Divided Procat HD

[walterb]

Have tried numerous times testing the divided pyrocat hd development. Can't seem to get it right. Film T Max 400 @ 250. Shadows placed in zone III, Sunlight Shed zone X.
Development: In Jobo processor with continuous rotation.
Presoak 5 min distilled water
Pyro part A 1:10 5 min
Pyro part B 1:10 5 min
1 min plain water stop (distilled water)
5 min TF 4 fixer
Wash 30 min, distilled water changed every 10 min.
Problem: blotches or streaking in sky area. Blotches have occcured in 3 different tests. Can't see any blotches other than the sky area.

Appreciate any help
Walter B. West Stockbridge, Ma.

[sanking]

Have tried numerous times testing the divided pyrocat hd development. Can't seem to get it right.

big snip . . .

Problem: blotches or streaking in sky area. Blotches have occcured in 3 different tests. Can't see any blotches other than the sky area.

Appreciate any help
Walter B. West Stockbridge, Ma.


Are you fixing the film in the drum or out?

Sandy King

[walterb]

Sandy
In the drum

[Ken Lee]

I keep getting blotching too - and wondered if it was due to water from my well. The fact that you use distilled water, but get blotches too, points elsewhere.

I follow the instructions carefully, and provide continuous agitation, but still get blotches. This is with FP4+ and HP5+.

Using an infra-red viewing device, I can see the blotches before the film goes into the fixer. I see it when the negatives are in solution B.

I don't use rotary processing, but trays (actually shoe containers (http://www.kennethleegallery.com/html/tech/devtray.html)).

[Jay DeFehr]

Ken and Walter,

Are you using a pre-soak? I don't get blotches with Hypercat, but I use a pre-soak.

[sanking]

Using an infra-red viewing device, I can see the blotches before the film goes into the fixer. I see it when the negatives are in solution B.

I don't use rotary processing, but trays (actually shoe containers (http://www.kenleegallery.com/html/tech/devtray.html)).

Ken,

When do you see the blotches when the negative is in solution B? Right away or do they appear gradually?

Also, is the blotchiness generally in one direction, or random. Looking at the botches in Walter's negatives they appear to be in the direction of the rotation of the drum. Anything in your case that could be associated with agitation in Solution A, or in how Solution A was drained?

Sandy

[walterb]

Sandy and Ken
I use a 5 min presoak in the drum. I have run this test 3 times and 3 times the blotches
appear in the same area of the film in the sky. I ran the test without sky in the exposure and could not see any blotches.

walter

[walterb]

Sandy & Ken

Here is a negative from the same test developed in the same batch but no sky and no blotches, at least that I can see.

walter

[sanking]

If the blotches are appearing during development in Solution B my hunch is that they the reason is due to the mechanism of draining of Solution A. If that is so the blotches probably begin immediately as soon as the negative goes into Solution B. I am really interested to hear what Ken has to say about this since he has the infrared device and can observe the progress of development.

Sandy

[Ken Lee]

In Solution A, there is no development of course, so there's nothing to see. I see the blotches in Solution B.

In my case, the blotches run vertically along the edges of the photos. When I get some time, I will post some proofs.

Over the weekend, I can run a test and look more carefully if that will help.

[Andrew O'Neill]

Hi Walterb,

Try the same test again but this time use a tray. I'm getting nice, smooth skies.

[sanking]

In Solution A, there is no development of course, so there's nothing to see. I see the blotches in Solution B.

In my case, the blotches run vertically along the edges of the photos. When I get some time, I will post some proofs.

Over the weekend, I can run a test and look more carefully if that will help.

Yes, I am very interested in determining exactly when the blotches begin. If it is an uneven draining issue adding a bit of wetting agent to Solution A might solve the problem.

Sandy

[Jay DeFehr]

I develop Arista APHS Ortho film much the way Ken develops his film; in a tray, by inspection (although, there's not much to inspect with 2-bath development; one second there's no image, the next there is). I find APHS to be very sensitive to handling, so I process in a single tray, beginning with water for the pre-soak. I dump out the pre-soak water, with the backing dyes, and pour in the A solution, with vigorous agitation throughout the absorption time. The film is completely clear during this phase. I pour out the A solution, and as quickly as I can, I pour in the B solution, again with vigorous agitation. The image pops up in a few seconds, but I develop for a full minute. I pour out the B solution and rinse the film with clean water, changing twice. Then I pour in the fix. The fixer I use fixes APHS almost instantly, but I fix for a full minute. I pour out the fixer and wash in clean water, add a few drops of photoflo at the end of the wash cycle, clip the film clip on the corner of the film and pull it out of the tray to hang dry.

