Come & get it. private message follows...
-
Welcome to Photrio!Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.Click here to sign up
What Happens When We Ultra-Dilute Pyrocat-HDC?
-
A
- Thread starter chuckroast
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale Fuji GW670 III
- Started by campy51
-
For Sale Hasselblad X Pan w/ 45mm/f4 Lens
- Started by eftones
-
For Sale 6 antique French pneumatic shutters _ Guerry
- Started by Manual Camera
-
For Sale Voigtländer Nokton Classic 35mm/1.4 with Leica M-mount
- Started by Klaus Mähring
-
For Sale Voigtländer Bessa R2 Special Edition Olive Green
- Started by Klaus Mähring
Forum statistics
Come & get it. private message follows...
Just to further annoy @koraks - more words with no pictures ...
I punched out some exposures on 35mm Lucky SHD 100 this past week because I wanted to process it in the ultra-dilute Pyrocat-HDC as I had done earlier with Fomapan 200. My interest is threefold; 1) Fompan 200 has very occasional emulsion issues - not enough to discard its use, but still annoying and 2) SHD is a very fined grained 100 speed film, and 3) is is about 1/3 the price of FP4+ or TMAX 100 bulk rolls.
I printed today and they images are just terrific. It confirms what I found with SHD 100 in 120 rollfilm - the quality seems excellent. Let's hope it's consistently so.
The only issue I saw was the negatives looked a bit weird in the non-exposed portions of the film - a kind of mottling and slight pinkish cast. This might have been an artifact of the ultra dilution, which I'd never done with this film to this degree. I ran an unexposed strip of film through a normal, strong developer and it cleared and washed normally, which gives credence to the theory that it reacts oddly to very high developer dilutions.
But man, oh, man are the negs and prints sharp and pretty much grainless. I shot the test roll with a Nikon F3 and a 28mm f/2.8 AIS lens and made sure to shoot into things that usually give 35mm fits - branches and power lines silhouetted against a bright sky. The film itself seems to be a fairly high resolution product, but combined with ultra-dilute processing it shows results approaching medium format - even sharper than the Fomapan 200 negs I displayed upthread.
Prints scans when they're dry.
P.S.This is so promising, I just ordered a bulk roll of SHD 100.
I punched out some exposures on 35mm Lucky SHD 100 this past week because I wanted to process it in the ultra-dilute Pyrocat-HDC as I had done earlier with Fomapan 200. My interest is threefold; 1) Fompan 200 has very occasional emulsion issues - not enough to discard its use, but still annoying and 2) SHD is a very fined grained 100 speed film, and 3) is is about 1/3 the price of FP4+ or TMAX 100 bulk rolls.
I printed today and they images are just terrific. It confirms what I found with SHD 100 in 120 rollfilm - the quality seems excellent. Let's hope it's consistently so.
The only issue I saw was the negatives looked a bit weird in the non-exposed portions of the film - a kind of mottling and slight pinkish cast. This might have been an artifact of the ultra dilution, which I'd never done with this film to this degree. I ran an unexposed strip of film through a normal, strong developer and it cleared and washed normally, which gives credence to the theory that it reacts oddly to very high developer dilutions.
But man, oh, man are the negs and prints sharp and pretty much grainless. I shot the test roll with a Nikon F3 and a 28mm f/2.8 AIS lens and made sure to shoot into things that usually give 35mm fits - branches and power lines silhouetted against a bright sky. The film itself seems to be a fairly high resolution product, but combined with ultra-dilute processing it shows results approaching medium format - even sharper than the Fomapan 200 negs I displayed upthread.
Prints scans when they're dry.
P.S.This is so promising, I just ordered a bulk roll of SHD 100.
Well, all this ultra-dilute HDC talk made me want to expose some of my bulk HR-50 and develop it in HDC 1+1+500. So, I did and was bummed out. I had left my fresh made Pcat-HDC downstate and only had a 2017 batch at the cottage. Make a long story short, it had gone South. This is the first time I have had any Pyrocat formula not work the way it should. Well, I just got done mixing a new batch for the cottage and will give it a go tomorrow.
I have never used any Lucky film, but it does sound interesting. Chuckroast, how is the quality control of lucky? Is it anything like Shanghai GP3? Hit and miss style.
I have never used any Lucky film, but it does sound interesting. Chuckroast, how is the quality control of lucky? Is it anything like Shanghai GP3? Hit and miss style.
So far it's been very good but that's based on a small sample size.
Yes, but I haven't really noticed very many people here on this forum complain about the Lucky film. I guess I'll have to try some in the future to see for myself. My camera is loaded with HR-50 and my batch of HDC is ready, but Mother Nature hasn't brought any sunshine here at the moment so I'm in a slight rain delay.
