-
Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
Preparing to shoot my first B&W 8x10 negatives and develop them using a Jobo drum on a Beseler motor base. My objective is to create negatives that scan well, so I'll be using Pyrocat-MC as a two-part compensating developer. I have a recipe developed from based on information from Sandy King. However, before I commit the materials and time, I would like to ask if anyone else is developing film with this approach and compare dilutions, temperatures, developing times, and film EI's.
Here's my recipe:
Films: Efke 25 exposed at ASA 25 and Ilford FP4+ exposed at ASA 100
Developer: Pyrocat-MC, Part A at 1:20 dilution Part B at 1:20 dilution
Developer and Presoak Temperature: 75 degrees F
Presoak: 3 to 5 minutes
Development Times (both films): (3 minute presoak) Part A: 5 minutes and Part B: 5 minutes
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
"My objective is to create negatives that scan well"
Why do you feel that you need a 2-part developer ?
Many of us use Pyrocat and other developers, in their "normal" configurations, for scanning purposes, with relative ease.
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
I have begun using stand development in a Unicolor drum (8x10) with Pyrocat-HD for it's compensation effects. The dilutions and techniques are straight from Sandy's article on unblinking eye. So far I've been very impressed with the results. My times are 45 minutes for N, 30 for N-1 and 80 for N+1.
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
I thought Sandy indicated it was economically unsound to use Pyrocat as a two part developer.
I use the Adams d23 two part formula with success. I believe that is Sandy's approach also.
bob
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bob McCarthy
I thought Sandy indicated it was economically unsound to use Pyrocat as a two part developer.
I use the Adams d23 two part formula with success. I believe that is Sandy's approach also.
bob
The 1:20 dilution for two-bath uses about five times as much of the stock solutions as a 1:1:100 dilution. However, you can re-use the 1:20 dilution several times if done within a window of three or four hours.
The major reason to use any two-bath developer is to avoid negatives of very high contrast. The mechanics of two-bath development holds contrast to a finite point, regardless of the conditions of exposure, and is a safe method of development where one may have exposed sheet in a wide range of subject brightness conditions and not kept good notes. It is also a good form of development for roll film that may have been exposed to a wide range of subject contrast.
I developed some Acros film recently in two-bath development and was very pleased with the acutance. It was quite similar to what I get when developing with minimal agitation (four agitation cycles during total development time). I also agitate only four times with tw0-bath development, for thirty seconds at the beginning and then at the 1/4, 1/2 and 3/4 points of development.
A pre-soak is not needed with most films but I recommend it for slow speed high contrast films like Efke 25, etc.
Sandy King
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
Piggy-backing on what Sandy said:
FWIW, a zillion years ago I tried using rotational agitators and I didn't like them because the constant agitation was just too much. I couldn't really balance shadow and highlight detail. Yes, exposure, pre-soak, developer type/dilution, and development time can compensate but this isn't the whole story. Limiting the amount of agitation allows the shadows to develop more whilst the highlights develop more slowly as developer weakens.
I prefer hangars for 4x5 and trays for larger so I can better control/limit agitation.
But take the above with a grain of salt... it's just one guy's opinion after all. And maybe I just did it wrong.
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
Make it two guy's opinions.
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mike1234
FWIW, a zillion years ago I tried using rotational agitators and I didn't like them because the constant agitation was just too much. I couldn't really balance shadow and highlight detail.
FWIW, I use rotational agitation and have no problems with ridiculously high SBR. The image below is a scan of a palladium print of a 4x5 negative. The outside area is Texas sun in the afternoon (read: BRIGHT), but keeping detail in the shadows wasn't a problem. The railing in the foreground has detail.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3448/...51b17dee27.jpg
It's just a matter of testing and learning to use what you've got. Also, some people just prefer rotational (as I do) and some prefer using hangers (like Mike does). It doesn't matter how you do it, it just matters that you get out there with your camera and actually do it!
That said, I'm testing out the 2-bath for my 120 and am liking it!
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
^^^ Like I said, I may have been doing it (drum processing) wrong. Or maybe I'm just an old fuddy-duddy. :)
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ken Lee
Why do you feel that you need a 2-part developer ?
Excellent question!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
sanking
The major reason to use any two-bath developer is to avoid negatives of very high contrast. The mechanics of two-bath development holds contrast to a finite point, regardless of the conditions of exposure, and is a safe method of development where one may have exposed sheet in a wide range of subject brightness conditions and not kept good notes. It is also a good form of development for roll film that may have been exposed to a wide range of subject contrast.
