD-X is a godawful combination, but I found this only after trying HP5+ in Xtol and ID-11. Prior to that experiment I had mistakenly believed my results were fine. This is subjective, of course. What is godawful for me may be amazing to you. And that's exactly why experimenting is worth it.

Here's what I would try:

* A normal/universal developer like ID-11 or Xtol
* A speed losing fine-grain developer like Perceptol
* High acutance developer like Ilsofol 3, FX-39 or Rodinal
* A staining developer like PMK or Pyrocat

... then see what developer+film combination you like the most, and THEN stick to that and hone your skills.

[John Layton]

It would be great if you could somehow get more darkroom access so that you could further refine your printing before further messing around with films and film developers. I say this because if you begin to change things up to early in the "process chain," you'll possibly end up over-compensating for less than stellar negatives as you print...getting final results that look "OK" to you, but will not represent the best of which you are capable overall.

If you can first dial in your printing procedures...then you might go back to photographing and film development and, using the same film and developer that you are now, shoot three rolls in a variety of lighting conditions, using "normal," "under," and "over-exposed" frames...then go back to the darkroom and process one roll as you usually do, then for the second roll, cut 35 percent from your (standard) developing time, and for the third roll, add from 35 to 50 percent to your (standard) developing time.

Now take those negatives and put them on a lightbox (invest in one now if you don't already have one - you'll be glad you did!), and take a good close look at them, using a magnifier of some sort (loupe, camera lens, whatever), and see if those "clear" (shadow) areas actually might carry any useful detail...and likewise with the "darker" (highlight) areas. Note also how the variables in developing time affect those images made in different lighting conditions, and at different ("normal, over, and under") exposures.

For now...assume that the more highlight and shadow detail is carried in a negative, the more useful this negative will be in that it will present you with the greatest amount of flexibility in the darkroom to employ whatever variables in printing to achieve your own "best possible" result.
(you can break those "rules" later on, when you can actually do this meaningfully/deliberately)

(Backing up a bit to film developing...you can also try changing (instead of times) the dilution of the developer, or the temperature of the developer, or the amount of agitation during the development step. These changes are best done, at least for now, one at a time so you can isolate the effects of each change independently of the others. Over time you will learn how best to combine two (or more) changed variables (lower temp for more time, etc.)

At any rate...what you will likely find over time is that your choosing/changing variables such as those I've outlined above will become innate - and you will begin to employ them almost without thinking to get your own best results. You are learning the language.

As an aside...you might also find that, while it is indeed fun (and sometimes productive) to change developers - you will actually be able to achieve those very results that you feel you might be missing now with your current developer, by simply changing one or more variables (time, temperature, dilution, agitation) with your current developer.

In the longer picture...my guess is that once you've dialed everything in with your current materials, you might reach out to try a different class of developer(s) - such as a hardening/staining developer like PMK or Pyrocat...and by that time you will "know the language" well enough to experiment meaningfully, and to evaluate its potential usefulness in the furthering of your creative reach.

(Then there are a variety of other films to try, papers and paper developers, alt processes, etc. etc....but don't get me started!)

[paulbarden]

I suggest that you ask yourself "Why do I want to explore other film+developer combinations?" If you don't have an answer to that question, then there's little reason to deviate from what is already working for you.

If, however, you want to find out if other materials can deliver results that are more aligned with how you want your photographs to look, then that is a worthwhile reason to look further afield. There have been "new" (and not so new, but rebranded/reformulated) films come onto the market every year, and I will often try one or two to see how they perform. This summer, I was pleasantly surprised by Ferrania Orto 50 (https://flic.kr/p/2p4xEMA) developed in Thornton 2-bath and plan to use it in 120 format when it appears in the USA. So, I added a new film to my vocabulary by exploring.

Often, when trying a film I'm not familiar with, I tend to do an A/B comparison study - exposing the new film and an established favorite (I often compare new films with FP4+) exactly the same, and then compare the results. You can learn a lot about an unfamiliar film that way, and sometimes you will be pleasantly surprised, and sometimes you will discover that the new film doesn't perform as well as your go-to film. Sometimes, you'll decide that the new film has something unique to offer and pursue it further. There's nothing wrong with testing materials, simply for the sake of comparing them to an old favorite. But decide at the start what you want to achieve by exploring other materials and techniques.

That said, you've received excellent advice from John Layton (post #8) and would be wise to adopt his recommendations.

[Alan Townsend]

I've been developing my 35mm and 6x6 work in a Patterson tank for a few months now (did this years ago...stopped and re-started this summer) and I'm pretty confident in my basic skills using Ilford DDX in the dilutions called for on the data sheets. I shoot HP5 and Delta 400. I haven't screwed anything up yet! I'm happy with my results and ability to be consistent when working with the chemicals.