I suspect the reformulated Lucky is not yet widely used. So far, I've shot it in 120 with excellent results and 35mm as noted above.
Last edited:
How close do you get to the box speed with Lucky 100 in 120 with normal development in Pyrocat-HDC. At least in comparison to say, FP4+, Acros, Tmax 100, etc..
I don't know, since I've only done semistand or EMA with it so far. If it's like most films, it's likely about 1/2 box speed in normal development, or perhaps slightly faster.
OK, a couple of images from the 35mm Lucky SHD 100 processed in Pyrocat-HDC 1:1:500 @ EI 100, EMA for an hour. Scans of silver prints, post processed to try and replicate the print as best as possible:
[April 2026] Just Dozing
[April 2026] Just Dozing
[April 2026] Knock On Wood
For both prints, I argued with myself in the darkroom about whether they should be slightly brighter, and likely would do just that in an exhibition print ... slightly.
They look pretty good CR.... I know that quandary while standing in the darkroom looking at the wet print, though I think it would depend on how the gallery was lit.....?
Andrew O'Neill
Moderator
Coincidently, I have 10 rolls of SHD 120, on the way...
I'll be waiting to see how you like it in 120 Andy. I hope you do one of your excellent videos when you run Lucky SHD through the ringer
Andrew O'Neill
Moderator
I'll be waiting to see how you like it in 120 Andy. I hope you do one of your excellent videos when you run Lucky SHD through the ringer
Definitely will do a video... and I might test it using a particular camera...
Oh boy! That camera and Lucky ought to be a winning combo. As soon as your video comes out I'm running to Tim's and grabbing a coffee and at least three donuts. Waistline be damned!
Andrew O'Neill
Moderator
My MacBook died and I just bought a Dell with touch screen (first touchscreen for me). CR, when I touched the screen on the pictures above, I sliced my finger. Wow! It's still cloudy/overcast/sprinkles here so I'm still waiting to get out and burn the roll of HR-50 so I can try HDC 1+1+500 with that.
It will be interesting to see how/if the Adox film responds since it's already formulated as a fine grained, sharp film.
Note that I am doing this in the spirit of seeing what's possible with ultra-dilute EMA processing but it's not clear to me that I would want this to be my default. There is a point at which you can oversharpen something, just as one can do digitally. For example, a highly textured surface like a brick wall will look almost like a comic book drawing if you sharpen too much - analog or digital.
Nonetheless, it's worth knowing what the "edges" of the process are.
One thing of possible interest. I normally prewet film for 3 min prior to processing. The 35mm SHD 100 showed a surprising amount of anit-halation dye in solution when I dumped this out. Next time I will do second quick rinse before processing to ensure it's all gone.
As I noted upthread, the 35mm exhibited a kind of strange mottled look in the clear leader of the film and a sort of overall cast. It seems not to have affected the printability of the negs. I never saw this with 120, but I want to make sure that the residual dye isn't interfering given the extreme dilution I am using.
I realize you: A) Are using 120 and B) Are not doing super-dilution, so this is just FYI.
Andrew O'Neill
Moderator
Thanks for the heads up. I do occasionally use dilute HD and HDC, but is mainly been with sheet film.
The pontificator here is the one who has clearly not read the manufacturer's disclosed data, nor used enough of the material to verify it.
The lack of enhanced to 100%+ low frequency adjacency effects is in the MTF chart that's in most of the Foma 200 datasheets. It's really quite obvious if you use it alongside materials (e.g. Tmax 400) that are intended to enhance low frequency sharpness. It's a significant part of what makes people perceive Foma films as looking more 'vintage'.
If Microphen won't get adjacency effects at low frequencies from Foma 200, diluting it further or messing with isomers is not going to help. The dilution independent development-inhibition characteristic of PQ (as opposed to highly dilute metol) was one of many reasons the industry adopted PQ much more widely. The snake-oil stain of catechol has very little to do with the effect.
However, most of what you are really seeing is nothing to do with the developer/ agitation, and much much more to do with a lens designed for very good MTF performance, especially at low frequencies (I'd suggest that people mistakenly call it 'medium format look' because Zeiss pioneered prioritising MTF, and a lot of people's first contact with Zeiss glass was in medium format). The shift to MTF prioritisation by other manufacturers in the 1980s is quite noticeable. The vintage West German Zeiss Contax lenses from the 1950s balance the characteristics quite nicely.
So... no pictures?
Because you have made it repetitiously clear that indulging you further would be a pointless endeavour.
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |