4x5 Ilford HP5+ and Diafine

[psychoanalyst]

Hello,

I am shooting my first sheet film ever this weekend and its the Ilford HP5+ on my Speed Graphic and I had noob question.

I already purchased the chemistry for the development (Diafine, Kodak fixer).

I am confused about what the data sheet for the Diafine reads. It seems to rate the HP5 at 640 ISO, while the Ilford rates it at 400.

Does that mean that I should meter my exposure at 640?

Thanks!

Avi

[Greg Blank]

The only way to know for sure with your specific equipment is to test. The function of your gear "will" change the results. In a perfect world all gear works identically and is always correct. Any published data, is a starting point at best. Since 640 is not a full stop value difference I would meter at 400 and bracket 1/2 under, 1/2 over and 1 stop over until you know that your results are consistent, wether that be consistently bad or good :D

http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.php?Film=HP5&Developer=Diafine&mdc=Search

That analysis will be $100.00 Thanks :)


Hello,

I am shooting my first sheet film ever this weekend and its the Ilford HP5+ on my Speed Graphic and I had noob question.

I already purchased the chemistry for the development (Diafine, Kodak fixer).

I am confused about what the data sheet for the Diafine reads. It seems to rate the HP5 at 640 ISO, while the Ilford rates it at 400.

Does that mean that I should meter my exposure at 640?

Thanks!

Avi

[BetterSense]

Diafine is annoying with sheet film, because you have to keep the two baths separate.

I would first try 400 and if your negatives are too dense, try a higher EI.

[Oren Grad]

I don't recommend starting with Diafine. It's a specialty developer that IMO is too finicky in use and too atypical in results to be a wise choice for someone just starting out.

There's a lot to learn. Keep things simple - start with a standard single-bath developer like D-76 or HC-110, and once you've learned the ropes with that, are otherwise comfortable handling sheet film, and have gained some understanding of what film speed means in practice, you can decide whether you have anything to gain from trying Diafine.

[David Karp]

I hate to ever say anything contradicting anything Oren says. But . . . :o

I learned how to develop film using Diafine. It eliminated the time temperature considerations and guaranteed that my first roll came out just fine. It is pretty hard to screw up negs in Diafine.

Before I started in LF, I was using X-Tol 1:3 for my 35mm and MF negs. When I started LF I went straight back to Diafine, so I could worry about technique instead of how long my negs were in the developer. I don't regret that decision.

After all my messing around with a variety of developers, I am back to two bath developers full time (for traditional darkroom printing), using Thornton's divided D-23 variant. I find that the vast majority of my negs print at grade 2 or 3 on my VC head. This summer I am finally going to try divided Pyrocat-MC.

If you do start with Diafine, I found that the best film speed for HP5+ was 200. Others see more speed. To find your speed, find a scene in open shade with areas of shade and open sunlight. Expose sheets at 100, 200, 400, and 800. Develop them in Diafine, and pick the one that gives you the shadow detail you like. If you ever need to add contrast to a negative, give it a bath in selenium toner diluted 1:1. That will give you the equivalent of N+1.

And yes, keep bath B out of bath A. Its not too hard to do.

[Oren Grad]

It is pretty hard to screw up negs in Diafine.

I've done it. :o :p :)

The tradeoff is between needing to control time and temperature passably well (HP5 Plus in, say, D-76, is pretty forgiving and does not require fanatically close time/temp control to deliver printable negatives) and needing to control agitation just so. In my experience, the latter is more difficult.

YMMV. No, make that YMODV. (Your Mileage Obviously Does Vary.) I guess it depends on which kind of trouble one is more prone to. Unfortunately, the only way to find that out is by trying for yourself. But I see inexperienced users reaching for Diafine because they're afraid of time/temp control and Diafine sounds like it ought to be easier. Well, not necessarily.

Avi, don't lose sleep over it. Good luck - dive in and have fun!

EDIT: In fairness, I should add that if Avi is intending to do tray development, then even with single-bath developers he's likely to have to wrestle a bit with agitation before he nails down a technique that works reliably for him. Two-bath just makes it harder, at least in my fumbly hands.

[David Karp]

Ah, Agitation.

