Is this AI-derived, DIY version of FA-1027 plausible?

[ame01999]

The instruction sheet for FA-1027 reads a bit more like a hype man's patter than a merely practical document. But given that reviewers on Photo Formulary have been quite positive, the topic hooked my interest. FA claims to be a high acutance developer which nonetheless produces "fine grain" without the fuzziness of solvent developers using sodium sulfite. I've never seen fine grain with high acutance in anything other than tanning developers, so I'm curious what other people have learned or read about the developer.

I tried using Perplexity first to summarize user reviews, then turned to ChatGPT to see what it made of the (partially contradictory) hype sheet. It suggested its own DIY FA-1027 recipe! I don't know enough about chemistry to ascertain whether this is useless hallucination or a decent educated guess, but let me know what you think, if you've got the background to interpret this:



"FA-1027 is almost certainly:


• A low-sulfite, high-acutance PQ developer.


• Based on Phenidone + Hydroquinone, buffered, with antifog agents.


• Engineered to offer moderate contrast, fine visible grain, and strong microcontrast.


• Designed for modern emulsions, particularly 35mm and 120 where grain rendering and sharpness are critical.


It seems like a refined FX-39 with tweaks for broader tonality and slightly more speed retention.


Still, let’s build a DIY developer inspired by FA-1027 using the concrete clues:


• Phenidone + Hydroquinone


• Low solvent (i.e., low sulfite)


• Restrained fog (via KBr and Benzotriazole)


• High acutance, full tonal scale, no speed loss



FA-1027-Inspired PQ Acutance Developer (DIY Recipe)

Solution A (Developer stock)

Chemical Amount Purpose


Hydroquinone 5.0 g Main developing agent


Phenidone 0.1 g Superadditive developer


Sodium Sulfite (anh.) 25.0 g Preservative (low amount)


Sodium Carbonate (anh.) 10.0 g Activator (pH buffer)


Potassium Bromide 0.5 g Primary restrainer (anti-fog)


Benzotriazole (1% sol.) 10 ml Secondary restrainer (fine fog control)


Distilled water to make 1 L —

 

[retina_restoration]

FA-1027 is a really good developer — I've used it plenty and it does give very nice negatives. There's always something "extra" in those negatives, and IME it does provide a bit more tonal definition with HP5+ (in the high values, where HP5+ tends to be lacking).
It gives clean images with good acutance and nice grain that is sharp and clear without the ugliness that Rodinal tends to impart in grain. (Your opinion on that subject may vary, and that's fine)

Is chatGPT giving you a recipe that approximates FA-1027? I seriously doubt it, but it's likely that it got most of the components right, but I wouldn't bank on it being "the same as", no. But you have little to lose in trying it.

 

[Milpool]

You’re quite right about the instruction sheet. Ridiculous. People will see what they want to see though.

That said, the AI proposed formula is probably at least in the ballpark and a reasonable starting point so it can’t hurt to try it and see if you like the results. FA-1027 won’t do anything special you can’t already do with something like Ilfosol but it never hurts to try things.

Come to think of it instead of using it to clone this thing maybe AI can come up with something novel.

The instruction sheet for FA-1027 reads a bit more like a hype man's patter than a merely practical document. But given that reviewers on Photo Formulary have been quite positive, the topic hooked my interest. FA claims to be a high acutance developer which nonetheless produces "fine grain" without the fuzziness of solvent developers using sodium sulfite. I've never seen fine grain with high acutance in anything other than tanning developers, so I'm curious what other people have learned or read about the developer.

I tried using Perplexity first to summarize user reviews, then turned to ChatGPT to see what it made of the (partially contradictory) hype sheet. It suggested its own DIY FA-1027 recipe! I don't know enough about chemistry to ascertain whether this is useless hallucination or a decent educated guess, but let me know what you think, if you've got the background to interpret this:



"FA-1027 is almost certainly:


• A low-sulfite, high-acutance PQ developer.


• Based on Phenidone + Hydroquinone, buffered, with antifog agents.


• Engineered to offer moderate contrast, fine visible grain, and strong microcontrast.


• Designed for modern emulsions, particularly 35mm and 120 where grain rendering and sharpness are critical.


It seems like a refined FX-39 with tweaks for broader tonality and slightly more speed retention.