Sandy's answer is naturally right on; however, I would add that I develop different films at the same time in the same drum, e.g., you developed FP4+ and Efke 25 and Tri-X in the same drum at the same time. The resulting negatives have a long tonal scale, low contrast, and scan well.
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
You develop all your negatives in 2-bath Pyrocat - regardless of subject brightness range - not just the ones where the subject brightness range was excessive ?
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ken Lee
You develop all your negatives in 2-bath Pyrocat - regardless of subject brightness range - not just the ones where the subject brightness range was excessive ?
That is correct.
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
Excellent !
If anyone has more illustrative samples, I'm sure that people would love to see them.
I plan to try this, as soon as I can get back to photography.
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ken Lee
If anyone has more illustrative samples, I'm sure that people would love to see them.
Here's an example...
http://www.largeformatphotography.in...6&d=1252071236
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
Jay... It's always difficult to tell actual tonal quality on a monitor but that looks pretty darned good. Nice lighting and there seems to be plenty of tonal detail.
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mike1234
It's always difficult to tell actual tonal quality on a monitor ...
You are absolutely right! But, the print is pretty nice too...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mike1234
Nice lighting and there seems to be plenty of tonal detail.
The light was good, but not great for this photograph.
This technique took a little for me to warm up to... the negatives look a little muddy with a low contrast and a long tonal scale, i.e., nothing like what printed well for me when I made wet prints 30 years ago in high school. However, the negatives consistently scan well and come to life with a couple quick adjustments in Lightroom and/or Photoshop. I initially tried compensating development for roll film, but have continued with it into LF. I like the 4x5 results and will be using it on my first batch of 8x10 negatives also...
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ken Lee
You develop all your negatives in 2-bath Pyrocat - regardless of subject brightness range - not just the ones where the subject brightness range was excessive ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jay Decker
That is correct.
If you put up the enlarger/wet side processing for digital capture (scanning) the emphasis on the density range of the negative takes on a much lower priority.
As long as you have detail in the shadows (exposure) and the density of the highlights (processing) are capable of being captured by your scanning device, very little else matters.
Adjusting the output with the myriad of tools in your editor can damn near solve any issue with much more subtlety than any paper grade.
Throw in local adjustments, the resulting output can match your vision to a tee.
I'm using a two bath D23 approach, and getting wonderful and consistent results. I have my processing time well established to the point virtually all negatives are printable, no matter what the density range of the subject.
I'm using the Adams formula with a touch less sulfide (75gm vs 100).
4 minutes A, 4 minutes B with minimal agitation, in A (1 frame drain@minute) and B (@2 minutes).
I intend to compare Pyrocat next, but I'm getting good results with the approach mentioned, so I'm in no rush.
bob
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
It's not uncommon for somewhat flat negs to scan well. This keeps the image within the film's optimal tonal range using only the straighter portion of the gamma curve. This keeps shadows open and highlights unblocked. You then just add contrast in PS. It's the appropriate way to go, IMHO.
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
Bob, I would be interested in hearing your comments.
Below are a few photos from my recent flurry of film development activity. All were developed using Barry Thornton's 2 bath developer in Jobo Expert Drums on a Beseler roller base. The first photo is a 5x7 on Arista.edu Ultra 200. The second is from 4x5 HP5+. The third is a part of a whole plate negative made on HP5+ (The scanning area on my scanner is not big enough to scan the whole negative). Without film holders for the larger sizes, I just lay them on the glass emulsion side down and flip them in Photoshop.
I regularly develop some combination of HP5+, FP4+, Delta 100, or Arista.Edu Ultra 200 together in the same drum. I print in the traditional darkroom, but I do quick scans to view on screen so I can decide which negs to print (sort of a digital proof sheet). These have had minimal processing in Photoshop so I feel comfortable putting them up for public view. In my experience, these negs will print well on grade 2 or grade 3.
Sandy King recommends using Divided D23 diluted 1:1 for four minutes in each bath when used for rotary processing. My experience using Thornton's similar two bath formula supports this recommendation. Thornton recommended 5 minutes in each bath when processing sheet film using intermittent agitation. I found that the rotary processed negatives are too contrasty if the A and B baths are used full strength. This indicates that constant agitation has an impact on two bath developers, and that assertions to the contrary based on the idea that development stops once the developer absorbed into the emulsion during the A bath is exhausted are just plain wrong. Perhaps the constant agitation in the B bath causes some of the developer absorbed into the emulsion to go back into solution and work on the highlights.
