Where were the Pyro wars?

[Sylvester Graham]

I'm wondering if anyone could link me to one or two of the most heated and important threads that made up the pyro wars.

A lot of threads on the subject, I'm having trouble sorting through.

[rdenney]

What pyro wars?

Rick "perplexed by the possible motivations for this question" Denney

[Jay DeFehr]

I think "Pyro Wars" is an overly dramatic term for a period of time when I dared to challenge some of the established thinking on staining developers, and those who helped to establish some of the thinking. "wars" implies something like equally opposing forces, when in actuality it was mostly me opposed by Sandy King and his supporters. I'm happy to forget most of what was said/ written during that time, and console myself with the fact that it was arguably the most productive and innovative period for staining developer education, research and development in history. It was during this time period that the original Hypercat formula (catechol, ascorbic acid and phenidone in glycol) and 510-Pyro were formulated, followed by all of the Pyrocat variants, and several Moersch formulas. These discussions, as rancorous as they often were, probably did more to raise awareness of staining developers, and the principles on which they are based, than anything that came before, including Hutchings' book, which pre dated internet fora like this one, or apug.

Those exchanges would never be tolerated by a hyper moderated forum like this one, which would probably throw the baby out with the bath water in the interest of civility and courtesy.

[Sylvester Graham]

This isn't about the drama. I could care less about the drama. And even less about rekindling any old sentiments. I'm just looking for information for my own use and, as you point out Jay, there is some fine information somewhere on here. I'd love a PM if the subject is too tender for the light of day.

Worst comes to worst I'll dig into the search function and pick the ones that seem to have the most responses.

[Jay DeFehr]

The substance of those discussions was my developers; Hypercat (http://pyrostains.blogspot.com/) (and now Obsidian Aqua (http://hypercatacutancedeveloper.blogspot.com/2012/07/obsidian-aqua.html), too) and 510-Pyro (http://pyrostains.blogspot.com/), and Sandy King's developers; the Pyrocat (http://www.pyrocat-hd.com/) series.

The original Hypercat formula was abandoned, because it was too similar in performance to, and more complex than 510-Pyro, so I went back to the drawing board to formulate a more elegant catechol developer, which is the current Hypercat, in glycol, and Obsidian Aqua in water. These developers perform identically at equivalent dilutions. The water-based version was formulated to address economy in shipping and availability of ingredients in remote locations. Water, carbonates, and metabisulfites are available locally in most places, leaving only catechol to ship, where it's not available locally. OA is highly concentrated, with 2X more metabisulfite relative to water than Pyrocat HD, and 2.5X less metabisulfite relative to catechol, for simultaneously better keeping, and better staining. I no longer recommend Hypercat or OA for rotary processing, though they perform as well as Pyrocat HD in this application, 510-Pyro is a better choice, and these single agent catechol developers really shine with intermittent agitation.

[rdenney]

This isn't about the drama. I could care less about the drama. And even less about rekindling any old sentiments. I'm just looking for information for my own use and, as you point out Jay, there is some fine information somewhere on here. I'd love a PM if the subject is too tender for the light of day.

Worst comes to worst I'll dig into the search function and pick the ones that seem to have the most responses.

If you search for relevant topics, even using Google with the "site:largeformatphotography.info" as an argument, you'll find mountains of information about pyro. Google is a more powerful search engine than what comes with vBulletin.

Why don't you just ask what you want to know about Pyro?

Rick "still perplexed" Denney

[sanking]

The Pyro Wars as I knew them actually began in 2004 between Steve Simmons of View Camera magazine and Jorge Gasteazoro, an alternative printer working in pt/pd living in Mexico. Jorge was at the time using a variant of Pyrocat-HD and Simmons proposed that he write an article for View Camera comparing PMK to Pyrocat. At the time PMK has been around since around 1990, Pyrocat-HD was introduced in 1998. Turns out that for one reason or another Jorge's original article was not published and instead Steve wrote his own comparison article on PMK versus Pyrocat-HD. Simmon's article came out in May or June of 2004, and the reaction to it started the Pyro Wars, which continued with a different cast of players until early 2007, with perhaps a few dying gasps since them. The major venues for the Pyro Wars were threads on APUG, on the AZO forum, and on the Large Format forum.

Sandy

[Drew Wiley]

There are so many really superb pyro tweaks out there at the moment that it's come down
to nuances and dev options (tray vs drum etc). One really just needs to experiment to
decide what is appropriate for their own methodology and chosen print media, with the
most significant bifurcation being between conventional silver papers and long-scale alt
printing. I did my share of testing and re-tweaking. It's fun to do that for awhile; but in the
long haul one just settles in to something versatile. The wars might be largely forgotten,
but the landscape has pretty much changed for good, and we're all benefitting from the
actual formulation efforts which have gone into it. Plainly, I'm a pyro addict myself.

[Dan Henderson]

86406

oops, wrong wars.
Sorry!

[JBelthoff]

I thought Pyro wars were the result of all of those early 80's glimmer rock bands....? :p

Silly me...

Seriously, pyro is an interesting topic for B&W dev and I agree with "rdenney" that you can Google a lot adding the site keyword.

pyro site:www.largeformatphotography.info (http://www.google.com/#hl=en&safe=off&tbo=d&sclient=psy-ab&q=pyro+site:www.largeformatphotography.info&oq=pyro+site:www.largeformatphotography.info&gs_l=hp.12...1054.13565.0.15641.19.19.0.0.0.6.2089.6058.10j2j0j5j7-1j0j1.19.0.les%3Bcpsugrpq2high..0.0...1.1.iGL5EXitsPw&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&bvm=bv.1355534169,d.dmQ&fp=75746be565b0cb2f&bpcl=40096503&biw=1440&bih=815)

Loads of great info abounds....!

[Kirk Gittings]

The Pyro Wars as I knew them actually began in 2004 between Steve Simmons of View Camera magazine and Jorge Gasteazoro, an alternative printer working in pt/pd living in Mexico. Jorge was at the time using a variant of Pyrocat-HD and Simmons proposed that he write an article for View Camera comparing PMK to Pyrocat. At the time PMK has been around since around 1990, Pyrocat-HD was introduced in 1998. Turns out that for one reason or another Jorge's original article was not published and instead Steve wrote his own comparison article on PMK versus Pyrocat-HD. Simmon's article came out in May or June of 2004, and the reaction to it started the Pyro Wars, which continued with a different cast of players until early 2007, with perhaps a few dying gasps since them. The major venues for the Pyro Wars were threads on APUG, on the AZO forum, and on the Large Format forum.

Sandy

That's the way I remember it too. The stuff with Jay was more an aftershock of the earlier wars.

In retrospect I'm really not to sure what all the hullabaloo was really about as its quite clear that all these developers are quite good with different strengths and weaknesses. Though I started in the PMK camp I am now firmly in the Pyrocat HD camp......though in all honesty either one can do the job.

[Sylvester Graham]

It's good to get a bird's eye view from you, Sandy and Kirk, since I apparently started using the stuff in the heat of the situation, about 2006.

For what it's worth I've always enjoyed pyro and I'm glad I use it.

[ImSoNegative]

I remember pyromania by def leppard, that was a cool song

[William Barnett-Lewis]

So if the wars are all over, what's the best one for a beginner to use? I'm stepping up to 5x7 with the intent to contact print and have read as much as I can find but still really don't know which one to try.

Thanks!

[rdenney]

So if the wars are all over, what's the best one for a beginner to use? I'm stepping up to 5x7 with the intent to contact print and have read as much as I can find but still really don't know which one to try.

Thanks!

From my perspective, the best one for a beginner is Pyrocat-HD, simply because the Photographer's Formulary sells the stock solutions already mixed up in glycol, and you can buy it online easily.

Rick "also a beginner to staining and tanning developers" Denney

[Jay DeFehr]

William,

It really depends on the beginner. If you want to buy something commercially packaged, your options will be limited, but still varied. If you're willing to mix up your own from a pre-measured kit, you can make any of the published formulas through Artcraft Chemicals. If you have a scale and are willing to use it, you can buy a few ingredients and make several different formulas.

As for which staining developer is easiest to use, it's hard to argue against 510-Pyro, as it's a single solution formula that is diluted with water to make a working solution, like Rodinal or HC110, with similar shelf life. Others will argue that using a two part developer is not difficult, and I don't disagree, but it's more difficult than using a one part developer, especially if one is not very familiar with making dilutions.

If 510-Pyro is easier to use than two solution formulas, you might ask yourself, what is the downside? The answer is, there is no downside. There is no staining developer better than 510-Pyro, and many that are nowhere near as good.

That being said, you don't need to use the best developer -- just about any developer is capable of excellent results. Since you asked for opinions, mine is that you use 510-Pyro, unless there's some reason that presents a problem to you. Good luck, and enjoy!

[RichardSperry]

First pyro for a beginner?

Pyrocat HD, from Photographers Formulary. Premixed in glycol.

http://stores.photoformulary.com/-strse-105/Pyrocat-HD-In-Glycol/Detail.bok

Then go from there.

[mikebarger]

I started with 510 Pyro. I order from Artcraft, however I multiply the formula by 4 and order that size kit. Saves on shipping for the long haul.

Mike

[ic-racer]

Just buy some Pyro and try it. By the time you search the internet and confuse yourself with a bunch of 'out of context' goggle hits on your key-words, you can be looking at your own negatives and decide for yourself if you like it.

[Kirk Gittings]

Just buy some Pyro and try it. By the time you search the internet and confuse yourself with a bunch of 'out of context' goggle hits on your key-words, you can be looking at your own negatives and decide for yourself if you like it.

I agree. I am not a connoisseur of developers, pyro or not. I find something that works well and I use it-concentrating my limited time and resources on gas and film.

[mdm]

Why use any pyro at all. Given most people scan, seldom print all that big and use modern films that are not grainy, what real advantage is there in a real world? Maybe if you are alt printing like Sandy or printing on azo like Edward Weston, maybe its worthwhile. Instead of arguing about the pyro wars, perhaps spend some time justifying its use at all.

[Andrew O'Neill]

David, one advantage is that the same negative developed in pyro can be printed on silver papers (especially VC) or for alt processes.

[Michael Kadillak]

Why use any pyro at all. Given most people scan, seldom print all that big and use modern films that are not grainy, what real advantage is there in a real world? Maybe if you are alt printing like Sandy or printing on azo like Edward Weston, maybe its worthwhile. Instead of arguing about the pyro wars, perhaps spend some time justifying its use at all.

The reason that one uses a developer like pyro is so that you are not lumped into the category of "most people". As Kirk mentioned, find what works and stick with it. That said sometimes you need to get out of the box. That is the niche that the Photography Formulary fills in the sense that you can try a small package of a developer (and they have many to chose from) without committing to acquiring the specific components that may be useless if you do not like it. That is what I did. Once I found what worked I then felt much more comfortable purchasing those specific components to mix it myself.

What I remember about those prior discussions is that for a single unit of real progress on this issue we had to wade through three units of complete BS. Thankfully we have moderators that are highly savvy to certain tendencies on this subject to keep things in check.

[William Barnett-Lewis]

Why use any pyro at all. Given most people scan, seldom print all that big and use modern films that are not grainy, what real advantage is there in a real world? Maybe if you are alt printing like Sandy or printing on azo like Edward Weston, maybe its worthwhile. Instead of arguing about the pyro wars, perhaps spend some time justifying its use at all.
Well, one of the reasons I'm interested is that now that I'm moving up to 5x7 and using traditional grain films (Foma/Arista.Edu Ultra 100 & maybe 400) with the intent of contact printing. Eventually I intend to use Lodima & Amidol to make landscape contact prints to try and sell in the tourist trade here in Northern Wisconsin.

If Pyro helps me achive that goal, it's worth exploring. If not, then not. It appears that it might help so I need to explore that tool and trying to find info on it is not very easy.

I think the idea upthread to "just do it" may well be what I simply need to do & order a batch of pyrocat-HD in glycerin from Photographic Formulary. And then see how bad a mess I can make of my negs because if there is one thing I know it's that as soon as you change anything in LF, mistakes follow ;)

[Drew Wiley]

Real simple. Subjects that were hell for me to print pre-pyro suddenly got real easy. There
were other conspicuous visual advantages in the actual prints, esp in terms of microtonality. Anyone who accuses us of some snooty mentality probably hasn't done this kind of experimentation, esp now that pyro formulas are widely accessible. You don't have to use them. But it's no coincidence that they've gotten popular and even generated so much controversy over minor nuances between them. With the exception of TechPan,
I haven't found a single b&w film that pyro hasn't improved, that is, for general shooting.
I still use other developers in the lab for specialized things like color masking, where I want
a different gradient and, of course, cannot tolerate a stain.

[RichardSperry]

"Why use any pyro at all"

Pyrocat HD is about the least expensive developer you can buy.

If you mix it yourself from chemicals it works out to about 200 liters per $50. Roughly $1 per gallon.

http://stores.photoformulary.com/Detail.bok?category=ALL&keyword=Pyrocat+hd&no=105&param_referer=http%3A%2F%2Fstores.photoformulary.com%2FCategories.bok&searchpath=205340282

Even at $30 for 50 liters, that's 13 gallons for $30(in glycol it has a long shelf life). Or $2.30 a gallon, compared to $7-8 for D76.

Even if it cost more, I really like the look of it printed, and would buy it.


Edit: dang, forgot I already posted in this thread. Message is still the same, buy it and try it. If you don't like it, don't use it.

[Jay DeFehr]

Richard,

It costs me about $35 to make 500 liters of Obsidian Aqua working solution, or about 7 cents/ liter, compared to 25 cents/ liter for Pyrocat HD ( using your figures).

I agree -- none of these staining developers should be expensive compared to non- staining developers. Commercially made developers add a lot of overhead, doubling or more, the cost of the developer to the user. Artcraft Chemicals will make up any developer you want -- just provide the formula and quantity. You won't get branded packaging, or instructions, but that information is almost always available on the net. Artcraft adds a very reasonable handling fee for making up custom kits, so the price to the user is very low compared to the commercially packaged products from other suppliers.