After many years of using a few different pyro developers, I've caught the itch to try WD2H. I found an old LFPF thread where John posted the correct formula and showed that he used 25ml A + 25ml B + 1600ml water to tray develop FP4+. Working out the dilution ratio here it's: 1+1+64. That's a somewhat odd dilution to my mind and he may have done this to extend development time. Is anybody else using this ratio or do you stick to the normal 1+1+50 of standard WD2D+?
Thanks for the help.
I did Alan, I mixed some up early this year and tried using it. I agree that the dilution seems to be 1+1+64.
( ps. i still don't believe there is such a thing as WD2H+ , I think it's WD2H. It's confused by there being WD2D+ before it )
...Anyway, then the story gets messy. I got a very thin couple of negs from the first mix. I talked to John Wimberley ( we were corresponding already re. the Durst 138S ) for de-bugging ideas and then got a pH meter and tested the B solution, then the full developer mix, both were too low, not alkaline enough.
I concluded that there was either an error in the sodium carbonate that I'd been sold, or I had mixed the wrong dilution somehow.
I then bought some more carbonate from EBay.
I mixed this (carefully ) and tried this. The negs were still thin, but better, and with a light stain.
I then tried 1+1+50 and got a further improvement but it was still short of a few that I'd developed in PMK, both in density and stain in the upper values.
Then it got to the point I was wasting too many sheets, and had real subjects to take, so I cut losses and mixed up more PMK from the stocks I had.
However tthe WD2H A and B are still there, waiting for me to figure out what to try next.
I would appreciate someone else having a go !
John was struggling to remember enough to advise, given that he doesn't have all of the notes from 25+ years ago when he did the last reformulation.
If I remember correctly the H formula was more dilute than the D version, the goal being more contrast/stain for the petroglyph negatives he was making at the time, so maybe it needs longer development times?
Originally Posted by Mark J
Seemingly, but however John gave all of the info at the time it was posted here ( 2011 ) , I just checked my copy and it was 9.5 mins for FP4+ for an N development at 70°C.
I use WD2H+ for pushing FP4+ to the limit. I mix my own according to Anchell's Darkroom Cookbook and the times therein. Negs are good.
NOTE: Solution A needs 60 grams of pyrogallic acid that is not shown. A mistake in the book. Without it you have really crummy D23.
my picture blog
ejwoodbury.blogspot.com
John said that the 'cookbook' missed out the sodium bisufite, 20g . Not the pyrogallol.
When I get time I'll dig out the link to his posting.
Thought I'd pass on my findings...so far.
I developed an 8x10 sheet of Fomapan 100 this morning in a BTZS tube at 20C for 8 mins; 1+1+64 dilution. It's hanging to dry as I type this, but it appears just a tad thin to me. However, I seem to recall from back about 100 years ago when I used the original WD2D formula that these negs always looked kinda thin. I won't know until I print it. My initial trial time may have been a little short, but I went that way because in my experience Fomapan 100 tends to build contrast quickly, and I really didn't know what to expect here.
Very interesting, thanks. I had picked up a couple of old postings about WD2D/+ being 'thin' .
Solution A
Benzo 0.2g
Metol 6g
Na Bisulfite 20g
Pyro 60g
EDTA 5g
Water 1 liter
Solution B
Na Carbonate 110g
Water 1 liter
Use Distilled water for mixing concentrates.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks