PDA

View Full Version : In praise of Divided Pyrocat



Ken Lee
15-Apr-2012, 16:44
http://www.kenleegallery.com/images/forum/TMY Divided Pyrocat.jpg

(Warning: 6x9 image. Don't tell the moderators)

I had a roll of TMX sitting in my 1950's Agfa Record 6x9 folding camera. The film was still in the camera from 5 years ago, with a few shots left. I decided to shoot some high SBR images and develop the film in Divided Pyrocat.

Wow, that stuff really works. I didn't take any specific readings: just placed an incident meter in the middle of the room near the chair and just did what the meter said, which was actually an 8-second exposure. I thought that would burn right through the film, but it worked just fine.

Here's what's really on the negative: a bit more detail in the shadows. No adjustment curve has been applied, just a straight line to clip the film edge and 100% white on sunlit paint. The non-adjusted version is less "snappy", but perhaps more analog in its feel.


http://www.kenleegallery.com/images/forum/TMY Divided Pyrocat2.jpg

Kirk Gittings
15-Apr-2012, 16:56
sweet!

Peter De Smidt
15-Apr-2012, 17:11
Divided Pyrocat is the best way of dealing with high SBR scenes that I've tried.

vinny
15-Apr-2012, 17:14
Gnarly!

Greg Y
15-Apr-2012, 17:21
Wow!

Richard Wasserman
15-Apr-2012, 18:03
"Sweet, gnarly, Wow!" What more can I add? Well done, Ken. I'm definitely going to test divided Pyrocat.

lbenac
15-Apr-2012, 18:12
Aaargghhh!!!!!!!!!!!!
I tried Divided Pyrocat many time and had a very low consistency with usually uneven development. I want so much to get that kind of range.
Ken I am totaly envious :o

Cheers,

Luc

sanking
15-Apr-2012, 18:28
Exquisite!

Sandy

venchka
15-Apr-2012, 18:46
Please point me to the thread with detailed directions. I know it is around here someplace. Imagine. Diafine that actually works right.

Wayne

Ken Lee
15-Apr-2012, 18:52
Mixing instructions can be found here (http://www.pyrocat-hd.com/html/mixing.html) - see section G.

For links to several earlier discussions, see "Divided Pyrocat" on this page (http://www.pyrocat-hd.com/).

Adding a few drops of PhotoFlo to solution A goes a long way in preventing uneven development.

lbenac
15-Apr-2012, 18:54
Please point me to the thread with detailed directions. I know it is around here someplace. Imagine. Diafine that actually works right.

Wayne

You could try this one at APUG http://www.apug.org/forums/forum37/64343-divided-pyrocat-hd.html

and of course the various link here http://www.pyrocat-hd.com/

Jay DeFehr
15-Apr-2012, 20:16
Aaargghhh!!!!!!!!!!!!
I tried Divided Pyrocat many time and had a very low consistency with usually uneven development. I want so much to get that kind of range.
Ken I am totaly envious :o

Cheers,

Luc

Luc,

You're not alone. 2-bath development with staining developers is asking for trouble, in my opinion, and in my experience, there's nothing you can get from 2-bath development you can't get more reliably with a single bath.

Nathan Potter
15-Apr-2012, 20:29
Ken, beautiful piece of work there - even viewed at poor rez here. I don't think I could manage that with my Diafine, maybe I just don't have the skill.

Jay, you might right but we don't really know the brightness range here and I would be fearful of that hot floor reflection, but I think Ken has grabbed some texture even there.

Nate Potter, Austin TX.

Ari
15-Apr-2012, 20:35
Ken, beautiful piece of work there - even viewed at poor rez here. I don't think I could manage that with my Diafine, maybe I just don't have the skill.

Jay, you might right but we don't really know the brightness range here and I would be fearful of that hot floor reflection, but I think Ken has grabbed some texture even there.

Nate Potter, Austin TX.

Not only that, but the outside shows up nicely, too.
Hard to imagine if you're metering inside the living room and got an 8s reading.
Well done, Ken.

Corran
16-Apr-2012, 01:54
I used Divided PC a couple times last year and I like it a lot! After I used up my first batch of PC I got another and since then every time I develop something goes horribly wrong, resulting in either clear negs or screwy density. I need to try it again...good stuff.

Ken Lee
16-Apr-2012, 05:05
In BTZS terminology, the Subject Brightness Range was 11.

In the parlance of the Zone System, the image required N-4 development.

In this case, because the film was in the camera for 5 years, I didn't actually know what film it was - TMY ? TMX ? - but that didn't matter since all films are developed the same way with this approach.

sanking
16-Apr-2012, 07:47
There are a few keys to get even development with two bath Pyrocat.

1. Pre-soak the film in water for 3-5 minutes. Temperature should be the same as that of the developer, say 75F.

1. Add a few drops of PhotoFlo to Solution A. This will break the surface tension and assure that the solution drains evenly after development. Uneven draining would mean that some areas of the film absorb more of the reducer than others, leading inevitably to uneven development and streaking. Agitate continuously in Solution A for five minutes, then drain the film for fifteen seconds.

3. At the start of development in Solution B the solution should contact the film everywhere at the same time. If one area of the film is contacted by Solution B a second or two before another area there will almost certainly be uneven development at this place on the film. If working with roll film on reels just plop the film into Solution B, don't pour it in. With sheet film I have found that BTZS tubes work fine. Just fill a second cap with Solution B, then after draining Solution A place the tube over the cap, invert and immediately agitate. Agitate in Solution B continuously for about one minute, then for about fifteen seconds every minute thereafter. The film is almost completely developed after the first minute, but some shadow density will continue to develop for another three or four minutes.

When exposing scenes of very high contrast, base exposure on a meter reading in the deepest shadows where you expect detail and texture on the print. Rate the film for about 1/2 the maker's ISO to compensate for some of film speed with this method. Don't worry about SBR or N value as the mechanism of two bath development will automatically prevent the high values from being overdeveloped. Remove the film from the camera and label for two-bath development.

Sandy

Richard Wasserman
16-Apr-2012, 08:08
Thanks Sandy, I was just about to ask just about everything you addressed. My last question (at least for now)—is 2-bath Pyrocat suitable for silver printing or is it at its best when scanning? I currently use stand developing when dealing with high SBR scenes, but 2-bath looks like it could be simpler and certainly quicker.






There are a few keys to get even development with two bath Pyrocat.

1. Pre-soak the film in water for 3-5 minutes. Temperature should be the same as that of the developer, say 75F.

1. Add a few drops of PhotoFlo to Solution A. This will break the surface tension and assure that the solution drains evenly after development. Uneven draining would assure that some areas of the film absorb more of the reducer than others, leading inevitably to uneven development and streaking. Agitate continuously in Solution A for five minutes, then drain the film for fifteen seconds.

3. At the start of development in Solution B the solution should contact the film everywhere at the same time. If one area of the film is contacted by Solution B a second or two before another area there will almost certainly be uneven development at this place on the film. If working with roll film With sheet film I have found that BTZS tubes work fine. Just fill a second cap with Solution B, then after draining Solution A place the tube over the cap, invert and immediately agitate. Agitate in Solution B continuously for about one minute, then for about fifteen seconds every minute thereafter. The film is almost completely developed after the first minute, but some shadow density will continue to develop for another three or four minutes.

When exposing scenes of very high contrast base exposure on a meter reading in the deepest shadows where you expect detail and texture on the print. Rate the film for about 1/2 the maker's ISO to compensate for some of film speed with this method. Don't worry about SBR or N value as the mechanism of two bath development will automatically prevent the high values from being overdeveloped. Remove the film from the camera and label for two-bath development.

