PDA

View Full Version : Non-Pyro Developer recommendations



David_5527
28-Dec-2011, 06:15
I'm just starting to work with 14x17 negs and am looking for a developer for fp4 and tmax400...development in trays.

I'm in Israel, and Pyro chemistry doesn't seem to be available here: I have found d-76; HC-110 and T-Max developer. I suppose the T-max developer would work best for the tmax film...right?

Any recommendation for the fp4?

I've scanned previous threads, but answers seem pretty even with those who like the d-76 and those who like the HC110....

I will probably try to order some Pyro here, but in the meantime am stuck with what is available...

Thanks.

David

Kevin Crisp
28-Dec-2011, 06:24
Well, you are stuck with perfectly adequate choices. TMAX films work very well in d76 (often diluted at least 1:1) and both D76 and HC110 will do a fine job on the Ilford film. Xtol is an excellent developer for both if you can get that.

MIke Sherck
28-Dec-2011, 07:24
My own personal preference for both FP4+ as well as Tmax films in trays is D-76, straight. My experience with Tmax developer was that the negatives came out rather flat.

Mike

cdholden
28-Dec-2011, 07:45
How are you planning to print your negatives?
Some processes will work with different types of developers better than others.

Ken Lee
28-Dec-2011, 07:48
Asking for anecdotal recommendations has advantages and disadvantages. One advantage is that anyone can make a recommendation without showing any evidence to support it. A disadvantage is that without any evidence to support it, the recommendation is questionable, and may introduce more confusion than clarification.

If you prefer to avoid testing, you might find it helpful to find someone whose images you admire, and find out how the images are made. It can be a very effective short-cut.

Jay DeFehr
28-Dec-2011, 08:11
David,

Which general purpose, non-pyro developer you use to process 14x17 film doesn't really matter much, so use whatever is convenient. There might be an advantage to using a developer you don't have to worry will be discontinued, forcing you to switch/ learn another developer, which means compounding your own from bulk chemicals. There are many general purpose, non-pyro developer formulas published, and a good strategy might be to determine which chemicals are most readily available to you, and choose a formula that utilizes those. D-76 type developers composed of some combination of metol/hydroquinone/phenidone/ascorbic acid with sodium sulfite and a mild alkali like borax or sodium metaborate are numerous and well documented. That being said, switching from one general purpose non-pyro developer to another, should that become necessary, is probably not such a big deal, and of all the decisions you'll make in the process of making an image, this one is not very critical. Good luck, and have fun!

Brian C. Miller
28-Dec-2011, 08:30
I have found d-76; HC-110 and T-Max developer.

Yes, all of those work just fine. Seriously, you don't have a thing to worry about with any of those. However, Kodak doesn't recommend T-Max developer for sheet films. Here's Kodak's "Black-and-White Tips and Techniques for Darkroom Enthusiasts" (http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/o3/o3.pdf) (pdf) publication, which lists some of the developer characteristics and compares them.

false_Aesthetic
28-Dec-2011, 08:32
Xtol 1:1 and FP4.
And then the Ilford equiv of Xtol.

I wish I had the time to go through my negs/prints to post an example but I have a plant to catch in 3 hours.


I like Xtol a lot. If it came in spread form I'd put it on toast.

But . . .

What Ken and Jay said.

jp
28-Dec-2011, 09:18
I've used both d76 (1:1) and hc110 for tmax400; no problems. hc110 might work a little faster, which is handy as I find tray processing in the dark kinda boring and tedious.

hc110 is best diluted/mixed prior to putting it into the tray, as it's hard to mix from concentrate in a shallow tray.

Tmax developer I have not tried for a long time, but it's a little expensive, and works fine.

PMK or pyrocat HD you could order from B&H or formulary. I have no idea whether that stuff ships to where you are. In addition to doing a good job, the pyro developers are relatively inexpensive, though that doesn't sound like a big concern if you're using 14x17 tmax film :-) (I'm a fan of 8x10 tmax400 film)

Drew Wiley
28-Dec-2011, 09:39
The correct TMax developer would be TMaxRS. It has to have the RS designation for
ideal sheet film use. Otherwise, either HC-110 or 76 work perfectly well. You'll get a
little straighter curve shape with HC-110 but possibly a bit more graininess. You'll
also need to adjust your film speed for good shadow detail. I found Ilford's published
ASA of 125 to be unrealistically optimistic, and generally use ASA 50 for these devs.

Peter De Smidt
28-Dec-2011, 10:20
In this case, I would use D76 or the HC110. I would dilute either to the point where you get a good development time for such large sheets in trays. 10-12 minutes should work well. If you go shorter than that, any little difference in technique will lead to a bigger difference in the negative. In my experience, it's easier to scratch big sheets of film. You're going to want to definitely do some test runs, not only for development time, but also for the technique of agitation and handling.

ROL
28-Dec-2011, 11:54
Asking for anecdotal recommendations has advantages and disadvantages. One advantage is that anyone can make a recommendation without showing any evidence to support it. A disadvantage is that without any evidence to support it, the recommendation is questionable, and may introduce more confusion than clarification.

If you prefer to avoid testing, you might find it helpful to find someone whose images you admire, and find out how the images are made. It can be a very effective short-cut.

Not exactly anecdotal, but possibly helpful despite the assumption that 14x17 negs (inches?) would be contact printed:

Although my usual drink is PMK Pyro, I was farting around this fall with (too long ignored) XTOL on 5"x7" as an alternate poison. Two 125 speed films (Arista Pro = FP4+, rated at 100) were exposed within a couple of minutes of each other with a 180mm Fujinon lens. I tray developed both (N–1), one in Pyro (1:2:100, 10 min.) and one in XTOL (1:1, 10 min.). I enlarged the central portion of the negs. to approximately 30"x40" onto Slavich grade 3 8"x10" paper, matching printing as closely as practical, in order to evaluate the differences. They were scanned identically with the same minimum of necessary sharpening (unsharp mask) and de–saturated to mitigate staining cues.


PMK Pyro
http://www.rangeoflightphotography.com/SupportPics/LFPF/TenayaLkPMKPyro.jpg

XTOL
http://www.rangeoflightphotography.com/SupportPics/LFPF/TenayaLkXTOL.jpg

Given that no one here is able to evaluate the actual proofs but me, here are my conclusions:


Both are fine grained developers, when used normally, with no importantly visible grain on fine grained films, even in great enlargements.

Local contrast and acuity seems to be marginally better in the Pyro negatives, referenced by the varnish streaks on the rock face behind Pywiack Dome (center left) and the dead beach tree on the opposite shore (bottom right). A change in paper grade might easily mitigate any perceived differences between the two developers. Distant heavily shadowed (forest) regions appear more "open" in the XTOL neg.

I believe the XTOL negative may be easier to print for an overall satisfactory result ...but then I don't normally print for only a satisfactory result ;)

Both PMK Pyro and Xtol are fine developers. I would not lose sleep over the use of either. The end results are for my practical purposes, insignificant. Cost and ease of use may be the only deciding factors, for many. For now, I'm sticking with PMK Pyro.


I have tested D76 and TMAX (film and RS developer) in the past, and have not found any combination to be to my liking. Too mushy.

Pick your poison.

Jay Decker
7-Jan-2012, 11:05
Which general purpose, non-pyro developer you use to process 14x17 film doesn't really matter much, so use whatever is convenient.

This is excellent advice. Personally, I started with a developer that was convenient and that I was confident that I'd get good, or at least adequate, results with, in my case, I started HC-110. I used HC-110 at a dilution of 1:49 for simplicity and convenience. After I had demonstrated to myself that I was getting good results with HC-110, I then experimented with other developers - I found that there are a lot of developers out there that produce good results.

This might be heresy to some, but I found that the film developer produced second order effects in the negative (and resulting final print), i.e., the film developer is much less important than lighting, lens, tripod stability, and film selection. Bottom line: as long as you pick a decent developer, the impact of the film developer on the negative is not of primary significance to the final image. And, you will realize a greater return for your effort by focusing your energy on your subject, lighting, lens, and film, rather than devoting a lot of time and energy experimenting with film developers. This is subject where personal perspectives vary considerably... YMMV!