Based on my experience using Thornton's two bath for years, tray development with intermittent agitation using the two baths at full strength for five minutes in each bath resulted in a noticeably less contrasty negative than one processed at full strength for the same times with constant agitation. The constant agitation makes it easier to blow out the highlights, so I have to be more aware of the scene's contrast using the 2 bath with constant agitation than when I was tray processing the negatives.
I wondered whether the increased contrast was due to development in the A bath. However, I don't think much development takes place in the A bath, even with constant agitation, since I mix Thornton's formula with 40g/L of sodium sulfite in bath A and 40g/L in bath B (sort of like Vestal's DD76). Diluting this 1:1 leaves only 20g/L of sodium sulfite and nothing else to act as an accelerator. Maybe one of these days I will run a few sheets through the A bath only and see if any development occurs, and if so, how much.
Thornton suggested that you could use a different B bath in N+1 or N-1 situations. I have not tried the N+1 with the rotary processor, but have tried the N-1 formula. A few of my 4x5 negatives from a recent trip came out with blown highlights when processed normally. I mixed up some B bath with 7g/L of Sodium Metaborate instead of the standard 12g/L used for N processing. I diluted this and the A bath 1:1 and processed the backup negatives for four minutes in each bath The results were very good. There was much more detail in the highlights and I think the negatives will print well. (The third photo was processed this way.)
I also found that the diluted baths are reusable for at least one day. I have run 30 4x5 sheets using the same baths with no problem, and discarded the diluted solutions at the end of the day.
Photos (c) 2009 David C. Karp
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
An article on Unblinking Eye, entitled Divided D-23 Developer, lists different development times in solutions A and B, according to N+1, N-1, etc.
Isn't that approach inconsistent with the notion that one basic pair of development times is suitable for a wide range of negatives ?
Am I overlooking something ?
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
The thing about Divided D23 that differentiates it from some of the other divided developers is that the first bath is the same D-23 that you could use to develop your negatives in a 1 bath developer. The Sodium Sulfite in D23 serves as both preservative and accelerator, so development clearly takes place in the A bath when using DD23.
This is different than a "true" divided developer such as Diafine, in which little or no development takes place in the A bath.
The version of Thornton's developer that I use splits the sodium sulfite between the two baths, so there is only 40g/L in the A bath. There should be very little development at that level. When tray processing using this formula, I found that I could combine films of extremely broad range of negatives in the same slosher and have very nice negatives across the board. Now that I have been rotary processing, things are a bit different. Scenes that I would have trusted to process normally in the tray are now blowing out. This is true even when the solutions are diluted 1:1 so that the concentration of sodium sulfite in the A bath goes to only 20g/L. That is why I tried the N-1 concentration of the B bath as described in my prior post. It works fine.
There are still advantages to the 2 bath for me, even when rotary processing. It still seems that time is still not as critical as with a one bath. I was using X-Tol 1:3 before going to the 2 bath, and total time in the developer is shorter than with X-Tol. I think that there is still some compensation with the 2 bath, but not as much as when tray processing. Plus, I can still develop different films in the same drum for the same amounts of time and have good negatives for each.
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
I should have added this to the prior post.
I believe the fact that DD23 is a fully formed developer when used as part A of a 2 bath accounts for Joe Lipka's recommendation of different times for N-1, etc.
I have also used Diafine with roll film in tanks and 4x5 in trays, and found that you can develop different films exposed in different lighting conditions, all for the same time, and have fine negatives in each case. I have not tried it in a rotary processor.
At some point I too intend to try Pyrocat MC as a compensating developer. I am interested to see how the stain impacts the prints, and if there will be a need for a weaker B bath in N- situations when using it.
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
Let me organize my thoughts for you.
First, in spite of many favorable comments about continuous agitation, I have formed a different mindset. My first attempts were with a motor base for the Kinderman tank and my results were not the equal of what I was getting with intermittent agitation. This was in the 70's so it's a long held attitude (I certainly would never claim to be a fact)
I experimented with a number of compensating approaches trying to control the harsh lighting of the SW desert where I lived at the time. Two bath, water bath, ultra-dilute, tried them all.