Sandy

Peter Gomena
16-Apr-2012, 08:14
I find 2-bath pyrocat HD works a miracle with roll film, but it is much more difficult to produce images without unevenness in sheet film. I blame my technique, not the process, and will get it nailed down one of these days. The trick is to get it immersed in the B all at once, just as Sandy outlined above. I can't help it, I keep learning. Someday I'll master it.

Peter Gomena

Shawn Dougherty
16-Apr-2012, 08:36
That's gorgeous, Ken!

sanking
16-Apr-2012, 09:21
Thanks Sandy, I was just about to ask just about everything you addressed. My last question (at least for now)—is 2-bath Pyrocat suitable for silver printing or is it at its best when scanning? I currently use stand developing when dealing with high SBR scenes, but 2-bath looks like it could be simpler and certainly quicker.

If you use two-bath development for that specific purpose, i.e. scenes of very high SBR, it should work fine for silver developing with VC papers.

As a general replacement for stand or semi-stand development for silver printing, where you need a lot of control of negative contrast, you are probably better served by traditional single bath development.

Sandy

lbenac
16-Apr-2012, 09:41
The trick is to get it immersed in the B all at once, just as Sandy outlined above. I can't help it, I keep learning. Someday I'll master it.Peter Gomena

I think that this is where I fail. Even with dropping the roll or the the sheets mounted on a Combi holder or Nikkor holder directly into solution B i still do not get the sky right. I need night vision :-)

Richard Wasserman
16-Apr-2012, 09:45
If you use two-bath development for that specific purpose, i.e. scenes of very high SBR, it should work fine for silver developing with VC papers.

As a general replacement for stand or semi-stand development for silver printing, where you need a lot of control of negative contrast, you are probably better served by traditional single bath development.

Sandy


Thank you, Sandy. I'll give it a try and see how it behaves.

venchka
16-Apr-2012, 10:46
There are a few keys to get even development with two bath Pyrocat.

1. Pre-soak the film in water for 3-5 minutes. Temperature should be the same as that of the developer, say 75F.

1. Add a few drops of PhotoFlo to Solution A. This will break the surface tension and assure that the solution drains evenly after development. Uneven draining would mean that some areas of the film absorb more of the reducer than others, leading inevitably to uneven development and streaking. Agitate continuously in Solution A for five minutes, then drain the film for fifteen seconds.

3. At the start of development in Solution B the solution should contact the film everywhere at the same time. If one area of the film is contacted by Solution B a second or two before another area there will almost certainly be uneven development at this place on the film. If working with roll film on reels just plop the film into Solution B, don't pour it in. With sheet film I have found that BTZS tubes work fine. Just fill a second cap with Solution B, then after draining Solution A place the tube over the cap, invert and immediately agitate. Agitate in Solution B continuously for about one minute, then for about fifteen seconds every minute thereafter. The film is almost completely developed after the first minute, but some shadow density will continue to develop for another three or four minutes.

When exposing scenes of very high contrast, base exposure on a meter reading in the deepest shadows where you expect detail and texture on the print. Rate the film for about 1/2 the maker's ISO to compensate for some of film speed with this method. Don't worry about SBR or N value as the mechanism of two bath development will automatically prevent the high values from being overdeveloped. Remove the film from the camera and label for two-bath development.

Sandy

Sandy,

I use Jobo tanks turning on a Uniroller base for all of my film. Will the need for instant immersion in Solution B cause any problems?

Wayne

Ken Lee
16-Apr-2012, 10:51
I developed my roll in a cheap plastic Paterson tank: no problems. Just spin the thing.

sanking
16-Apr-2012, 11:22
Sandy,

I use Jobo tanks turning on a Uniroller base for all of my film. Will the need for instant immersion in Solution B cause any problems?

Wayne

Wayne,

Unfortunately I have no experience with Jobo and this type of development. The key, I believe, is whether the method used by Jobo to fill the tubes allows Solution B hits the film almost everywhere at the same time.

Sandy

Peter De Smidt
16-Apr-2012, 11:26
I've have used divided Pyrocat MC in a Jobo expert drum for some 4x5" Acros negatives. I didn't notice any unevenness, but I didn't run any tests specifically looking for that.

Ken Lee
16-Apr-2012, 12:10
I added a second photo to the original post. The second one shows what's really on the negative. It's got less punch, but more data in the shadows, and perhaps a more analog feeling.

Holdenrichards
16-Apr-2012, 16:45
Incredible result!

Zaitz
16-Apr-2012, 17:14
Love the results. I've tried this with 8x10 BTZS tubes but got uneven development. I'll have to try adding photoflo. I also got streaks I think because of scratches caused by the BTZS tube and the way the developer was dragged over during agitation. Need to try it with the 4x5 Combiplan.

Ken Lee
16-Apr-2012, 17:20
Photoflow is the secret sauce for this secret sauce :cool:

trad.dig.experience
16-Apr-2012, 22:06
That is a very inspiring image. My question is, "what paper did you use to get that wonderful warm quality?" That is as cool as the developer. Great image.

trad.dig.experience
16-Apr-2012, 22:45
That is a very inspiring image. My question is, "what paper did you use to get that wonderful warm quality?" That is as cool as the developer. Great image.

I thought of another question. How do you get your floors so damn shiny?

I will try it. The developer - not the floor polish.

very inspiring, thanks. Scott

CP Goerz
17-Apr-2012, 01:29
Works with PMK too, solution A only for 20 mins then add B a little at a time, gives an amazing negative and I find its more reliable than the water bath method.

Ken Lee
17-Apr-2012, 03:46
That is a very inspiring image. My question is, "what paper did you use to get that wonderful warm quality?" That is as cool as the developer. Great image.

See http://www.kenleegallery.com/html/tech/bronze.php.

One advantage of the Photoshop Fill Layer method is that we can tone each print individually, and we don't have to purchase or mix inks, or dedicate our printer to a 3rd party inkset. With a calibrated monitor and a good ICC profile, we can have WYSIWYG printing with minimal effort.

A disadvantage is that we get the archival longevity of our paper+ink combination, which varies depending on our choices.

Unlike with plain black and white printing, toned images use more of the inks. I've never seen loss of resolution or banding. On good paper such prints look quite nice.

Another advantage is that you don't need to use a RIP, or something like Epson's Advanced B&W printing feature.

Ken Lee
17-Apr-2012, 03:50
How do you get your floors so damn shiny?

The lighting exaggerates the look of the polish, but that being said, the really good Polyurethane is no longer legal for home use where I live - for environmental and health reasons - so we use 4 or 5 coats instead of the usual 2.

I joke with my wife that she won't be happy until people can ice-skate on the floor.

trad.dig.experience
17-Apr-2012, 10:32
remarkable floor. the wife is happy. And it looks cool in pictures. Thanks Ken Lee.
Scott

Zaitz
13-May-2012, 04:11
:( Failure. Tried divided pyro again, this time in a Combiplan tank. Seemed to be going smoothly but the negatives came out clear. On two there is the faintest hint of an image, 99.5% clear. One is completely clear. It's Acros and there are no edge markings. I thought at first maybe an exposure issue since it was the Speed Graphic's shutter but no edge markings means I fixed before/during development? But there is that .5% hint of an image on two of the negatives....

Photos from the same set developed well in R09 so I don't think it was an exposure/loading thing. Wonder how I got fixer in there and when. Will have to try again....but with one negative!

Ken Lee
13-May-2012, 04:36
It might be best to shoot a test shot, nothing important, until you work out the knots.

Zaitz
13-May-2012, 06:11
Yes that would be the wise thing to do :D. I'd like to get this dialed in so I better go the smart route. Trying to tame mid-day sun contrast and this seemed like a great way to do it. The rodinal developed negatives are too harsh I think. I'd like a dense negative for scanning that doesn't blow the highlights! Doesn't help though that I don't have a neutral density filter yet. An orange filter during the day to keep the shutter speed low enough @f2.5 darkens the shadows and increases contrast I suppose, not helping.

Jim Noel
13-May-2012, 06:36
Lately I have been using divided Pyrocat HD on a Jobo in Expert tanks. 5 minute pre-soak in plain water.
I have no problem with streaks or unevenness even when I use lith film in the camera which has always been the most difficult for me to develop evenly in a tray or hangers in a tank.

Zaitz
15-May-2012, 14:34
Well I don't know what I am doing wrong now. Tried it again, this time at 1:10 and the negative was still 90% clear. Definitly not a fixer issue. Then I saw the Pyrocat bottle after and noticed I forgot to shake them....wonder if that's what did it.

Ken Lee
15-May-2012, 14:50
If your film keeps coming out clear, it seems like the developer itself is bad.

Before trying it divided, did you establish that it works when combined ?

Did you purchase a 2-bottle kit, or did you mix it yourself ? In either case, is the the water or Glycol-based version ?

Zaitz
15-May-2012, 15:01
It worked the last time I tried two-bath but has also worked every time mixed. Just this week, after not having used it for a couple months, did I encounter this problem. The new negative at 1:10 does scan but is pretty atrocious looking. I gave it 6min in A @75° and 5min in B at 75°.

This is the one I am using:
http://stores.photoformulary.com/-strse-101/Pyrocat-dsh-Hd/Detail.bok

2 bottle kit. Pre mixed liquid.

Again developed other sheets immediately after with R09 that look normal. So I don't think it's a water issue either. Might have to try a standard development with Pyrocat HD to see if something is up with the developer I guess. Thanks for the help.

Ken Lee
15-May-2012, 16:01
That formula doesn't seem to mention Glycol, so I presume it's prepared with water.

For what it's worth, in 2011 I switched to D-23 because my water-based Pyrocat failed one time too many. Developing by inspection with an Infra Red viewing device, the film wasn't developing at all, but I was able to add some Metol powder to the developer, and that rescued the negatives - but I vowed "never again".

After a year, I tired of mixing developer from scratch every time, so I prepared some Pyrocat in Glycol, and I'm hooked again. It's as fresh today as the day I mixed it.

Here's a link to Photographer's Formulary Glcycol-based version: http://stores.photoformulary.com/-strse-105/Pyrocat-HD-In-Glycol/Detail.bok

They note the following: "Packaging in glycol stabilizes the formula to give a very long shelf life and long term consistency."

By the way, your photos from inside the church are really nicely done !

http://www.flickr.com/photos/zboumeester/6951217881/in/photostream/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/zboumeester/6883209829/in/photostream/

Lachlan 717
15-May-2012, 16:09
Zaitz,

You need to shake the bottles before use!!!

I can't remember which of the parts needs it, so just do both.

If that doesn't help, I'm out of ideas...

mdm
15-May-2012, 18:08
It does come out thin though, and if you are using an acid stop or fix then that could kill the stain and most of the density. I notice no stain with hypo/sulfite fixer but ilford hypam fixer seems to leave the stain.

Zaitz
15-May-2012, 18:25
That formula doesn't seem to mention Glycol, so I presume it's prepared with water.

For what it's worth, in 2011 I switched to D-23 because my water-based Pyrocat failed one time too many. Developing by inspection with an Infra Red viewing device, the film wasn't developing at all, but I was able to add some Metol powder to the developer, and that rescued the negatives - but I vowed "never again".

After a year, I tired of mixing developer from scratch every time, so I prepared some Pyrocat in Glycol, and I'm hooked again. It's as fresh today as the day I mixed it.

Here's a link to Photographer's Formulary Glcycol-based version: http://stores.photoformulary.com/-strse-105/Pyrocat-HD-In-Glycol/Detail.bok

They note the following: "Packaging in glycol stabilizes the formula to give a very long shelf life and long term consistency."

By the way, your photos from inside the church are really nicely done !

http://www.flickr.com/photos/zboumeester/6951217881/in/photostream/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/zboumeester/6883209829/in/photostream/
Thank you, I really appreciate that! It's really a great place because they have no problems with photography. I did just see the Glycol version too. So maybe it is shaking the bottles or just old/bad but I'll go with that version next time.



Zaitz,

You need to shake the bottles before use!!!

I can't remember which of the parts needs it, so just do both.

If that doesn't help, I'm out of ideas...
:o Not sure how I missed that. I was paying so much attention to getting the times/temps/ and agitation for the B bath right that I didn't even look at the Pyrocat bottles to notice the 'Shake Well' bit. I was trying to use two Combiplan tanks for the process which worked fairly smoothly....other than practically no image :D.



It does come out thin though, and if you are using an acid stop or fix then that could kill the stain and most of the density. I notice no stain with hypo/sulfite fixer but ilford hypam fixer seems to leave the stain.
Thin would be nice in this case. On the first go around I thought all 3 negatives were 100% clear. I had to look very, very closely to see any image at all in 2 of them. 1:10 dilution made the image stronger but still nothing close to even a bad negative. My other Pyro negatives processed traditionally have looked great, even divided in the BTZS tubes save the uneven development and 'drag' from scratches.

Ken Lee
8-Feb-2013, 20:40
http://www.kenleegallery.com/images/forum/DividedPyrocatA2.png
Indoors during a snow storm, Massachusetts 2013
Sinar P, 210mm Macro Sironar N
4x5 TMY, Divided Pyrocat HDC


Here's a shot where exposure for shadow areas was long enough to place the snow-lit outdoors at Zone XII and beyond.

I keep coming back to this developer, and to scenes whose extreme brightness range renders them "unsuitable" subjects.

Ari
8-Feb-2013, 21:03
Ken,
I would never do something like that, much less use a sheet of film for such a scene, much less photograph inanimate objects; but I gotta say, that's quite beautiful.
The tones of the interior are quite luscious, and you've proven yourself a master of subtlety and finesse.

Peter De Smidt
8-Feb-2013, 21:45
I agree with Ari. That's a really good photo, Ken.

Divided Pyrocat is the best developer for a high contrast scene that I 've tried.

rdenney
8-Feb-2013, 22:53
Ken,
I would never do something like that, much less use a sheet of film for such a scene, much less photograph inanimate objects; but I gotta say, that's quite beautiful.
The tones of the interior are quite luscious, and you've proven yourself a master of subtlety and finesse.

Yes. I look at Ken's images and I'm thinking "do not try this at home".

I have to say, though, that I recently had a similar experience using color film, processed normally.

http://www.rickdenney.com/Island/saltbox_chair_lores.jpg
Exposure was 40 seconds at f/32, putting the sunlit scene outside the window at Zone XIII (or a bit less when considering reciprocity failure). But the print still shows a different density between the specular highlights in the bottles on the shelves in front of the window and the sunlit grass in the background. With black and white, though, I don't think I could possibly have gotten my scanner to see through the resulting density. Color negative film doesn't get as dense. I have not yet developed the black and white negative I made at the same time--I may try the divided Pyrocat for it.

Rick "time's a wastin'" Denney

Mark MacKenzie
9-Feb-2013, 08:13
Very nice, Rick.

Ken, how would this neg have been different in Diafine? Enjoy the snow, by the way.