Where to next in the developing journey? Different developer, change dilutions........I'm ready for the next creative learning lesson.

I don't have a darkroom and have never printed my work in a darkroom. Planning to take a lesson at the community darkroom over holiday break. So the only "no go" is any chemical process that will turn my kitchen into a hazmat zone! and it needs to work in a developing tank.

I'd like to be able to continue to use my Ilford Stop and Fixer with whatever new developer I might add.....hate to waste that stuff or have too many chems sitting around.

Thank you.



I would suggest the following.

1. Get a large format camera of some kind, an old graphic 4x5 is a good choice.

2. Use the "taco method" to develop four sheets of 4x5 in your Patterson tank. This method uses a standard hair band to hold the film roughly like a rectangular taco. The film is held in one hand in changing bag, then curled around like a cylinder in the long dimension, the hair band attached near the middle, then placed in the tank with the fill tube in place.

3. Since you are now developing large format film, we can talk to you in a large format forum.

4. I suggest using a self-made developer of some kind next, like cafenol someone suggested, D-23, or D-76H. D-23 can be used diluted 1:7, 1:3, 1:1 for various effects but is no good for any push processing. Stand, semi-stand, etc. D-23 at 1:3 will develop most films at normal ei in about 20 minutes, and works very well for taco method that gives uneven results with short developing times.

This will ensure supply after the coming zombie apocalypse.

Have fun,
Alan Townsend

[esearing]

You can also likely find other photographers near you who have used various developers and meet up for a share and compare discussion. Pyrocat middle values was the game changer for me vs HC110 excessive contrast. Over time I have gravitated back toward a slightly more contrasty negative too rather than rely on expansion on VC paper grades.

[Bob Kerner]

Thank you everyone. Taking a printing course tomorrow! I cannot wait to see that first image emerge. As for the development side of things, I ordered a bottle of Rodinal and will give that a try.

[esearing]

Thank you everyone. Taking a printing course tomorrow! I cannot wait to see that first image emerge. As for the development side of things, I ordered a bottle of Rodinal and will give that a try.

What did you learn from the printing course? Did the instructor talk about the chemistry and papers used in the classroom vs what other options you might use?

[Bob Kerner]

Printing class was excellent. I already understood the basic chems so the time was spent setting up the enlarger, filtration, doing exposure tests, and making contact sheets before the final print. And a lot on etiquette since it’s a community darkroom space and you don’t want to wreck someone else’s work by opening the filter tray with the light on!

There will be tons to learn

[Torquemada]

I've been developing my 35mm and 6x6 work in a Patterson tank for a few months now (did this years ago...stopped and re-started this summer) and I'm pretty confident in my basic skills using Ilford DDX in the dilutions called for on the data sheets. I shoot HP5 and Delta 400. I haven't screwed anything up yet! I'm happy with my results and ability to be consistent when working with the chemicals.

Where to next in the developing journey? Different developer, change dilutions........I'm ready for the next creative learning lesson.

I don't have a darkroom and have never printed my work in a darkroom. Planning to take a lesson at the community darkroom over holiday break. So the only "no go" is any chemical process that will turn my kitchen into a hazmat zone! and it needs to work in a developing tank.

I'd like to be able to continue to use my Ilford Stop and Fixer with whatever new developer I might add.....hate to waste that stuff or have too many chems sitting around.

Thank you.

Stop and fixer is pretty much universal..

The thing is, at this stage you need to stick with actual known chemicals with proven results. Avoid the caffenol, and other home made stuff. Getting RODINAL was a very smart choice. But to actually compare them, you will have to do some work and go through some out of pocket expenses.

Basically youll have to run some test rolls of film. In each chemical. Its dull, boring, and expensive, particularly with ilford and kodak film.

[Tin Can]

Only use TF5 Fix WITH ONLY DISTILLED

With Grocery store gallon DISTILLED WATER




Stop and fixer is pretty much universal..

The thing is, at this stage you need to stick with actual known chemicals with proven results. Avoid the caffenol, and other home made stuff. Getting RODINAL was a very smart choice. But to actually compare them, you will have to do some work and go through some out of pocket expenses.

Basically youll have to run some test rolls of film. In each chemical. Its dull, boring, and expensive, particularly with ilford and kodak film.

[Willie]

My thoughts were to experiment with things like Pyro to see how that changes things…be experimental rather than following the standard Ilford recipe.

Have you processed at least 50 rolls/sheets of film yet?
Need a number of rolls and some longer time usage so you have a good baseline for comparison.

The fact you have not printed anything yet is something you need to remedy. The Community Darkroom should be able to help in this regard. Judge your negatives by the actual prints. As Ansel said: The print is the performance. It tells you how well you did with your negatives.

Can you tell an underdeveloped negative compared to an under exposed one? Same thing with over developed/exposed. Experience in deveoping and making prints will give you the hands on knowledge you need for when you do start experimenting a bit.

Be aware that no matter what you choose to use there are others who "know" it is not only now usable, but probably the worst choice you could possible ever make. At the same time there will be other excellent photographers using that combination for high end exhibition work. There is no "one best" no matter how much we might want to believe it.

Only after printing a number of rolls/sheets will you start to understand just how things work. Then you can change one thing and make some prints and find out if that change results in prints where you can SEE and actual difference. If you can't - compared to what you have been doing - why stay with a change?

One last thing on this. Look at excellent work. A lot of excellent work. Original fine prints from top photographers. Use this to judge your quality. If your prints don't measure up find out why and change habits until they do. A good way to see excellent prints is galleries. Buy one or more, maybe the contact prints Alan Ross does of Ansel Adams negatives for the gallery in Yosemite. Or prints from others who are known for high end work. Knowing high quality will help a lot as you work for it.

[monochromeFan]

Have you processed at least 50 rolls/sheets of film yet?
Need a number of rolls and some longer time usage so you have a good baseline for comparison.

The fact you have not printed anything yet is something you need to remedy. The Community Darkroom should be able to help in this regard. Judge your negatives by the actual prints. As Ansel said: The print is the performance. It tells you how well you did with your negatives.

Can you tell an underdeveloped negative compared to an under exposed one? Same thing with over developed/exposed. Experience in deveoping and making prints will give you the hands on knowledge you need for when you do start experimenting a bit.

Be aware that no matter what you choose to use there are others who "know" it is not only now usable, but probably the worst choice you could possible ever make. At the same time there will be other excellent photographers using that combination for high end exhibition work. There is no "one best" no matter how much we might want to believe it.

Only after printing a number of rolls/sheets will you start to understand just how things work. Then you can change one thing and make some prints and find out if that change results in prints where you can SEE and actual difference. If you can't - compared to what you have been doing - why stay with a change?

One last thing on this. Look at excellent work. A lot of excellent work. Original fine prints from top photographers. Use this to judge your quality. If your prints don't measure up find out why and change habits until they do. A good way to see excellent prints is galleries. Buy one or more, maybe the contact prints Alan Ross does of Ansel Adams negatives for the gallery in Yosemite. Or prints from others who are known for high end work. Knowing high quality will help a lot as you work for it.

The idea to compare ones work with the prints of a published photographer is not going to help a new person out at all. Its very easy to stymie yourself by doing that. I followed in that road for a year and well, the misery it caused me undoubtedly created a 2 year setback in my own personal skills.

when you are leanring, it is best to just do photography. Trying to copy the work of a PROFESSIONAL PRINTER that is paid to do 20x30" prints for art gallery exhibitions when you can only do 8x10 with your enlarger is really going to put a crimp on yourself.

[Vaughan]

Why use Rodinal when almost any other developer is better. OK, I agree that monobath is worse. But something like Kodak HC-110 or Ilford Ilfotec HC give better results, are more versatile, and have equally long concentrate keeping qualities.

[pigpen]

Bob had mentioned he wanted to be careful with the chems he uses because he is developing in his kitchen. Has anyone here used the Eco Pro chemicals?

[Bob Kerner]

Bob has moved on from his thread. Got his answer (or lack of it, along with some free 'gatekeeping' comments) and realized he should be the master of his own learning journey!

[paulbarden]

Bob has moved on from his thread. Got his answer (or lack of it, along with some free 'gatekeeping' comments) and realized he should be the master of his own learning journey!

Wise choice, Bob.

[monochromeFan]

Bob had mentioned he wanted to be careful with the chems he uses because he is developing in his kitchen. Has anyone here used the Eco Pro chemicals?

Eco Pro has multiple lines, the eco pro environmentally "safer" ones, and the other not so safe ones.. Have only used the "environmentally friendly" ones..

The Xtol clone they make is GREAT when you can make it dissolve. Very long shelf life when mixed up. Im talking it was giving same results after 6 months of storage.

The paper developer, of environmentally safer format... not so great, short shelf life when the bottle opens. Very short shelf life when mixed for use. And the paper results are not anywhere near what they should be. Alway felt it made things a contrast grade darker when development was done per Foma requirements.