Still, let’s build a DIY developer inspired by FA-1027 using the concrete clues:


• Phenidone + Hydroquinone


• Low solvent (i.e., low sulfite)


• Restrained fog (via KBr and Benzotriazole)


• High acutance, full tonal scale, no speed loss



FA-1027-Inspired PQ Acutance Developer (DIY Recipe)

Solution A (Developer stock)

Chemical Amount Purpose


Hydroquinone 5.0 g Main developing agent


Phenidone 0.1 g Superadditive developer


Sodium Sulfite (anh.) 25.0 g Preservative (low amount)


Sodium Carbonate (anh.) 10.0 g Activator (pH buffer)


Potassium Bromide 0.5 g Primary restrainer (anti-fog)


Benzotriazole (1% sol.) 10 ml Secondary restrainer (fine fog control)


Distilled water to make 1 L —

 

[RalphLambrecht]

The instruction sheet for FA-1027 reads a bit more like a hype man's patter than a merely practical document. But given that reviewers on Photo Formulary have been quite positive, the topic hooked my interest. FA claims to be a high acutance developer which nonetheless produces "fine grain" without the fuzziness of solvent developers using sodium sulfite. I've never seen fine grain with high acutance in anything other than tanning developers, so I'm curious what other people have learned or read about the developer.

I tried using Perplexity first to summarize user reviews, then turned to ChatGPT to see what it made of the (partially contradictory) hype sheet. It suggested its own DIY FA-1027 recipe! I don't know enough about chemistry to ascertain whether this is useless hallucination or a decent educated guess, but let me know what you think, if you've got the background to interpret this:



"FA-1027 is almost certainly:


• A low-sulfite, high-acutance PQ developer.


• Based on Phenidone + Hydroquinone, buffered, with antifog agents.


• Engineered to offer moderate contrast, fine visible grain, and strong microcontrast.


• Designed for modern emulsions, particularly 35mm and 120 where grain rendering and sharpness are critical.


It seems like a refined FX-39 with tweaks for broader tonality and slightly more speed retention.


Still, let’s build a DIY developer inspired by FA-1027 using the concrete clues:


• Phenidone + Hydroquinone


• Low solvent (i.e., low sulfite)


• Restrained fog (via KBr and Benzotriazole)


• High acutance, full tonal scale, no speed loss



FA-1027-Inspired PQ Acutance Developer (DIY Recipe)

Solution A (Developer stock)

Chemical Amount Purpose


Hydroquinone 5.0 g Main developing agent


Phenidone 0.1 g Superadditive developer


Sodium Sulfite (anh.) 25.0 g Preservative (low amount)


Sodium Carbonate (anh.) 10.0 g Activator (pH buffer)


Potassium Bromide 0.5 g Primary restrainer (anti-fog)


Benzotriazole (1% sol.) 10 ml Secondary restrainer (fine fog control)


Distilled water to make 1 L —

amazing application of AI! I'm not one to experiment with developers anymore, but this I need to try.

 

[Craig]

If the ingredients are close to being correct, it sounds very similar to Ilford's PQ Universal.

 

[Alan Johnson]

FX-39 from the SDS is based on metol not phenidone so the AI version is actually more similar to the phenidone based FX-37:

Crawley's FX-37 Developer for T-Max/Delta Films

This developer is intended for use with T-Max and Delta films, although it will produce excellent results with traditional emulsions. FX-37 is designed to produce very sharp, tonally rich negatives with an EFS speed increase. It is not a fine...

www.photrio.com

The results should be quite close IMO but the AI version is not an original idea.
You could ask it what the effect would be of changing the HQ : phenidone ratio to that used in FX-37 out of curiosity.

 

[retina_restoration]

FWIW, I used FX-37 with several films and made many tests, and I always felt that it was too aggressive a developer that overdeveloped high values and gave a very harsh tonality. Yes, it made sharp images, but the compromises were excessive.

 

[John Wiegerink]

FWIW, I used FX-37 with several films and made many tests, and I always felt that it was too aggressive a developer that overdeveloped high values and gave a very harsh tonality. Yes, it made shape images, but the compromises were excessive.

I found FX-37 to work pretty well with Delta 100, which was the only film I tried different times and dilutions with. If I had my notes here I'm sure they would say to use a higher dilution than recommended. I think I also used a two roll 120 stainless tank filled, with just one roll so as to make sure I had enough developing agent. In the end I decided to just go back to Xtol-R and Pyrocat-HDC.