I just read about the intensity of the snowstorm. Loss of power, etc. I hope you all are alright.

Ken Lee
9-Feb-2013, 09:21
Very nice, Rick.

Ken, how would this neg have been different in Diafine? Enjoy the snow, by the way.

I just read about the intensity of the snowstorm. Loss of power, etc. I hope you all are alright.

We have electricity here, for which I am grateful. We got around 20 inches of snow in my part of Massachusetts, so I got a 1/2 day off of work and was able to run a developer test: 2 identical exposures, one developed in Diafine and the other in Divided Pyrocat HDC.

Here's the Diafine negative. It's very similar to the Divided Pyrocat version, and with a bit of adjustment could probably be made to match - but some differences are there. In both cases I have scanned so as not to clip either the dark or high values. While the Diafine negative is denser, the curve is different. I prefer the Divided Pyrocat negative.

Because my tests are "amateur grade" at best, I defer to Sandy King for a reliable, comprehensive and articulate study. (We've been discussing an article about Divided Pyrocat, along lines similar to his wonderful View Camera article on Diafine. Perhaps some additional enthusiastic "demand" will hasten the project :cool:)

http://www.kenleegallery.com/images/forum/DiafineA2.png

sanking
9-Feb-2013, 20:39
Beautiful image, Ken, and highly unusual interpretation with the muted tones.

I am working on the testing, but as they say, there is no good wine before its time. Or something like that. Sometimes the process of discovery and explanation is like sweating bullets. But I am counting on your wonderful images to illustrate the article, whenever I get it done.

Sandy

Mark MacKenzie
10-Feb-2013, 10:20
Wow, subtle, subtle difference. The door knob and the picture frame just a bit lower value. How about grain structure? What about at a high magnification? I guess Diafine appeals to me for its ease of use.

Glad you are ok. I read it will rain later this week in Maine. We get bad ice storms here in Tennessee that you guys dont seem to get.

Yes, I think the enthusiastic demand is there.
Many thanks...

Ken Lee
10-Feb-2013, 11:13
Wow, subtle, subtle difference. The door knob and the picture frame just a bit lower value. How about grain structure? What about at a high magnification? I guess Diafine appeals to me for its ease of use.

Glad you are ok. I read it will rain later this week in Maine. We get bad ice storms here in Tennessee that you guys dont seem to get.

Yes, I think the enthusiastic demand is there.
Many thanks...

Diafine is a very compelling choice: it's hard to beat re-use.

Some of the differences may depend on the brightness and calibration of your monitor: one of the annoying features of this form of communication. (Even when we calibrate a monitor, we have to choose the brightness level: there's no standard. Depending on the room we're in, our eyes adjust further... Don't get me started*. Try looking again later in a darkly-lit room, or turn your monitor brightness all the way up.)

Steering clear of sensitometry, I can state that in this case, compared to the Divided Pyrocat negative, the Diafine negative has compressed low values and compressed high values. To put it another way, the Divided Pyrocat negative looks more linear.

I have not applied any curves to these photos, only setting the ends of the histogram at scan time. Some form of S-curve could be applied to the Diafine photo to make it more like the Pyrocat photo (which looks more like the original scene), but that would defeat the point of the exercise.

Because I use film that is 4x5 or larger - and use (only) an Epson scanner - the difference in grain between the two developers is less critical, and my sample scans at high magnification would be unreliable. That being said, I can state that the Divided Pyrocat negatives appear to have finer grain when examined with a loupe. There are several reasons why that could be so for most films, but again I defer to "bigger guns".

*Back in the day, I used to accompany my father to the "hi fi" store, where you could compare the effects of different speakers, headphones and amplifiers and dream about owning them. The more carefully we listened to the same piece of music, the more distinct the differences became. Of course speakers have a different sound when you bring them home, because of the acoustics of your room... it's endless.

Ken Lee
10-Feb-2013, 21:45
I was reluctant to post my second pair of test negatives because of uneven development and some scratches. However, it gives a better demonstration of the difference.

This scene was of even greater brightness range. The statue on the table was dark enough that my Pentax digital spot meter could not get a reading. I used incident metering instead, in the style recommended by Phil Adams where we meter the shadow area and then give an extra stop.

For both negatives, the scanning histogram was adjusted to leave a touch of texture in the snow, and render the clear film edge as black. No curve was applied.

If all we had was the Diafine negative, we could apply some curves and rescue it. However, the Divided Pyrocat negative requires no substantial correction: it seems to stay linear all the way down, and (most importantly) feels like light "right out of the box".


http://www.kenleegallery.com/images/forum/Diafine2.png
Diafine

http://www.kenleegallery.com/images/forum/DividedPyrocat2.png
Divided Pyrocat

Mark MacKenzie
11-Feb-2013, 07:22
Thanks for posting these, Ken. It almost looks like an exposure difference. Any chance of a slow shutter or any other difference?

Ken Lee
11-Feb-2013, 08:52
Thanks for posting these, Ken. It almost looks like an exposure difference. Any chance of a slow shutter or any other difference?

My Diafine negatives are always denser than my Divided Pyrocat negatives (and my negatives developed in ordinary developers). The Diafine histograms are shifted further to the right. But what matters is the region between the darkest and lightest areas of the curve, wherever they are.

The Diafine negatives I have produced are denser, but the difference in density between their darkest and lightest areas is smaller than what I get with Divided Pyrocat. With Diafine it's as though all the tonal information is crammed into a smaller part of the curve, which also happens to be a higher part of the curve.

I have tried to move my Diafine negatives further left, by using 70 degree water instead of 75, but it hasn't made an appreciable difference. I also tried dilution of 1:1 (which may be fine with continuous rotary agitation) but got negatives that were too flat.

It would be great if others could make some comparisons. What I have so far, can only be described as "anecdotal evidence" at best. Kodak TMY may not be the best candidate. I have read that Diafine was created with Tri-X in mind, and there are several other films to investigate. Also, these were 6-second exposures. That may matter also.

Joe O'Hara
11-Feb-2013, 18:50
Ken, a few questions on these.

In the first (Feb. 9) pair of pictures:

What was the "placement" in zone terms of the shadow areas? E.g., beneath the painting to the left of the window or on the
darker throw pillow in the middle.

Were there any adjustment done in PS post scanning, or is what we are seeing is just what you got from doing
histogram (levels) adjustments in the scanner SW? (I.e., adjustments applied equally to all areas of the image.)
I can get a similar effect with D-23 diluted but I would have to stomp on the window a bit to make it happen.

Were there any dark tones at the dmax of your printer? I assume you had your monitor set to emulate some kind of
paper... I assume the histogram showed some pixels at 0 luminance.

This is tricky stuff, with a lot of variables to control. I'm doing a lot with D-23 1:3 in high contrast situations, but I seem
to lose at least a stop of film speed vs. box speed and the low tones don't have the separation they do here, though
it does help with not blocking up the highlights. I use the 3010 tank.

Thanks!

Ken Lee
11-Feb-2013, 20:04
Ken, a few questions on these.

In the first (Feb. 9) pair of pictures:

What was the "placement" in zone terms of the shadow areas? E.g., beneath the painting to the left of the window or on the
darker throw pillow in the middle.

Were there any adjustment done in PS post scanning, or is what we are seeing is just what you got from doing
histogram (levels) adjustments in the scanner SW? (I.e., adjustments applied equally to all areas of the image.)
I can get a similar effect with D-23 diluted but I would have to stomp on the window a bit to make it happen.

Were there any dark tones at the dmax of your printer? I assume you had your monitor set to emulate some kind of
paper... I assume the histogram showed some pixels at 0 luminance.

This is tricky stuff, with a lot of variables to control. I'm doing a lot with D-23 1:3 in high contrast situations, but I seem
to lose at least a stop of film speed vs. box speed and the low tones don't have the separation they do here, though
it does help with not blocking up the highlights. I use the 3010 tank.


I used an incident meter in the BTZS style, and then checked with a spot meter. The incident meter was placed on the couch (an area of "open shadows") and pointed towards the lens. By setting the meter to an ISO of twice the speed at which I shoot the film, this is roughly equivalent to setting the shadows on Zone IV.

With that exposure, the trees outside the window fell at around Zone XI and the snow even higher. I didn't really care how high, because I knew the values were well beyond the reach of N-2 development, which is the most I will ever do with a normal developer.

The only corrections were made at scan time: adjusting the ends of the histogram to render the clear film edge as 0 and retain texture in the snow outdoors.

With reduced development we see a reduction in effective film speed. A rule of thumb is 1/2 stop for N-1 and 1 stop for N-2. Reduced development can also result in flatter negatives, and the parts of the curve which get flattened, vary with film/developer/time etc. Some films respond to contraction better than others.

Ken Lee
12-Feb-2013, 05:58
If you want to see what that room looks like (the tones of the walls, etc.) have a look at the first post in this thread here (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?89702-In-praise-of-Divided-Pyrocat&p=875748&viewfull=1#post875748), which shows how things appear when lit by direct sunshine coming through the windows.

Joe O'Hara
12-Feb-2013, 17:57
Thanks, Ken, for your detailed response.

Sounds like I might have to break in another developer :(

Ken Lee
12-Feb-2013, 18:48
I would never do something like that, much less use a sheet of film for such a scene, much less photograph inanimate objects;

On your web site I see some architectural photos that might work very nicely with a method like this. If we scan the film, we can always add contrast later if we want.

mandoman7
15-Feb-2013, 12:53
For me its good news that the Pyrocat method is comparable at least since I don't presently have the ability to tray develop conveniently, but do have a Jobo outfit. My understanding is that Diafine likes gentler agitation and isn't recommended for drum development. I have had some success in my tests using the drum with the divided Pyrocat method. Am I correct in my assumptions, Ken?

Peter De Smidt
15-Feb-2013, 15:37
I've used a Jobo for divided Pyrocat.

Ken Lee
15-Feb-2013, 15:49
For me its good news that the Pyrocat method is comparable at least since I don't presently have the ability to tray develop conveniently, but do have a Jobo outfit. My understanding is that Diafine likes gentler agitation and isn't recommended for drum development. I have had some success in my tests using the drum with the divided Pyrocat method. Am I correct in my assumptions, Ken?

I'm not an expert or a rigorous tester, and I don't do rotary development. (I had a Jobo which I rolled by hand for a while, but missed tray development and the ability to develop many sheets at a time)

With regard to Diafine and rotary development, see post 14 of a recent thread on this forum entitled Diafine: Help please for uneven development (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?98377-Diafine-Help-please-for-uneven-development). In particular, answer number 2.

Sandy King gave instructions for Divided Pyrocat in post 17 of this thread. If you'd like to read more, see http://www.pyrocat-hd.com/ (http://www.pyrocat-hd.com/) where there are links to more discussions, including Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer? (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?52913-Anybody-using-Pyrocat-HD-or-MC-as-a-Compensating-Developer) on this forum.

mandoman7
15-Feb-2013, 17:50
Thanks Ken.

Ken Lee
17-Mar-2013, 19:40
http://www.kenleegallery.com/images/forum/couchartar2.jpg
Sofa and Cushions, 2013
5x7 HP5+, Divided Pyrocat HDC

richardman
28-Mar-2013, 12:05
I have been using 2-bath Pyrocat for 35mm and then 120/220 roll film almost 2 years now. And now it seems to work great for sheet film also:

This is with 4x5 Acros 100. I have quite a bit of experience with scanning and using Lightroom. The 17x22 print is stunning in its tonality.

http://richardmanphoto.com/PICS/20130326-Scanned-2.jpg

Ken Lee
28-Mar-2013, 12:33
May I ask, do you develop with some kind of rotary method ?

With the shuffle method, I have been having a hard time avoiding uneven development, in spite of adding plenty of PhotoFlo. My well water may also be partly to blame.

richardman
29-Mar-2013, 01:26
As I replied via email, yes, I do use a Jobo and never have any problems with uneven development. With 4x5, I use the 2809 reel.

Raffay
29-Mar-2013, 04:15
What is SBR? Something like HDR?

Ken Lee
29-Mar-2013, 04:51
SBR = Subject Brightness Range. It's a term from BTZS or Beyond the Zone System, and means the same basic thing as DR or dynamic range.

It's relevant here because highly compensating formulas like Divided Pyrocat allow us to more easily photograph scenes of high dynamic range or high SBR.

rdenney
2-Apr-2013, 07:44
SBR = Subject Brightness Range. It's a term from BTZS or Beyond the Zone System, and means the same basic thing as DR or dynamic range.

It's relevant here because highly compensating formulas like Divided Pyrocat allow us to more easily photograph scenes of high dynamic range or high SBR.

Nit to pick: SBR applies to the scene (of course), but dynamic range usually applies to the sensing or reproduction technology whereever that term is used. One needs high dynamic range in the sensing technology to record a high subject brightness range.

Thus, divided pyrocat helps increase dynamic range sufficiently to record a scene with high subject brightness range. Keeping the terms separate may avoid confusion.

Rick "who said it was picking nits" Denney

sanking
2-Apr-2013, 10:16
May I ask, do you develop with some kind of rotary method ?

With the shuffle method, I have been having a hard time avoiding uneven development, in spite of adding plenty of PhotoFlo. My well water may also be partly to blame.

I develop 4X5 and 5X7 sheet film in an 8X10 Chromega II drum of the kind sold for color printing. I use it on a motor base. With this method of development you add the developer to the drum, then start the motor. The solutions do not contact the film until the motor is turned on and the drum begins to rotate. I add only a few drops of PhotoFlo per 250ml - 500 ml of Solution A. No bromide drag is produced with two solution development so the interference of the dividers does not seem to be an issue as it sometimes is with traditional single solution developers.

I rarely see uneven development with this method.

It has been a very long time since I used shuffle development and I have never tested it with two-bath Pyrocat.

Sandy

David Aimone
2-Apr-2013, 11:18
I did my first test run of 6 negatives through divided Pyrocat-MC, 1:10, 6 and 5 minutes in a Jobo on a reversing motor base, 75 degrees and a couple of drops of fotoflow. 2 Efke PL25M, 2 Arista EDU 100 (Fomapan) and 2 T-Max 400. Everything looks good, except at least 2 of the 6 photos have large, curving waves of what looks like uneven development. Here is the set for these photos: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ioglass/sets/72157633152071952/with/8599928899/

And here are the two most obvious (that I can see) offending photos:

Arista:
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8107/8601056400_3972562e7b_b.jpg

Efke:
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8226/8599951941_6491fbd4c9_b.jpg

Could this have anything to do with the thickness of Pyrocat-MC in glycol at 1:10, and the placement of the film in the JOBO tank? Any ideas or what I should try next? Interesting how the bands in these two photos are 90 degrees different angle.

sanking
2-Apr-2013, 14:26
I did my first test run of 6 negatives through divided Pyrocat-MC, 1:10, 6 and 5 minutes in a Jobo on a reversing motor base, 75 degrees and a couple of drops of fotoflow. 2 Efke PL25M, 2 Arista EDU 100 (Fomapan) and 2 T-Max 400. Everything looks good, except at least 2 of the 6 photos have large, curving waves of what looks like uneven development.

The streaks definitely appear to be caused by some type of laminar flow problem with one or both of the solutions. Have you used this system before with success with traditional one solution developers?

Sandy

David Aimone
2-Apr-2013, 14:33
Sandy,

I've used Pyrocat-MC the traditional way many many times in this same JOBO, but at 1+1+100 or 1+1+150. My thoughts are this:

1. Keep track of which photos are in which position in the JOBO reels to compare to any streaks.
2. Try new chemistry (which I do have, I'm toward the tail end of the current bottles).
3. Try 1:20 maybe?

Any ideas why they might be across the 4" dimension of the film on one, and across the 5" dimension of the other? They are all oriented the same way in the JOBO...

Lachlan 717
2-Apr-2013, 14:37
I
Could this have anything to do with the thickness of Pyrocat-MC in glycol at 1:10, and the placement of the film in the JOBO tank? Any ideas or what I should try next? Interesting how the bands in these two photos are 90 degrees different angle.

David,

The 90 degree difference could be due to 2nd neg being on the bottom of the tank when the Dev was poured (thus, being hit by the Dev from the side), whilst the 1st image could have been hit by the first surge as the Dev changes direction from in-flow to roll-flow.

Maybe 1:10 is initially too strong? Did you presoak?

(Hope this makes some sense in description!!)

sanking
2-Apr-2013, 15:29
David,

The 90 degree difference could be due to 2nd neg being on the bottom of the tank when the Dev was poured (thus, being hit by the Dev from the side), whilst the 1st image could have been hit by the first surge as the Dev changes direction from in-flow to roll-flow.

Maybe 1:10 is initially too strong? Did you presoak?

(Hope this makes some sense in description!!)


This makes sense in terms of the streak marks. With a two bath developer the second solution must come into contact evenly with the film almost at once because development is virtually instantaneous. For the next test I would use a 1:20 dilution and increase the total amount of solution. Maybe just one type of film also. If that does not work, the method may not work with two bath Pyrocat.

With Jobo there are many ways, depending on tank or drum, of introducing the solution to the film. Some ways are problematic even with traditional one solution development.

Sandy

David Aimone
3-Apr-2013, 18:29
I will try again a 1:20. I did pre-soak the first time. I do think in makes sense in your description of the placement of the negatives and the developer.

Not giving up this quick! I do like what it did, especially with the Arista film which I often find to be dull...

onnect17
3-Apr-2013, 20:18
Are you using a Jobo 3010?

David Aimone
4-Apr-2013, 05:54
I'm using a JOBO 2551 with 2509 reels on a reversing Unicolor Motor Base. This sort of arrangement:

92644


Are you using a Jobo 3010?

onnect17
4-Apr-2013, 06:01
I do not see the flaps.


I'm using a JOBO 2551 with 2509 reels on a reversing Unicolor Motor Base. This sort of arrangement:

92644

David Aimone
4-Apr-2013, 11:45
I do not see the flaps.

Sorry, that's just a stock photo, not my actual setup. But I've never used the flaps in processing with normal recipes.

Ken Lee
4-Apr-2013, 12:45
I owned a small JOBO tank a few years ago, but rolled it by hand. What is the typical speed during rotary development: some number of revolutions per minute ?

I've gone back to regular Pyrocat HDC for now, although I regret it. With tray development I just can't seem to avoid streaking, even when developing 1 sheet at a time.

sanking
4-Apr-2013, 16:33
I owned a small JOBO tank a few years ago, but rolled it by hand. What is the typical speed during rotary development: some number of revolutions per minute ?

I've gone back to regular Pyrocat HDC for now, although I regret it. With tray development I just can't seem to avoid streaking, even when developing 1 sheet at a time.

Speed in RPM varies a lot with equipment. The Jobo equipment that I have seen is pretty fast, over 40 RPM. If you use one of the Beseler or Unicolor motor bases the speed ranges from 10-20 RPM, depending on size of the drum.

Sandy

David Aimone
4-Apr-2013, 18:43
Speed in RPM varies a lot with equipment. The Jobo equipment that I have seen is pretty fast, over 40 RPM. If you use one of the Beseler or Unicolor motor bases the speed ranges from 10-20 RPM, depending on size of the drum.

Sandy

My Unicolor/JOBO combination seems to be about 20 RPM, with the direction reversing about every 2 seconds or so.

Ken Lee
4-Apr-2013, 18:46
Oh - That would explain the difference between merely swishing something around here and there, and really rotating it.

Andrew O'Neill
4-Apr-2013, 19:07
I have found for myself it is a real gamble when developing in a tray, unless you agitate really vigorously, splashing developer all over the place. With rotary (BTZS), I always get great results (no mottling) and I don't have to use nearly as much stock solutions compared to tray development.

sanking
4-Apr-2013, 20:10
I have found for myself it is a real gamble when developing in a tray, unless you agitate really vigorously, splashing developer all over the place. With rotary (BTZS), I always get great results (no mottling) and I don't have to use nearly as much stock solutions compared to tray development.

All of my original testing of the Pyrocat developers was done with BTZS type rotary development, rolling the tubes in a water bath. It works beautifully with regular Pyrocat single solution dilutions. I have actually never tested it with divided Pyrocat, but plan to do so soon. In theory it should work since the method of introducing Solution B is very sudden, virtually instantaneous.

I met Phil Davis in the 1980s when he did a couple of of the BTZS workshops at the university where I taught. He mentioned in one of our conversations that rotary type development was the only type that allowed for consistency and even development needed with BTZS testing. Jobo would do the trick, but in BTZS testing you develop test film exposed the same for different times in order to derive the densities needed to plot curves, so the only practical system was tubes, rolled in a water bath. He used a number of different prototypes for the tubes, including one set made from stainless steel. One of my friends owns a few of these SS tubes, very beautiful work.

Sandy

Ken Lee
5-Apr-2013, 02:53
I have found for myself it is a real gamble when developing in a tray, unless you agitate really vigorously, splashing developer all over the place. With rotary (BTZS), I always get great results (no mottling) and I don't have to use nearly as much stock solutions compared to tray development.

Just to be clear, have you found all developers to be a gamble when developing in a tray, or only certain kinds ?

Joe Forks
5-Apr-2013, 04:31
I've been doing 12x20 in trays but I'm considering trying a piece of 4" PVC on a unicolor base. Is this going to work or be a problem?

Not sure exactly how to go about it. I guess glue the cap on one side, but what about the other? It seems to get the cap tight enough
to keep from leaking, it's impossible to get off. Maybe I need a screw cap on the opposite end but did not see one at the home depot
I visited yesterday.

Anyone else using either home made tubes or PVC for large sheet film?

Thanks in advance.

Kevin J. Kolosky
5-Apr-2013, 05:19
So which is the winner, Divided Pyrocat or Diafine?

richardman
6-Apr-2013, 00:31
I have only tried Diafine on 35mm, not enough sure on 120/220. Any case, Diafine "pushes" Tri-X so if you need to shoot at 1200 ISO, Diafine is your developer.

I just have more 4x5 Acros souped in 2-bath Pyrocat. Looks delicious / great / whatever

Ben Calwell
6-Apr-2013, 06:41
That's a beautiful photograph. You're not from this planet, are you.

Joe Forks
7-Apr-2013, 05:50
In the book of pyro Hutchings says that is how you agitate. If you are not splashing the agitation is too gentle.



I have found for myself it is a real gamble when developing in a tray, unless you agitate really vigorously, splashing developer all over the place. With rotary (BTZS), I always get great results (no mottling) and I don't have to use nearly as much stock solutions compared to tray development.

Ed Bray
7-Apr-2013, 06:35
I tried divided Pyrocat HD today for the first time. I used 1:20 for Solution A (with 4 drops of wetting agent) and 40 grams of Sodium Carbonate in 800mls of water for Solution B (PH was 11.4) I processed 6 sheets of 5x7 in my 3005 expert drum on the CPP2 for the following: 5 minutes pre soak, 6 minutes Solution A, 6 minutes Solution B (at max rotary speed), 2x 30 sec washes, TF-3 Alkaline Fix for 5 minutes, 14x 30 second 500ml washes before soaking for 2 minutes in a tray of water/wetting agent.

Negatives drying as I type, but at first glance they look very nice.

Andrew O'Neill
8-Apr-2013, 22:19
Just to be clear, have you found all developers to be a gamble when developing in a tray, or only certain kinds ?

Ken, I've only used divided pyrocat-hd.


In the book of pyro Hutchings says that is how you agitate. If you are not splashing the agitation is too gentle.

Joe, I have the same book. And you should hear the film "clack" against the tray. I love the zone board for testing film. It's just that so much stock developer is required for divided development, and the smell bugs me. Solution A is pretty stinky.

Tav Walraven
9-Apr-2013, 06:40
Joe Forks.........

Check your Inbox. Sent you a lengthy PM.


tw

Larry Gebhardt
9-Apr-2013, 09:46
How do these print on VC paper? It's hard to get a feel for how much compensation there is in the film because with a decent scanner you can achieve a similar result even with contrasty negatives. So what grade of paper would these print on in the darkroom? Or what is the film density range?

Ken Lee
9-Apr-2013, 12:09
How do these print on VC paper? It's hard to get a feel for how much compensation there is in the film because with a decent scanner you can achieve a similar result even with contrasty negatives. So what grade of paper would these print on in the darkroom? Or what is the film density range?

From An Introduction to Pyro Staining Developers (http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/PCat/pcat.html)


"3. When printing with variable contrast papers, pyro stain, which is always proportional to silver density, functions as a continuous variable color mask that reduces printing contrast, particularly in the high values. This allows shadow and mid-tones to be printed without compressing or blocking the highlights, reducing time spent burning and dodging."

There's a nice discussion on APUG entitled Pyrocat HD, VC papers, light source and contrast (http://www.apug.org/forums/forum37/33573-pyrocat-hd-vc-papers-light-source-contrast.html)

Google will find more :)

Jim Galli
9-Apr-2013, 14:06
Beautiful shot Ken.

I have to laugh. I needed to mix up a batch of good 'ol PcatHD earlier last weekend, and I pulled the mixing instructions that I downloaded from Ed Buffaloe's site, what, 10 years ago?? I've lost track.

So I mixed as usual, I've mixed up many many batches of A and B. Then I noticed in the written part of the destructions something about Phenidone. In the block list, no phenidone. In the written instructions; phenidone. I vaguely remember adding the phenidone early on. It's a pita to get in solution and I would sort of squish it up in a bottle cap with a bit of alcohol, then mix it in.

But the last 20 times + or - I forgot all about phenidone. We don' need no steenking phenidone. It's been working as good as ever.

Now I'm afraid to put the phenidone in. Might booger something up.

So my formula for A I've been using is just Sodium Metabisulfite, Catechol, and Potassium Bromide. I halved everything and mix 500ml at a time. Stored in a dirty 7UP bottle.

sanking
10-Apr-2013, 07:24
Jim Galli wrote,

"But the last 20 times + or - I forgot all about phenidone. We don' need no steenking phenidone. It's been working as good as ever.

Now I'm afraid to put the phenidone in. Might booger something up."

LOL.

Jim, for sure Pyrocat-HD will work without phenidone, and if you like what you get without it keep mixing it that way. You could also mix the stock formula without bromide.

That said, the addition of phenidone and/or bromide do change the working characteristics of a working solution of Pyrocat-HD. You get more energy with the small amount of phenidone from synergy, and the bromide lowers b+f slightly, while also decreasing slightly effective film speed. I won't say that one is better than the other because best depends on many factors and is quite subjective, but there is a difference.

Sandy

Larry Gebhardt
10-Apr-2013, 13:28
From An Introduction to Pyro Staining Developers (http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/PCat/pcat.html)


"3. When printing with variable contrast papers, pyro stain, which is always proportional to silver density, functions as a continuous variable color mask that reduces printing contrast, particularly in the high values. This allows shadow and mid-tones to be printed without compressing or blocking the highlights, reducing time spent burning and dodging."

There's a nice discussion on APUG entitled Pyrocat HD, VC papers, light source and contrast (http://www.apug.org/forums/forum37/33573-pyrocat-hd-vc-papers-light-source-contrast.html)

Google will find more :)

Ken, thanks, but I didn't make myself clear. I have printed Pyrocat images on VC paper, so I know how well they work. What I really meant was what is the density range you achieved with this large subject brightness range and development technique. In other words what contrast grade paper, or what VC filter, would be needed to print the images you showed at the beginning of the thread as you scanned them?

sanking
10-Apr-2013, 15:16
Ken, thanks, but I didn't make myself clear. I have printed Pyrocat images on VC paper, so I know how well they work. What I really meant was what is the density range you achieved with this large subject brightness range and development technique. In other words what contrast grade paper, or what VC filter, would be needed to print the images you showed at the beginning of the thread as you scanned them?

Larry,

With 1+20 working solutions of both A and B, at 75ºF, and 5 minutes of continuous agitation in both solutions, the CI of the films I have tested ranges from a low of about .45 to a high of about .55. This CI allows printing with VC papers using a 2.5 to 3.5 filter. The data I have from Ken's tests suggests that his negatives would fall within that range.


Sandy

Jim collum
10-Apr-2013, 18:24
gorgeous image.. both art & craft!!



http://www.kenleegallery.com/images/forum/couchartar2.jpg
Sofa and Cushions, 2013
5x7 HP5+, Divided Pyrocat HDC

Larry Gebhardt
11-Apr-2013, 04:41
Larry,

With 1+20 working solutions of both A and B, at 75ºF, and 5 minutes of continuous agitation in both solutions, the CI of the films I have tested ranges from a low of about .45 to a high of about .55. This CI allows printing with VC papers using a 2.5 to 3.5 filter. The data I have from Ken's tests suggests that his negatives would fall within that range.


Sandy

Thanks. It sounds like the negatives should print very well. I'll shoot a few extra sheets next time I find a high contrast scene so I can test this out.

Ed Bray
21-Apr-2013, 10:21
I tried divided Pyrocat HD today for the first time. I used 1:20 for Solution A (with 4 drops of wetting agent) and 40 grams of Sodium Carbonate in 800mls of water for Solution B (PH was 11.4) I processed 6 sheets of 5x7 in my 3005 expert drum on the CPP2 for the following: 5 minutes pre soak, 6 minutes Solution A, 6 minutes Solution B (at max rotary speed), 2x 30 sec washes, TF-3 Alkaline Fix for 5 minutes, 14x 30 second 500ml washes before soaking for 2 minutes in a tray of water/wetting agent.

Negatives drying as I type, but at first glance they look very nice.


Here is the first of the images from the negatives that I processed above, very pleased with the compensating effect, I could not believe the amount of detail from the semi-circular windows bearing in mind how high the contrast between the light outside and the very dark conditions inside.

The measured exposure was 30 secs @ f45 at ISO25, although the exposure I actually gave was 4 minutes at f45 on Adox CHS25 which will give an idea of how dark it was although I did allow 1 stop for reciprocity and I also had the Centre Filter on the 72mm Super Angulon XL which ate up another 2 stops.

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8388/8667804271_53fa4fda36_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/edbray/8667804271/)
Redundant Pressure Filters (Tottiford Water Treatment Works) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/edbray/8667804271/) by Ed Bray (http://www.flickr.com/people/edbray/), on Flickr

Ed Bray
23-May-2013, 15:18
Another visit to the Old Filter House.

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2891/8796662897_755bce4973_c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/edbray/8796662897/)
Window, Old Filter House, Tottiford (http://www.flickr.com/photos/edbray/8796662897/) by Ed Bray (http://www.flickr.com/people/edbray/), on Flickr

Ed Bray
5-Jul-2013, 14:28
Seems I've got this thread to myself at the moment. Here is one I saw yesterday. 4x5 OOD Ilford FP4+ in my first Grafmatic Holder. Shot with the Canham MQC with a 4x5 reducing back.

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2813/9219303116_a861a201f0_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/edbray/9219303116/)
Overgrown (http://www.flickr.com/photos/edbray/9219303116/) by Ed Bray (http://www.flickr.com/people/edbray/), on Flickr

sanking
5-Jul-2013, 17:45
Seems I've got this thread to myself at the moment. Here is one I saw yesterday. 4x5 OOD Ilford FP4+ in my first Grafmatic Holder. Shot with the Canham MQC with a 4x5 reducing back.


Congratulations on your nice work with two-bath Pyrocat. I am looking at some free time over the next two or three months and hope to stir up interest a bit with the article on divided Pyrocat that I have been promising for a long time. Would have finished it earlier but I just don't multi-task as well as I used to!!

Sandy

David Karp
5-Jul-2013, 18:34
Looking forward to seeing that article Sandy.

Ed Bray
6-Jul-2013, 12:38
Looking forward to seeing that article Sandy.

As am I, just another until that time:

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2864/9224780014_4a98478f37_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/edbray/9224780014/)
Goats Beard (http://www.flickr.com/photos/edbray/9224780014/) by Ed Bray (http://www.flickr.com/people/edbray/), on Flickr

James Morris
7-Jul-2013, 20:07
I don't know how to scan negs well, but here's my first go at divided pyrocat hd:

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5501/9237098766_91eb3d3bb6_h.jpg

HP5+ 8x10, EI 200.

I used 1:10 A&B for 6 minutes each at about 22C.

The SBR is about 17 stops.

Ed Bray
14-Jul-2013, 01:47
I used Divided Pyrocat HD as I wanted to see if the Compensatory Action would prevent the whites being completely blown out which is normally what happens with this type of image. This actually worked better than expected and I actually had to add a little contrast to give it a bit of a lift.

Fomapan 400 @ ISO250, 1/8 sec @ f32, Divided Pyrocat HD 6 minutes both solution A+B at 25° C. Wollensak WA Raptor 6.25 inch f9 lens.

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2894/9277552358_4f7fa4879f_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/edbray/9277552358/)
Steps, Avon River, Devon. (http://www.flickr.com/photos/edbray/9277552358/) by Ed Bray (http://www.flickr.com/people/edbray/), on Flickr

Another from the same process batch.

Ilford FP4+ @ ISO100, 1/8 sec @ f22, Divided Pyrocat HD 6 minutes both solution A+B at 25° C. Schneider 121mm f8 Super Angulon lens.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7332/9283265036_8aa5e481a4_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/edbray/9283265036/)
Storm Damaged Tree, Avon River, Devon (http://www.flickr.com/photos/edbray/9283265036/) by Ed Bray (http://www.flickr.com/people/edbray/), on Flickr

Larry H-L
17-Jul-2013, 16:25
Tried the divided method for the first time today, experimented with some different 120 roll films to see how they reacted and to make sure the 6-minute times worked for me.

I'm very impressed, most all of them look great. Ilford Delta 400 looked fantastic, as did Acros and FP-4. The only film that disappointed me was Foma 400... it looked rather flat and milky. Maybe it is the film base?

No streaks or uneven development marks. I agitated for a full minute at the start of both A and B.

I'm going to load up some 4x5 Delta 400 (still have plenty in the freezer) and some 5x7 Delta 100 for the next test, to see if I can duplicate the results on sheet film. I might add a touch more exposure, shadows might be a bit weak.

Ed Bray
18-Feb-2014, 11:33
5x7 Fomapan 400 @ ISO200 red filter (8x)

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3714/12616828655_fc52561270_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/edbray/12616828655/)
Brownhill Battery (http://www.flickr.com/photos/edbray/12616828655/) by Ed Bray (http://www.flickr.com/people/edbray/), on Flickr

EOTS
17-Jun-2015, 06:13
First test shot using Divided Pyrocat.

Not quite satisfied with the composition though.
Wish I had a bit more wide angle to include more of the vegetation on the right side.

Also, the wind and the swans skewed up the mirror.
But what the heck, just a test shot anyway ...

8x10" TMax 100.
Divided Pyrocat HD 20+20+100 for 5 minutes.

Negative came out quite thin, the scanned data resides only at a small portion of the histogram.

The developer (HD with glycol) was bought at the end of 2012,
so I'm not quite sure if that's causing that or if it's intended to be.

135591

Robert Langham
22-Jun-2015, 15:50
I'm sending my film to Ken.

photonsoup
14-Oct-2015, 20:17
This isn't a great photo, but its the details that make it interesting.
Crown Graphic
Schnieder 135mm lens
Arista EDU 100
16 second exposure
f22
Divided Pyro
Bright outdoor daylight coming in through windows
iPhone photo of negative on light box, inverted in PS, no adjustments other than resize.
http://theplumberbryan.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/arista_p.jpg

Notice that you can see detail in the tire tread in the heavy shade, and still see detail in the scene outside in late afternoon daylight. I think it was about an 11 stop difference.
Heres a shot of the negative
http://theplumberbryan.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/arista.jpg

David Aimone
15-Oct-2015, 06:55
Looking forward to it Sandy! Love Pyro but the few tries at divided pyro have been less than perfect!


Congratulations on your nice work with two-bath Pyrocat. I am looking at some free time over the next two or three months and hope to stir up interest a bit with the article on divided Pyrocat that I have been promising for a long time. Would have finished it earlier but I just don't multi-task as well as I used to!!

Sandy

sanking
15-Oct-2015, 08:12
Looking forward to it Sandy! Love Pyro but the few tries at divided pyro have been less than perfect!

I finished the article some time again and it is on the Pyrocat web site.

http://www.pyrocat-hd.com/html/TwoBathPyrocat.html

Sandy

Taija71A
15-Oct-2015, 08:49
Sandy!

Thank-you once again...
For taking the time to write another extremely clear, concise and detailed Article.

Your contributions on the various facets of Pyrocat Film Developing...
Are always truly exceptional and definitely 'without peer'.

They are appreciated by the LF Photographic Community, more than you will ever know!
Very best regards, -Tim.

sanking
16-Oct-2015, 18:04
Tim,

Thanks for your kind remarks.

Two-bath developers like Pyrocat, and Diafine, make control of very high contrast scenes a very straight forward proposition. You just expose for the shadows, and the developer does the rest.

Sandy

Taija71A
16-Oct-2015, 18:52
Thank-you. No problem Sandy!

You are more than welcome...
And were definitely deserving of the kind words. -Tim.