I don't remember what the box says, but I agitate negs in my 2 bath continuously for the first 30 seconds, then ten seconds every minute thereafter. I first used hangers and tanks, but then switched to a slosher for tray development. I much prefer the slosher. (Now I also use rotary development, but that is a different story.)

I practiced hanger development extensively before I ever put a negative on a hanger. I did not try it for real until I had a consistent. appropriately paced technique.

Hangers are OK, but the slosher is the best method I have tried: All of the benefits of tray development while minimizing the opportunity for scratches. (I am certain that I could never accomplish shuffle development without scratching every negative I make. I am super fumble fingered that way.) Sloshers are not that hard to make at home. Mine can hold six 4x5 negs in 11x14 trays.

[Oren Grad]

And my salvation turned out to be rotary, first with BTZS tubes and then a Jobo. Let a thousand development methods bloom! :)

Take home for beginners: if you can't get a particular method to work reliably, don't despair. There are plenty of alternatives.

[David Karp]

Absolutely.

[psychoanalyst]

I don't recommend starting with Diafine. It's a specialty developer that IMO is too finicky in use and too atypical in results to be a wise choice for someone just starting out.

There's a lot to learn. Keep things simple - start with a standard single-bath developer like D-76 or HC-110, and once you've learned the ropes with that, are otherwise comfortable handling sheet film, and have gained some understanding of what film speed means in practice, you can decide whether you have anything to gain from trying Diafine.


Oren/David,

Thanks a ton. I am unfortunately stuck with Diafine since I already purchased it. So, I am going to go with that see what I can learn.

I had a question about the fixer. I got the Kodak professional fixer : http://www.google.com/products/catalog?rlz=1C1CHKZ_enUS430US430&q=kodak+fixer&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=shop&cid=17861565719966546825&sa=X&ei=3hwGTq-wDcLLgQffs5XODQ&ved=0CDQQ8wIwAQ

Do I need to use up the entire packet at once, or can I take small amounts every few months and make the stock fixer solution?

Thanks!

Avi

[David Karp]

If you are thinking about, say, using part of a one gallon envelope of fixer dry chemical to make a lesser amount, don't do it.

Next time, you can purchase some liquid fixer and then just dilute enough for your immediate use.

And have fun!

[Ken Lee]

Keep in mind that every sheet costs around 1 dollar. A few dollars buying some other developer, is well worth the expense. Every link in the chain, is the most important one.

[drew.saunders]

I find that Diafine in a rotary drum, diluted 1:1 with water and with the film at box speed, is quite moron resistant with regard to getting good negatives for scanning, and I'm the kind of moron that needed resisting. I switched to this method based on the article in View Camera a couple years ago. I've also started adding a drop of Photo-flo to the "A" developer for more even development and haven't had a blotchy sky since. You then dump the diafine and don't re-use it.

For FP4+, I did need 5 minutes each of A and B. For TMax or Efke IR820, I'm fine with 3 minutes, but it's OK if I go over a bit. I haven't tried HP5+, as I really don't need the speed.

I've not used Diafine for tray or stand development.

[sanking]

I find that Diafine in a rotary drum, diluted 1:1 with water and with the film at box speed, is quite moron resistant with regard to getting good negatives for scanning, and I'm the kind of moron that needed resisting. I switched to this method based on the article in View Camera a couple years ago. I've also started adding a drop of Photo-flo to the "A" developer for more even development and haven't had a blotchy sky since. You then dump the diafine and don't re-use it.

For FP4+, I did need 5 minutes each of A and B. For TMax or Efke IR820, I'm fine with 3 minutes, but it's OK if I go over a bit. I haven't tried HP5+, as I really don't need the speed.

I've not used Diafine for tray or stand development.

Not entirely moron resistant. If you put the film in the drum with the emulsion facing inside, toward the wall of the drum, this method of development gives poor results.

Sandy

[Bill_1856]

Both the Diafine and the Fixer stock will last a long time -- at least a year. Be very careful not to get any of the Diafine solution B into solution A. Repeat -- very, very careful!
One of the nicest things about Diafine (and most other two-bath developers) is that it makes it hard to screw up, no matter what ISO you use. I'd go with the ISO=400.