I know this is a tedious process, but this film is so sensitive to handling, it's the only way I can get pristine negatives. If any film was going to streak or blotch, it would be this stuff. If I had problems with uneven development, I would use brush agitation (cheap sponge paintbrush, in my case).

Ken,

Edge density is sometimes associated with using too small a tray for the format being developed. What size trays are you using?

[Ken Lee]

http://www.kennethleegallery.com/images/forum/blotches.jpg

Here is a sample image from a run I did 5 days ago. It is a proof of the shot. No adjustment has been made to contrast, or anything else for that matter.

At that time, I was taking all my sheets from A, and putting them into B all at once - and only then, starting to shuffle.

As you can see, the blotches are mainly along the edges, but not exclusively.

After seeing those blotches, I developed another batch a few days later. That time, I made sure to immerse each negative into B separately and completely - instead of immersing them all at once. Below is a photo from that batch. Because there was no obvious blotching, I could edit the file in Photoshop, adjust the contrast, and make a real photo from it.

http://www.kennethleegallery.com/images/forum/img272.jpg

I may be wrong, but it appears that development happens the moment the film enters B, so it's imperative that it be uniform. The negative has to be fully submerged, all at the same time. I wonder if it might make sense to use B at a higher dilution, IE a weaker solution, so that development not be so sudden.

[sanking]

I may be wrong, but it appears that development happens the moment the film enters B, so it's imperative that it be uniform. The negative has to be fully submerged, all at the same time. I wonder if it might make sense to use B at a higher dilution, IE a weaker solution, so that development not be so sudden.

It is also very important in stand development, where we use very dilute solutions, that the negative be wetted out with the developer uniformly, and as quickly as possible, and then agitated vigorously for at least one full minute afterward. Failure to do so will result in uneven development not unlike what is being described in this thread.

From what I have read so far it seems that uniform and quick immersion of the negative in Solution B may be the solution. I will run some tests when I get some spare time but based on earlier calibration I am fairly certain that it will not be possible to use a weaker dilution of Solution B. But I will test to make sure.

Sandy

[Nathan Potter]

If I look at Walters first neg very carefully the streaks seems to exhibit a very faint adjacency effect along both edges of the streaks. I have noticed this using Diafine in tray development and ascribed it to streaks of solution A being left on the film while plunging it into solution B. Maybe these streaks inhibit the initial action of solution B in an, albeit small, but detectable way. That comment on the very fast development of the image at the start of solution B may suggest that the non uniform streaks of A are exaggerated by B.

The notion of a touch of wetting agent in A is interesting. I should try that with Diafine.

BTW Sandy, many thanks for your nice writeup on Diafine a couple of years ago in View Camera magazine. It prompted me to get busy and work on the technique of two bath development.

Nate Potter, Austin TX.

[Jay DeFehr]

Sandy,

I don't mean to butt in, and I don't know how you tested to arrive at your optimum dilution of your B bath, but a less alkaline B bath at a higher concentration might provide smoother, less blotch-prone development. If Nathan is on to something, it could mean the very same factors that produce sharpness are responsible for the blotching.

[Ken Lee]

I have taken the liberty of adding the following to the instructions (http://www.pyrocat-hd.com/html/mixing.html#divided) page on Divided Pyrocat HD.

"Negatives must be fully immersed in Solution B and agitated vigorously for at least one full minute. Failure to do so, can result in uneven development."

[walterb]

Andrew
I can't use trays as I don't have a darkroom. Load the film in the JoBo in a closet and development is on the kitchen counter .

I plan to test again later today using a small amount of wetting agent in A as Sandy has suggested. Will post my results when finished.

Would it make sense to give a quick clear water rinse after the A solution?
Also is it at all possible that the dye released from the pre-soak could be a factor?

Thanks to all I appreciate the help.

[sanking]

Andrew
I can't use trays as I don't have a darkroom. Load the film in the JoBo in a closet and development is on the kitchen counter .

I plan to test again later today using a small amount of wetting agent in A as Sandy has suggested. Will post my results when finished.

Would it make sense to give a quick clear water rinse after the A solution?
Also is it at all possible that the dye released from the pre-soak could be a factor?

Thanks to all I appreciate the help.

Walter,

You should not rinse the film with water after the A solution. This would wash out the reducer which must be in the emulsion of the film when you transfer it to Solution B. If you rinse most of the reducer will be removed and you will get virtually no development.

The wetting agent may help, and I would suggest increasing the amount of Solution A and B. My suspicion is that for some reason the solution flow in your Jobo does not allow the film to be wet completely out all at once and perhaps using more solution wil remedy this.

I have not seen any mottling in my use of Pyrocat-HD but my system of development of sheet film, which is in print drums or BTZS tubes, assures that the film is wet out immediately in all of the solutions. I really believe this is the key to even development.

Sandy

[walterb]

Sandy
I ran another test with the same results. I doubled the amount of solution A and B. Everything else remained the same, time, dilution, etc.
I did not add any wetting agent as I would not know if it was wetting agent or the
doubling of the amount of A & B if it worked. Tomorrow unless you have any other
suggestions I will do the same and add some wetting agent. I really want this to work
so I will continue until I get it.

Thanks for your patience

Walter

[Scott Whitford]

I must be missing something here (wouldn't be the first time).

What's the benefit of the divided development? As opposed to mixing sol'ns A and B together then developing in one step...

I'm curious because Pyrocat HD and TMY in a Jobo is my all-around favorite combo.

I mix at 2+2+100 and dev at 70 deg F for around 8 minutes for normal contrast. Continous rotation in a Jobo using the reels at speed "P". I never see uneven development in skies.


Scott

[David Karp]

Scott,

Check out this thread: www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=52913&page=4

[Ken Lee]

What's the benefit of the divided development?

Divided Developer formulas have been around for a long time.

This thread, is merely about a particular aspect of the subject.

For a more extensive discussion, with sample photos, look here (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=52913).

[sanking]

Sandy
I ran another test with the same results. I doubled the amount of solution A and B. Everything else remained the same, time, dilution, etc.
I did not add any wetting agent as I would not know if it was wetting agent or the
doubling of the amount of A & B if it worked. Tomorrow unless you have any other
suggestions I will do the same and add some wetting agent. I really want this to work
so I will continue until I get it.

Thanks for your patience

Walter

Wow, you sure have a lot of uneven development on this test. To be sure, doubling the amount of A & B did not solve the problem at all.

I look forward to results of your test with the wetting agent.

Sandy

[Jay DeFehr]

Scott,

I think you raise an important point. The benefits should always be weighed against the risks. If the quality of the resulting negative is all that matters (I'm not suggesting it is), I think a negative developed in divided Pyrocat would be very nearly indistinguishable from a negative developed in Pyrocat as a single bath developer, if both negatives are developed to the same contrast. Again if the resulting negative was the only consideration, it might be hard to justify the use of divided Pyrocat, given the very subtle differences in defect-free negatives, and the risk of defects with the divided developer. Of course, there are benefits to 2-bath development that are not directly related to negative quality; the option to develop films of different types and speeds together, the non-necessity of tight time or temperature control (2-bath development allows one to process without either a thermometer or a timer, if necessary), and in the cases of other types of 2-bath developers, much increased economy.

This thread has me wondering if I've overlooked defects in my own negatives developed in my 2-bath developer, as I can't think of any good reason why I shouldn't be seeing the same problems Ken and Walter are seeing. I'll give them a good looking over when I get home.

[Jay DeFehr]

I found a raw, unedited scan of a 2-bath negative with lots of sky area. Aside from some dust and noise, I don't see any streaking or blotching.

[Henry Ambrose]

Some suggestions, comments and questions:

Shoot some sheets of blank sky or a blank evenly lit target so you can clearly see the pattern of streaking. Its not a waste of film if it helps you solve this problem.

I always had problems with the time it took to pour developer into Jobo tanks with the lift and the 2500 series tanks which I assume is what you are using. C-41 went well but some B&W did not. Longer times and more dilution worked better for me.