I pretty much settled for the Adams formula. The two bath fit all the requirements. Cheap, mix it yourself for pennies, effective with long scale (high DR) subjects. For normal shots I used HC-110 (B).
I went digital for 5 or 6 years before coming back to large format. By then the darkroom was long gone or in storage. I was in a different house w/o a proper place to easily set one up. So I then went hybrid, wet film developing/digital printing.
So I began working to optimize film development for scanning.
First the scanner has an impact, what I did for my consumer scanner was very different as to what I do for my current cezanne. Secondly, I am somewhat well trained in Adobe Suite as my primarily source of income (when my clients pay me) is in 3D and video.
I tried stand development, high (ultra) dilution and other approaches. The attempt was to limit DR while getting good detail in the shadows.
Sandy King wrote an article in View camera that flooded back old practices. I tried it and found it worked well. I played with time, his timing worked very well. I worked with agitation, and found minimal agitation enhanced edge effect. I reduced sulfite for two reasons - one is that sulfite can cause fine grain because it dissolves the grain (at expense of sharpness) and secondly activates the metol in part A(pH issue).
Since I was targeting a scanner and not wet process, I wanted a capping process that self limited the density of the developed negative. Tapering shoulder with a decent straight line in the mids.
Adams agitated too much from my reading and understanding of his process. My belief was bath A should begin bringing up the density across the board shadows to highlights. I use a fairy normal agitation, 30 second, then one agitation cycle every minute. Since the sulfite in A will activate the metol, we get partial development. At 4 minutes we are well short of development to completion.
Bath B where I seen suggestions of continuous agitation to no agitation, was where I spent time experimenting. I found initial agitation of 15-20 seconds was enough to move the process forward w/o staining/streaking. After that, I wanted minimal so the chemistry moves to exhaustion on the highlights, but progresses on in the shadows. I do one intermediary agitation at the midpoint of time for B (ie at 2 minutes). While no agitation is in theory best, I think it doesn't hurt and evens out any streaking or lack of agitation issues.
I use a covey of combiplan tanks in a dip and dunk fashion. There is an article on the main page of this site on the general technique. I use 4 tanks. Though realistically only 2 are needed for part A and B, I also do no more than 12 sheets per liter of solution. Maybe more could be done, but since I'm mixing the chemistry myself its nothing cost wise.
The key to how it works for me is
I have soft but long scale negatives
I can mix many films in a batch. IE I have processed FP4 and Delta together in the same tank. Working on T-Max now.
My scanner is very capable
I use photoshop on a daily basis and have good control of what it can and can not do.
hope this helps,
bob
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
David, what is the purpose of the sulfite in Part B?
Kodalk doesn't need a preservative, I don't believe.
I know folks who use a salt to help the gelatin but I haven't found that to be so. May be a water issue. I suppose.
bob
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
Thanks Bob.
The Thornton formula is very similar to yours. His formulation was: Bath A - 6.5g metol, 80g sodium sulfite. Bath B - 12g sodium metaborate. All brought up to 1L. So, a bit less metol, a bit more sodium sulfite and sodium metaborate.
I decided to try splitting the sodium sulfite after reading that Vestal did this in his DD76. Anchell and Troop mention that they felt that this was the best approach for DD76 without explaining why. I thought about it for a while, and guessed that the reason might be to have less development in the A bath, and to goose up the development in the B bath by adding the extra sulfite to the developer absorbed into the emulsion. Alternatively, perhaps it was a gelatin issue for them. I am not a chemist and I don't play one on TV (:)), so I just winged it. I don't know if it works for any of these purposes, or what is really happening. The negatives look good so I just kept doing it after my initial experiments.
The long scale negatives that work so well for scanning also work very well for darkroom printing. Most negatives print very well on grade 2 or grade 3 paper.
It is interesting that you also found different results between intermittent and continuous agitation using 2 baths. It makes you wonder about Anchell's and Troop's assertion that rotary processing is ideal for 2 baths. It does work, and based on my experience recently, it does work pretty well. However, I agree with you that it works even better with intermittent agitation.
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
Thornton does briefly discuss lowering the Sodium Sulphite (his spelling) in Bath A, but for the specific purpose of increased definition and without adding the remainder to Bath B: "If you want to opt for really high definition at the expense of grain, you can cut down the sodium sulphite in Bath A to as little as 35 grams, but you will need to change to about 12g of sodium carbonate [presumably from sodium metaborate] in Bath B." [Edge of Darkness, p. 95.]
