New Kodak Formulas

[Jerry Bodine]

...Is it an error to compare miniature film response to LF even when the films are supposedly the same type?

Jac, FWIW you may find this excerpt from an email response I got from Ilford some time back to be of interest:

...there can be small differences between 35mm, 120 and sheet film as these do use different bases and slightly different emulsions. Although we endeavor to manufacture all three types to be as close as possible in order for development times to be consistent across the range for any one film type (and they are for most practical purposes) someone carrying out the exacting type of testing you describe will inevitably pick up small differences.

[LabRat]

Not to be obvious, but testing will give you answers...
You should have your developing/EI tests done beforehand, and have done many runs to have proven it long ago... So a no-brainer now and later...

One shouldn't have to change developers, as there are some but minor differences between them, but one should stick to one (any one) for long as possible, unless you hit a wall with it (like availible anymore)... I think many get "blinded by choice" with different offerings from makers, and think it will make a big difference... (It won't...) It's much mote about what you get used to using, and getting consistent results you can easily print with your preferred process on a good or bad day or night...

I have been given stock developer solutions(like HC-110 or Rodinal), some old and some very new, and tried them in a pinch, where the stock looked fine, but didn't develop anything, but I know to slip a piece of fogged raw film (in roomlight) in fresh mixed solutions, and wait about 3 min until the film darkens completely to confirm it works... (and that new half bottle of stock on the shelf from 6 months ago might not do what it used to do...)

I mix 98% of my chems from scratch, and never had a failure, and stock solutions seem to last longer than store bought... And I make as little or as much as I need for a project... And is MUCH cheaper, and get perfectly consistent results...

Developers are like making dough for baking... Several of the usual ingredents, but in different proportions, to create some variations... Or you can spend much more for designer or boutique versions of the same dough (for much more dough)...

I strongly suggest making your own, and cut out the middleman... A cheap scale, magnetic mixer, some bulk chems, and a copy of darkroom cookbook or BJP annual, and explore or standardize right from the start...

Steve K

[Howard Tanger]

The answer is simple: ILFORD.

IsIs that an American company? Howard

[Duolab123]

IsIs that an American company? Howard

Is Kodak Alaris an American company? Nope.

[Pere Casals]

Is Kodak Alaris an American company? Nope.

This deserves a clarification.

As part of the bankruptcy of the American company, Kodak faced a $2.8 billion claim by the UK Kodak Pension Plan (KPP) that controls Kodak Alaris (today mostly a marketer) as a privately held company through Kodak Alaris Holdings Limited.

So we have a US Kodak company that manufactures film that is marketed by UK Kodak company taking a share to sustain UK Kodak Pension Plan.

...but KPP wants to sell its "Droit du seigneur" on Kodak products, so they make a short term pricing policy to increase the short term profit to make the sell of Alaris easier and to show a value that can increase the selling price.


So we don't know well what is all that, IMHO Alaris is nominally an UK company but it's also an instrument to pay the debt in UK of an American Kodak company.

Problem is that all this mess damages color LF popularity, and it challenges the long term survability of this kind of photography.

[Drew Wiley]

LabRat - try making your own HC-110. Not easy at all, and it does have some fairly unusual characteristics in terms of versatility. It also keeps extremely well in concentrate, even partially used bottles. Let's be thankful for the options and varieties still available. Yes, I do mix many of my own developers; but there are numerous cases where I'd hate to have to concoct a substitution for something complicated. Color darkroom work in particular is heavily reliant on factory formulas. And in that case, I find even the black and white contrast masks perform better using HC-110 rather than ordinary developers. In my world, there are significant practical differences between specific developers, even in black and white work. I'm not a one-shoe-size-fits-all type. For others, your generic advice might be fine.

[LabRat]

True, HC-110 is its own formula (and I keep some stock around for process work), but there are other DIY formulas like D-19 I make when I need a vigorous, harder, more active developer (I don't use it for general pictorial work as it is a little harsh for me, even very diluted), but I'm still happy it is still made...

Steve K

[Drew Wiley]

It's the predictable performance of HC-110 at exceptionally low dilutions I require. It's the basis for a personal tweak that allows me very low contrast straight-line masks. At normal contrast levels, DK-50 is a readily formulated reasonable substitute in terms of analogous curve expectations. For general use, I'm more of a pyro user anyway.

[LabRat]

Yea, keep on making masks with it, you found what works...

I use DK-50 D (a variation) for general work, works great and I get edge effects, cheap, and good latitude without mushy grain... Not into staining developers as they can print a little flat on WTFB that I print neutral tone... :-)

Steve K