I also tried filling the tank first then dropping in the film but that won't work for you, since you lack a darkroom.

The best method I found with Jobo 2500 tanks was to use the larger one that took 2 reels, filling it 3/4 full and dunking the one reel of film. I agitated by gently rolling the tank in the sink. You will need a standard cap for the tank to do this. Do not try inversion - all that liquid rushing around will rip the film from the reel.

Have you tried a different dilution of your developer?

What might happen if you used Pyrocat HD mixed but a higher dilution? Might you get some compensation effect as you desire now?

[sanking]

Some suggestions, comments and questions:


Have you tried a different dilution of your developer?

What might happen if you used Pyrocat HD mixed but a higher dilution? Might you get some compensation effect as you desire now?


Weaker dilutions can be used but with any given film will result in less contrast. Of course, if you are developing to scan, which is the main reason this work flow is being promoted, less contrast does not make any difference, within reason. So a 1:20 dilution, or even weaker, may be used in place of 1:10. In fact, for some high contrast films, Efke 25, Rollei Pan 25, etc. a 1:15 or 1:20 dilution would be recommended as the standard since 1:10 might give too much contast.

The basic rule is that higher dilutions result in less contrast, but each film is different so there is no one magical dilution.

I have developed over a hundred sheets of 5X7 film and at least two hundred rolls of 120 film with divided Pyrocat-HD and have not seen any mottling or streaking once I got the technique down. I develop 5X7" film one sheet at a time in an 8X10 Beseler drum, on a motor base. The mechanism of development is such that the developer pretty much comes into contact with the film evenly and immediately. After development in Solution A, drain for 15 seconds, then begin Solution B. The basic procedure is.

Step One -- Five minute presoak in plain water. My water source if quite pure and I don't use distilled.
Step Two -- Five minutes in Solution A, then drain for 15 seconds.
Step Three -- Five minutes in Solution B, then drain for 15 seconds.
Step Four -- Wash for twenty minutes with distilled water.
Note that with rotary agitation I use a weaker dilution than with intermittent agitation, so instead of 1:10 which would be my standard for development of Acros in tanks on spiral reels with intermittent agitation I use 1:20.

With 120 film my procedure is as follows. Note again that the film comes into contact with both Solution A and Solution B immediately and completely.
Step One -- Five minute presoak.
Step Two -- Five minutes in Solution A. Drop the reels with the film loaded into the tank which has been filled in advance. Agitate vigorously for one full minute, then agitate vigorously for fifteen seconds every minute thereafter. Remove reels and drain.
Step Three -- Drop the film into a tank containing Solution B. Agitate vigorously for one full minute, then agitate vigorously for fifteen seconds every minute thereafter. Remove reels and drain.
Step Four -- Wash film for twenty minutes.

Please note that I have never advocated shuffle agitation with sheet film, or any other type of development that does not allow for the film to be immersed completely and all at once in the solutions.

Sandy King

[mdm]

If one were using BTZS style tubes for divided Pyrocat would it still be possible to use a small quantity of developer as usual (50ml for me) or would more be required to minimise problems. If I can continue to use a small quantity, that would make it an economical aproach for me. My best negatives over all, come from BTZS style tubes, but minimal agitation has worked well too. I will give it a try anyway.

David

[sanking]

If one were using BTZS style tubes for divided Pyrocat would it still be possible to use a small quantity of developer as usual (50ml for me) or would more be required to minimise problems. If I can continue to use a small quantity, that would make it an economical aproach for me. My best negatives over all, come from BTZS style tubes, but minimal agitation has worked well too. I will give it a try anyway.

David

Yes, I often develop sheet film myself in BTZS type tube with divided Pyrocat. You should have two caps for this, however. Cover the tube with one with the film in it, fill the other with developer. Presoak the film, then when you are ready to develop drain the tube and place it over the cap with the developer. When you are ready to develop just turn the tube over and immediately began agitation by moving the tube up and down and side to side. After a minute you can put the tubes in a water bath and bob them around as with standard BTZS technique.

Sandy

[pivot]

Weaker dilutions can be used but with any given film will result in less contrast. Of course, if you are developing to scan, which is the main reason this work flow is being promoted, less contrast does not make any difference, within reason. So a 1:20 dilution, or even weaker, may be used in place of 1:10. In fact, for some high contrast films, Efke 25, Rollei Pan 25, etc. a 1:15 or 1:20 dilution would be recommended as the standard since 1:10 might give too much contast.

The basic rule is that higher dilutions result in less contrast, but each film is different so there is no one magical dilution.

I have developed over a hundred sheets of 5X7 film and at least two hundred rolls of 120 film with divided Pyrocat-HD and have not seen any mottling or streaking once I got the technique down. I develop 5X7" film one sheet at a time in an 8X10 Beseler drum, on a motor base. The mechanism of development is such that the developer pretty much comes into contact with the film evenly and immediately. After development in Solution A, drain for 15 seconds, then begin Solution B. The basic procedure is.

Step One -- Five minute presoak in plain water. My water source if quite pure and I don't use distilled.
Step Two -- Five minutes in Solution A, then drain for 15 seconds.
Step Three -- Five minutes in Solution B, then drain for 15 seconds.
Step Four -- Wash for twenty minutes with distilled water.
Note that with rotary agitation I use a weaker dilution than with intermittent agitation, so instead of 1:10 which would be my standard for development of Acros in tanks on spiral reels with intermittent agitation I use 1:20.

With 120 film my procedure is as follows. Note again that the film comes into contact with both Solution A and Solution B immediately and completely.
Step One -- Five minute presoak.
Step Two -- Five minutes in Solution A. Drop the reels with the film loaded into the tank which has been filled in advance. Agitate vigorously for one full minute, then agitate vigorously for fifteen seconds every minute thereafter. Remove reels and drain.
Step Three -- Drop the film into a tank containing Solution B. Agitate vigorously for one full minute, then agitate vigorously for fifteen seconds every minute thereafter. Remove reels and drain.
Step Four -- Wash film for twenty minutes.

Please note that I have never advocated shuffle agitation with sheet film, or any other type of development that does not allow for the film to be immersed completely and all at once in the solutions.

Sandy King

Thank you for sharing your technique.
As I read elsewhere an alkaline stop bath instead of washing the film for 20 minutes should be fine as well. However, I am not certain about the concentration. Is a 1% stop bath ok?

Regards
Stephan

[sanking]

Thank you for sharing your technique.
As I read elsewhere an alkaline stop bath instead of washing the film for 20 minutes should be fine as well. However, I am not certain about the concentration. Is a 1% stop bath ok?

Regards
Stephan

Film washes clean very quickly without any clearing agent. You only need about 10-15 changes of water for archival washing of film. I just wash for 15-20 minutes and don't bother with a clearing agent.

Sandy King

[pivot]

Film washes clean very quickly without any clearing agent. You only need about 10-15 changes of water for archival washing of film. I just wash for 15-20 minutes and don't bother with a clearing agent.

Sandy King

Perhaps I am missing something here... but don't you fix your film? Or are you talking about washing the film before and after putting the film into the fixer?

Stephan

[Andrew O'Neill]

Drop the film in the fix right after stop bath. No rinse before fix is necessary. If you are planning on using HCA before the wash, you should give the film a good rinse. Like Sandy, it's not necessary to use a HCA for film as the emulsion is on a pervious substrate and washes quickly. I only use it for paper.

[sanking]

Perhaps I am missing something here... but don't you fix your film? Or are you talking about washing the film before and after putting the film into the fixer?

Stephan

I must have misunderstood your question as I thought you were talking about washing the film in a clearing bath after fixing. So I was just remarking that a clearing bath is not really necessary with film.

Sandy

[Jay Decker]

I too get blotches in about 1 sheet in 5. I am processing with Jobo CPP and a Jobo 3005 drum. One solution that I have considered is keeping the Solution A dilution at 1:10 and changing the Solution B dilution to 1:20, which is more dilute than the 1:10 dilution I have been using.

Do you think this might have some merit?

If so, do think that increasing the Solution B processing time will be necessary?

[walterb]

Sandy
Another test with my divided pyro. Changed the dilution to 1:20 both A & B 600 ml ea
added 2ml of Kodak photo flo to the A. Developed both negatives at the same time 5 min ea., 1 min distilled water stop, 5 min tf4 fixer, 20 minutes wash distilled water.

