Can someone give me a crash course on developers

[mfratt]

I know there are a million different developers out there, and I know that each does things differently. I've only used D-76 and HC-110, and I'm fairly happy with them, but I really have no frame of reference to compare to.

I was wondering if theres a resource where I could get the run down of how the most popular developers tend to behave. I'm someone who likes to have as much control as possible over my pictures, and if a different developer might suit me better, I'd like to give it a try without having to try each one and compare side by side.

[Armin Seeholzer]

Here you can see thad XTOL from great yellow father is the best compromise:
http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/chemistry/bwFilmProcessing/selecting.jhtml?pq-path=14053

Cheers Armin

[Bruce Watson]

Crash course in developers? Sure: The Film Developing Cookbook (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/186416-REG/Focal_Press_9780240802770_Book_The_Film_Developing.html) is aimed right at you.

[Ken Lee]

Some things to consider:

1) Expect many forum members to recommend their favorite, and give you no reason whatsoever. They will also fail to provide any sample photos.

2) With developers, we consider


Ease of use
Speed of use
Safety of use
Ease of mixing
Shelf life
Cost
Availability

3) It's never really a developer on its own. It's the developer/film combination in which we're interested. Each combination has its own personality. Therefore, what do we look for in a particular developer/film combination ?


Speed
Accutance
Grain
Linear response to exposure (reciprocity)
Linear response to development
Linear response to color

4) The "best" film/developer combination may be SuperXX + ABC Pyro (or whatever) but if the film is no longer made, or unavailable in the size you want to shoot, or too expensive in the size you want to shoot, then that's a show-stopper.

[Heroique]

I'm someone who likes to have as much control as possible over my pictures … without having to try each one and compare side by side.

As your darkroom experience grows, I think you’ll recognize the contradiction here.

Oh, nevermind. ;)

Here’s my personal “crash course” for you: TMax-100 + TMax rs.

[Brian C. Miller]

I like what Arthur Fellig said about developers: don't become a chem-head. Find something and then stick with it.

Xtol is only available in the 5L packet sizes. I mix it up in a 2-gallon plastic bucket, and then I store it in jugs. It lasts a really long time. If the solution is clear, it's good to go. Lately I have been using Ilford Ilfosol-3 which is a general-purpose one-shot developer. No, I haven't been keeping strict track of all of the characteristics of film-developer combo.

[Bob McCarthy]

I may be breaking the thread but,

the developer is the least important link in the chain of shot to print (by far actually)

Far more important is:

-get the right amount of light on the film (exposure) to insure the shadows have information that contributed to the quality desired in the shot.

-the development the film to creat depth in the shadows and to generate the proper density in the negative to provide for palpible highlights in the print exposed/scanned from the film.

-to understand the contrast ratio of the light on the subject and to make decisions in the above statements to compensate

-to have an artistic eye and compose a beautiful subject.

Then and only then will the choice of developers have a "small" impact in the output on this chain of events.

There is no magic bullet. With tiny negatives (35mm) there can be an impact, with a largish piece of film, not so much.

Find one you like and adjust your process to it. You're currently using developers that are used by the vast majority of photographers and are perfectly usable for virtually all photographic circumstances.

I know I'm reading between the lines to a large degree, but it is a very common question asked by those new to film development.

bob

[mfratt]

As your darkroom experience grows, I think you’ll recognize the contradiction here.

Oh, nevermind. ;)

Here’s my personal “crash course” for you: TMax-100 + TMax rs.

Yes yes yes I know. The only way to actually figure out what is right is to get experience with it. I'm just looking for a starting point. I was looking at all the developers I can buy and have no idea where to start.

[mfratt]

I may be breaking the thread but,

the developer is the least important link in the chain of shot to print (by far actually)

Far more important is:

-get the right amount of light on the film (exposure) to insure the shadows have information that contributed to the quality desired in the shot.

-the development the film to creat depth in the shadows and to generate the proper density in the negative to provide for palpible highlights in the print exposed/scanned from the film.

-to understand the contrast ratio of the light on the subject and to make decisions in the above statements to compensate

-to have an artistic eye and compose a beautiful subject.

Then and only then will the choice of developers have a "small" impact in the output on this chain of events.

There is no magic bullet. With tiny negatives (35mm) there can be an impact, with a largish piece of film, not so much.

Find one you like and adjust your process to it. You're currently using developers that are used by the vast majority of photographers and are perfectly usable for virtually all photographic circumstances.

I know I'm reading between the lines to a large degree, but it is a very common question asked by those new to film development.

bob

And I do agree. I'm pretty new to LF photography, but I've been diving into the zone system for exposure, trying to figure out correct push/pull times, and so on, so as to control exposure, contrast, light, etc.

Even if the developer isn't all that important, its still a link in the chain, and every time I mix HC-110, I kind of grind my teeth since I'm only using it because thats what I was told to use when I began.

I guess, for me, its important that every part of the process is a conscious decision. That is one of the things that I love about LF in general; the amount of control it provides and the fact that the medium itself pushes me to think through what I'm doing much more so than with smaller formats and infinitely more so than with digital (which is what I used up until recently)

[Bob McCarthy]

I'm not nearly as old as some of these guys, <G>, but I have been in the darkroom since the early 70's. I started with D76 in school lab, have used just about every developer known to man, and currently use D23 and HC110.

HC 110 works well with damn near any film. Why do I use it? It is amazing convenient to mix 30 ml of HC110 drawn directly from the syrup bottle with a turkey syringe and squirt it into a (just short - then top off)) liter of water and be ready to go in 10 minutes.

With excellent results to boot.

bob

[Gem Singer]

mfratt,

You didn't mention the type of film and the format you are using.

As Ken Lee mentioned, the combination of developer and film is more relevant than the make or type of developer you prefer to use.

The method of agitation you plan on using is a very important factor when it comes to choosing a film developer. Some developers work best with tray development. Others work best with rotary development.

Bruce Watson recommended S.Anchell and B.Troop: "The Film Developing Cookbook".

I suggest that you obtain a copy of that book. Read it, and you will find the answer to your question regarding the maze of film developers that are available

[BetterSense]

Ansel Adams used HC110. It was good enough for him, and according to my calculations it's the cheapest of all developers. Why change?

[Jay DeFehr]

mfratt,

Developers have two separate categories of characteristics:

Developing -

Developing characteristics are directly related to image quality, and include: Grain, film speed/ shadow detail, sharpness, and gradation. Generally speaking, the best developer is the one that compromises least in any single category, while producing the best results overall, but any given user might prioritize the above characteristics differently, and so each characteristic also represents a class of developers. There are fine grain developers, acutance developers, speed enhancing developers, and developers designed to produce a long tonal scale, and each class makes compromises to target its design priority. The Kodak chart Armin posted is a very simple illustration of the concept, though a more revealing one could be made featuring developers from each class, instead of comparing several general purpose Kodak developers.

Practical -

There are many practical considerations that might be as important, or more important than the developing characteristics, including: economy, availability, toxicity, keeping properties, ease of use, documentation and support. One cannot overestimate the importance of consistency and reliability. When a developer capable of the best possible results fails, one might begin to long for a reliable, if mediocre developer.

Reading descriptions of, and claims for various developers can be educational, and intriguing, and misleading, all at the same time, and one might contract Developer Fever, and never fully recover. If your interest is in making photos, I'd recommend you choose a good, convenient general purpose developer (any one will do), and get on with making photos. If, like me, developers and developing hold their own fascination for you, apart from making photos, there are many very good books on the subject, some mentioned already.

Welcome, good luck, and enjoy!

[ki6mf]

I suggest that you pick a single film and developer. figure how to make it work for the way you want, figure out zone system, iso, film speed etc. Then determine if you want to change. If you change its probably the film and developer that you will end up experimenting with. I started with d76 when using zone system shoot HP5 at ISO 300 , this worked out to be what my gear tested out at, and never felt the need to look at Pyro or other films and developers.

[Ron Marshall]

When I got back into photography after a 25 year hiatus I decided to try a number of developers, mostly out of curiosity, since all I had ever used in the past was D76.

What I found was, after becoming used to each, I was able to get very good negs from all of them. The differences between them were minimal; more a matter of trade-offs, a bit more speed versus a bit more grain etc.

Lots of good devs out there. Read Anchell and Troup, try a few to satisfy yourself, then stick with one.

[Merg Ross]

[QUOTE=mfratt;650314] I've only used D-76 and HC-110, and I'm fairly happy with them, but I really have no frame of reference to compare to.

The best frame of reference would be to look at the work of other photographers. What do you like about their prints and find lacking in yours, if anything. Use their work as a frame of reference, and build on it. There is no silver bullet.

Michael Smith did this four decades ago and decided he liked the look of Edward Weston's prints. He then found a way to build on that look, later manufacturing his own brand of chloride paper and modifying film and paper developers along the way.

If you have the time to be dedicated to your vision, there are no shortcuts, nor should you spend too much time on technique alone. My motto after many decades as a photographer is, "keep it simple." You may be just fine with D-76 and HC-110. I used both for years,and they performed well.

Good light, and have fun!

[mfratt]

Thanks for all the great advice.

I'm still experimenting with different films, as well. I started out with Kodak TXP, but I've found that I prefer the tonality and handling of highlights better with the Ilford HP5+. I just picked up a small box of Ilford Delta 100, I'm gonna give that a run. I'm also interested in trying the Adox CHS 50. I want to try the Fuji Acros as well for long exposures at night due to its relatively low contrast and its reciprocity characteristics (I've used this in 120, briefly. My prints were kind of flat, but thats probably my error in printing not the film. I've only printed about 3 or 4 negs off it).

I think I'll stick with the HC-110 until I settle on a film that I like. Based on that Kodak chart, however, I'm thinking that XTOL might be the way to go.