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
Hi Jim,
I do recall that discussion in Edge of Darkness. That formula would give results similar to the Beutler high acutance formula, which is not what I was after, or what I am getting.
There are some photos I have in mind that would really benefit from that sort of developer, but for most of what I do I think it would be too much.
Have you tried it?
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
I haven't tried his 2-Bath formula. I have used his DiXactol for compensation development as a 2-bath and as a 1-bath when I want to develop more than one type of film and like the results.
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
I was thinking about Sandy's VC Mag article on 2 baths. He had a photo of a sunporch or porch (or something similar) with a super broad contrast range. Based on my recent experience, I think that with continuous agitation I would have to use an N- B bath as described above for a scene like that, but Sandy did not have to (and he used continuous agitation of some kind for the photos in the article).
So, I am thinking, could it be:
1. You can make adjustments in Photoshop to handle this much easier than you could handle it in the darkroom.
2. Perhaps the rotation speed has an impact on contrast, and slower rpms might help.
Any thoughts on this, or any other potential causes?
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
Sandy -
Your recommended development time of 5 minutes in each solution, is for 1:20 dilution, at 75 degrees Fahrenheit... no ?
If we wanted to pinch pennies and use even less developer, could we increase temperature, or extend development time ? Or would this introduce problems ?
Would the same be true with other developers, like Divided D-23 ?
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
For those who are interested, here are some other threads touching on Pyrocat as a 2 bath developer:
http://www.largeformatphotography.in...ht=bath+dilute
http://www.apug.org/forums/forum37/6...yrocat-hd.html
These both have helpful information.
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
Well I'll be a monkey's uncle !
TMY at ISO 250, Divided Pyrocat HD, 5 min, 75 degrees, 1:10.
I placed the wood on the chair on Zone II - III, and let the rest go where it may. The inside walls fell on Zone V, the grass in the yard outside fell on Zone XI ! The clouds in the sky fell on Zone... XIV !
Another interior with deep shadows and full window-light from outdoors. The statue on the table, I placed on Zone III. The carpeting on the stairs fell 8 zones higher, and the white paint on the steps another 2 zones beyond that. Zone 13 is way beyond what any sane photographer would waste a sheet of film and still expect to capture useable texture. I didn't know that the film could hold that many zones.
Foreground in the shade, clouds lit by full sun. No filter was used. The fence was placed on III, and the clouds fell as high as Zone XI. So what ? Maybe a yellow filter would have made the clouds look more dimensional, but the brightness range was irrelevant.
All of these negatives scanned so easily, I had to increase contrast to make them feel like light. The amazing thing to me, is that there was no need for stand, semi-stand, flash, dilution, HDR merging, blending, multiple exposures... no incantations or rituals of any kind !
Watching the development process with an Infra Red monocular, this process looks like Pt/Pd: the images just pop out when you place the film into bath B. I haven't had this much (photographic) fun in a long time !
Next time, I will give more continuous agitation: these negatives have a slightly mottled look. Five minutes isn't a lot of time, especially when you tray-develop a lot of sheets at the same time as I do. I will increase the dilution to 1:20, and lengthen the time a bit in each developer.
Thanks so much for sharing this technique ! It's been around for a long time, but it took me until now to pick it up.
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
Great Ken. A fun experiment. It is amazing how well the 2 baths work.
We really do owe Sandy a debt of gratitude. Before he started his experiments and wrote his VC Mag article, most of the commentary on 2 bath developers was that they did not work very well any more, that they were appropriate only for the films available in the old days. The experts were always steering interested photographers away from 2 baths.
For your next experiment, try shooting one sheet each of a few different films, and develop them all together. Just what the doctor ordered when coming back from a trip where you used multiple films.
I think I am going to order some Pyrocat MC in glycol from the Formulary tonight.
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
Actually, Infra Red viewing devices makes it possible to develop different films - even different sized sheets - at the same time, if you're careful enough. But having only one time/temperature for all films... now that's outrageous !
I ordered some Metol from Artcraft Chemicals, so I can try some the Thornton version of Divided D-23 next. I'm so spoiled by the affordability of 1:100 dilution of Pyrocat, it's hard for me to use it at 1:10. It feels like using a $50 bill to light a 50-cent cigar ;-)
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ken Lee
Actually, Infra Red viewing devices makes it possible to develop different films - even different sized sheets - at the same time, if you're careful enough. But having only one time/temperature for all films... now that's outrageous !
I ordered some Metol from Artcraft Chemicals, so I can try some the Thornton version of Divided D-23 next. I'm so spoiled by the affordability of 1:100 dilution of Pyrocat, it's hard for me to use it at 1:10. It feels like using a $50 bill to light a 50-cent cigar ;-)
Bear in mind what David mentioned earlier. Tw bath D-23 is different from two-bath developers like Diafine and Pyrocat-HD. With two bath D-23 the first bath is very similar to straight D-23 so some development is taking place in Solution A. With Diafine and Pyrocat-HD there is no accelerator at all in Solution A and all of the development takes place in Solution B.
BTW, I know that a 1:10 or 1:20 dilution of Pyrocat-HD uses a lot more of the developer than a 1:1:100 dilution. However, if you look at the acual amount of chemistry in two-bath D-23 and divided Pyrocat-HD you will see that they are quite similar so if you mix both developers from scratch cost won't be that much different.
BTW, I have not used two-bath development with tray development of sheet film, but I think it should work fine if you keep the sheets of film separate, as in individual trays or in some type of slosher type device.
Sandy King
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
Thanks for the heads-up. I thought that the Thornton variation was different, but apparently not. Oh well, one can never have too much Metol around... isn't that what they say ?
I have grown accustomed to the convenience of Pyrocat in Glycol HD, from Photographer's Formulary. I guess I could easily mix the non-Glycol based formula myself. Why not ?
I am still puzzled about the approach of using divided developers all the time. Having seen the results under extreme lighting, I will try some photos under normal conditions.
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ken Lee
I am still puzzled about the approach of using divided developers all the time. Having seen the results under extreme lighting, I will try some photos under normal conditions.
I only use two bath development all the time with MF roll film. When using sheet film I keep notes as to exposure and usually develop according tlo BTZS testing. However, two bath development of sheet film is a viable option in situations where careful notes were not kept during a shooting session.
Sandy King
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
Here's a test shot made under more normal lighting conditions - except for the rose petal lit by direct sunlight.
Divided Pyrocat HD development has limited the high values as promised. Without it, the sun-lit rose petal would have been unprintable: it fell on Zone XI. As if by magic, it now has plenty of texture, and the adjacent petals maintain their subtle shading at the same time.
After decades of struggling with challenging light, this is really impressive. It makes you want to go out and shoot all kinds of scenes that we learned long ago, to avoid.
I shuffled 6 sheets continuously, which resulted in even development.
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ken Lee
After decades of struggling with challenging light, this is really impressive. It makes you want to go out and shoot all kinds of scenes that we learned long ago, to avoid.
Absolutely. When I was tray processing, I stopped marking negatives for N- or N+. If I was in an N-1 situation, I would just go ahead and make a negative. More often than not, it would work out. For N+1, if things were just too flat, I would intensify the negative in selenium 1:1 for 5 minutes.
The other cool thing about two baths is that you don't have to worry quite so much about time in the developer. I used to stress out about making sure that the film was not in the developer too long. With two baths, I don't stress at all. A little extra time in A or B does not make so much difference. With Diafine, the temperature (within a broad range) makes little or no difference! For me, developing film is more fun this way.
As noted above, it seems that rotary processing with a D-23 variant requires a bit more segregation of negatives and more concern about development time. I think some of these concerns will disappear when using Pyrocat or Diafine.
I think 2 bath development is as close as we can come to having a true magic bullet.
Glad this worked out for you.
P.S. Just ordered my Pyrocat MC. Can't wait to try it out!
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ken Lee
Well I'll be a monkey's uncle !
TMY at ISO 250, Divided Pyrocat HD, 5 min, 75 degrees, 1:10.
I placed the wood on the chair on Zone II - III, and let the rest go where it may. The inside walls fell on Zone V, the grass in the yard outside fell on Zone XI ! The clouds in the sky fell on Zone... XIV !
All of these negatives scanned so easily, I had to increase contrast to make them feel like light. The amazing thing to me, is that there was no need for stand, semi-stand, flash, dilution, HDR merging, blending, multiple exposures... no incantations or rituals of any kind !
Watching the development process with an Infra Red monocular, this process looks like Pt/Pd: the images just pop out when you place the film into bath B. I haven't had this much (photographic) fun in a long time !
Next time, I will give more continuous agitation: these negatives have a slightly mottled look. Five minutes isn't a lot of time, especially when you tray-develop a lot of sheets at the same time as I do. I will increase the dilution to 1:20, and lengthen the time a bit in each developer.
Thanks so much for sharing this technique ! It's been around for a long time, but it took me until now to pick it up.
Ken, something to concider. Sometimes long scale doesn't look natural. Much like the overdone HDR is digital capture color
This is where photoshop can come in handy. With careful masking you can separate the scene into the ways our eye's see it. ie two different scenes with there own contrast ranges.
BRB. Let me make a quick and dirty example
bob
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bob McCarthy
Ken, something to concider. Sometimes long scale doesn't look natural. Much like the overdone HDR in digital capture color
This is where photoshop can come in handy. With careful masking you can separate the scene into the ways our eye's see it. ie two different scenes with there own contrast ranges.
BRB. Let me make a quick and dirty example
bob
this is more how I expect it to appear to me
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
Thanks Bob - You are certainly right.
What I posted was more of a Eureka moment, upon my first encounter with the technique. I just set up the camera and shot out the window, at what would have been an impossible shot.
Your version feels like real light - It's poetic- and as you point out, there really are two different scenes, each with its own feel.
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
Ken,
Your negative, and Bob's comment and modification of the curve of the print, is an excellent example of why two-bath development is such a a practical alternative for photographers who develop their negatives to scan and then adjust tonal values in Photoshop. In practice there would have been other ways to capture the long subject brightness range of that scene, but none of them would have been as simple as plain two-bath development.
One of the comments I hear a lot in discussing two-bath developers is that they don't work well with modern films. I don't know how that idea got started but my testing of both modern T-grain films and traditional grain films with several different two-bath formulas found that both types worked fine with two-bath development.
Sandy King
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ken Lee
Thanks Bob - You are certainly right.
What I posted was more of a Eureka moment, upon my first encounter with the technique. I just set up the camera and shot out the window, at what would have been an impossible shot.
Your version feels like real light - It's poetic- and as you point out, there really are two different scenes, each with its own feel.
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
This "automatic" supression of extreme values reminds me of a story about a construction engineer, assigned to build a hotel on a remote tropical island.
His local guide and translator was struck by the fact that the engineer carried hot tea in the cool of the morning, and iced tea in the heat of the day. "It's a thermos bottle", the engineer told the native. "It keeps hot things hot, and cool things cool".
"Yes", said the guide. "There's just one thing I don't understand: How do it know ?"
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
Speaking of old film and misconceptions, this also reminds me of something from the medical field, not a joke.
Researchers have long known about the placebo effect, where patients will sometimes get the same healing effect from an empty pill as they might get from a carefully investigated remedy. It never occurred to them to investigate how someone can automatically cure themselves of a disorder, based merely on the "power of suggestion".
Spontaneous healing through "suggestion" can be far more interesting, promising, and economical than elaborate and dangerous approaches. But having a rather focused concept of "research", they overlooked it.
You might say that this method, considered for special cases only, is actually more interesting than contraction and expansion.
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
Ken,
Another thing to remember about 2 bath developers (implicit in one of Sandy's posts above) is that you can regularly use them with roll films. The scene to scene variations are automatically handled by the 2 bath. Where we might have had to develop the entire roll for one scene we felt was "special" we can now just drop them into a 2 bath and have an entire roll developed scene by scene.
Divided D76 works well with 35mm and 120. Thornton's works well on 120, never tried it on 35mm. I'll bet Divided Pyrocat works very well with 120.
-
Re: Anybody using Pyrocat-HD or MC as a Compensating Developer?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
David Karp
Ken,
Another thing to remember about 2 bath developers (implicit in one of Sandy's posts above) is that you can regularly use them with roll films. The scene to scene variations are automatically handled by the 2 bath. Where we might have had to develop the entire roll for one scene we felt was "special" we can now just drop them into a 2 bath and have an entire roll developed scene by scene.
Divided D76 works well with 35mm and 120. Thornton's works well on 120, never tried it on 35mm. I'll bet Divided Pyrocat works very well with 120.
Two-bath Pyrocat-HD works very well with 120 film. I have been using MF as back-up gear for LF, and in some travel it is my main format. In another thread on this subject I attached a scan from an actual print of 44"X60" size that a friend made for me from one of my Acros negatives developed in two-bath Pyrocat-HD. See http://www .largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=50674&page=11. The original negative has very high acutance and the print is tack sharp and almost grain free even from close viewing distance.
Sandy King