I loaded one negative with the emulsion side to the outside on the JOBO reel, the other one was loaded correctly with the emulsion to the inside. The one loaded incorrectly shows streaking, the one loaded correctly show no blotches or streaking. I know it is only one negative but it appears that the photo flo has corrected the problem. This is the first time for me at least with no blotches.

Walter

[Ken Lee]

Walter: Congratulations and thanks ! Your patience and persistence are helping us all.

Sandy: What does the wetting agent do, if it is applied in solution A ? Does it promote absorption of solution A into the film emulsion ?

If that is the case, would a longer pre-soak accomplish the same thing ?

Given that films have dyes which are removed in pre-soak, would it be helpful to perform more than one pre-soak, or to perform pre-soak with a large volume of water ?

What is the difference between a wetting agent (which breaks up surface tension in water), and something that changes the pH of the water ?

Walter - Are you sure the streaking in the first photo, isn't really a rare 'double twister" in the sky ? Also, could you share with us the Zone values for your photo ? I'm very interested in how things play out doing landscape photography. Did you use a filter for separation in the clouds ?

[sanking]

Sandy
Another test with my divided pyro. Changed the dilution to 1:20 both A & B 600 ml ea
added 2ml of Kodak photo flo to the A. Developed both negatives at the same time 5 min ea., 1 min distilled water stop, 5 min tf4 fixer, 20 minutes wash distilled water.

I loaded one negative with the emulsion side to the outside on the JOBO reel, the other one was loaded correctly with the emulsion to the inside. The one loaded incorrectly shows streaking, the one loaded correctly show no blotches or streaking. I know it is only one negative but it appears that the photo flo has corrected the problem. This is the first time for me at least with no blotches.

Walter

Walter,

That is great to hear. We will need to test this more but from here it appears that the wetting agent did its job.

Sandy

[sanking]

Walter: Congratulations and thanks ! Your patience and persistence are helping us all.

Sandy: What does the wetting agent do, if it is applied in solution A ? Does it promote absorption of solution A into the film emulsion ?

If that is the case, would a longer pre-soak accomplish the same thing ?

Given that films have dyes which are removed in pre-soak, would it be helpful to perform more than one pre-soak, or to perform pre-soak with a large volume of water ?

What is the difference between a wetting agent (which breaks up surface tension in water), and something that changes the pH of the water ?

Walter - Are you sure the streaking in the first photo, isn't really a rare 'double twister" in the sky ? Also, could you share with us the Zone values for your photo ? I'm very interested in how things play out doing landscape photography. Did you use a filter for separation in the clouds ?
Walter,

Ken,

So far as I know the wetting agent does not promote absorption of Solution A into the emulsion. Rather, it releases the surface tension and allows Solution A to spread over the surface of the negative instead of pooling or streaking in one area as some liquids tend to do after they drain. If Solution A drains in streaks this could result in uneven development because Solution B would come into contact with uneven amounts of Solution A.

And no, I don't believe a longer pre-soak would accomplish the same thing as the wetting agent.

Sandy

[walterb]

Ken

This is not a double twister, the negatives were exposed within 10 seconds of each other. I flipped the first negative on the JOBO reel on purpose just to see the difference. The shadows to the left of the shed were placed on zone III the brightest cloud was placed on XII I used no filter.

Walter

[Ken Lee]

Sorry, I was joking about a double twister :)

[Greg Blank]

Those steaks are where the negative contacted or nearly contacted the ribs of the drum. Consequentaly the chemicals surged at the ribs leaving the steaks.



Sandy
Another test with my divided pyro. Changed the dilution to 1:20 both A & B 600 ml ea
added 2ml of Kodak photo flo to the A. Developed both negatives at the same time 5 min ea., 1 min distilled water stop, 5 min tf4 fixer, 20 minutes wash distilled water.

I loaded one negative with the emulsion side to the outside on the JOBO reel, the other one was loaded correctly with the emulsion to the inside. The one loaded incorrectly shows streaking, the one loaded correctly show no blotches or streaking. I know it is only one negative but it appears that the photo flo has corrected the problem. This is the first time for me at least with no blotches.

Walter

[Henry Ambrose]

Those steaks are where the negative contacted or nearly contacted the ribs of the drum. Consequentaly the chemicals surged at the ribs leaving the steaks.

Likely correct, IMO.
I have no love for the 2500 series sheet film holder.