2 bath film developers?

Patrick Robert James · Oct 24, 2012

I realize this will cause a riff in the lovefest going on here for two bath developers but my advice is if you are going into the darkroom with the neg don't buy the hype. Two bath developers in my experience have many problems including compression of the midtones into muddiness and uneven development. My advice would be to skip them. It isn't worth the trouble unless you are dealing with a situation that is at the edge of what is possible with film, i.e. a staining developer won't work and neither will a real stand developer like FX-2. People who scan their negs will disagree with me but you can roll a dog turd in powdered sugar and make a doughnut out of it if you use a computer....

For anyone who disagrees with me on this, answer one question- name a famous photograph that was produced from a negative developed in a two bath developer......

Jonathan R · Oct 24, 2012

Patrick Robert James said:
I realize this will cause a riff in the lovefest going on here for two bath developers but my advice is if you are going into the darkroom with the neg don't buy the hype. Two bath developers in my experience have many problems including compression of the midtones into muddiness and uneven development. My advice would be to skip them. It isn't worth the trouble unless you are dealing with a situation that is at the edge of what is possible with film, i.e. a staining developer won't work and neither will a real stand developer like FX-2. People who scan their negs will disagree with me but you can roll a dog turd in powdered sugar and make a doughnut out of it if you use a computer....

For anyone who disagrees with me on this, answer one question- name a famous photograph that was produced from a negative developed in a two bath developer......

PRJ, I have had enough darkroom frustration to appreciate what you are saying. No irrational love-fest for me. All the same, computer manipulation can only work on detail that is there in the first place. Many or most subjects have a contrast range that must be compressed somewhere to be recorded on film. Most of us shoot many different kinds of subject on one roll of film, and you cannot adjust your development to suit them all. Despite the mid-tone issue, 2-baths are a workable compromise. Highlights are compressed more than mid-tones, and this makes the extreme highlights (clouds, street lamps, specular reflections) much more printable (and scannable).

For 35mm at least, uneven development is really not an issue once you have found the limits of stand-time and standardised your technique.

I don't know about famous photographs, but I was pleased with this one: unplanned, natural window light, only time for 3 frames, lots of very different stuff on the same roll - and yes, it does print straightforwardly.

Roger Cole · Oct 24, 2012

Patrick Robert James said:
I realize this will cause a riff in the lovefest going on here for two bath developers but my advice is if you are going into the darkroom with the neg don't buy the hype. Two bath developers in my experience have many problems including compression of the midtones into muddiness and uneven development. My advice would be to skip them. It isn't worth the trouble unless you are dealing with a situation that is at the edge of what is possible with film, i.e. a staining developer won't work and neither will a real stand developer like FX-2. People who scan their negs will disagree with me but you can roll a dog turd in powdered sugar and make a doughnut out of it if you use a computer....

For anyone who disagrees with me on this, answer one question- name a famous photograph that was produced from a negative developed in a two bath developer......

It isn't any "trouble." They are easier than single solution developers. With Diafine at least I find I need to print on about grade 3, which is fine with me, and printed on VC paper with a grade 3, occasionally 3.5, filter the midtones look fine. I have never seen uneven development from it.

You don't like them, fine, don't use them. I don't "love" them but I do like them and use them sometimes.

removed account4 · Oct 24, 2012

i have started to use a 2 bath developer for both film and prints ...
i use sumatranol 130 and ansco 130
it works great.
i start things off in the soft working developer ( sum130 )
and boost the contrast and grain in the hard developer ( a130 )
much better than other developers i have used, and economical, they last forever.

Harry Lime · Oct 24, 2012

Patrick Robert James said:
For anyone who disagrees with me on this, answer one question- name a famous photograph that was produced from a negative developed in a two bath developer......

Prior to and through WWII the Stoekler two bath was widely used. Obviously after all these years, no one can tell exactly which shot was developed how. Divided D23 was very popular with a lot of large format shooters. I want to say that Ansel Adams, Weston and others used DD23, but would have to verify that information to be sure.

I agree that under certain lighting conditions the mid tones may get a little muddy. I noticed this in particular with Diafine, but thinking back on the lighting in those shots, it really was flat in the middle.

BT2B seems to be much less susceptible to this. But I feel that the advantages of 2bath developers outweigh the negatives.

Jonathan R · Oct 24, 2012

Patrick Robert James said:
For anyone who disagrees with me on this, answer one question- name a famous photograph that was produced from a negative developed in a two bath developer......

Come to think of it, we must know this for many of Barry Thornton's photographs (if fame is a function of technical virtuosity).

Sim2 · Oct 24, 2012

Ho hum good news/ bad news,

Inspite of it being on the website the Speedibrews mix is no longer available - grrrrr. So.... getting the ingredients for the Barry Thorntons formula instead! I've only really mixed pre-packaged or simple chems before - any advice on mixing this formula? i.e. temps/order of chems or general advice (and no I don't intend to sniff/lick or dip my food into the raw chems! )

Patrick Robert James said:
Two bath developers in my experience have many problems including compression of the midtones into muddiness and ....

Oh. In my experience a -1 or -2 dev on the zone system will compress the mid-tones too but it is a viable process to use. What I am looking for/hoping for with the 2 bath system is getting a possibly compromised but useable neg from a mixed roll where the neg probably would have been sacrificed to the "correct" zone dev for another (possibly first) neg. No magic bullet but perhaps another string to the bow - we shall see!

Sim2.

Roger Cole · Oct 24, 2012

It will compress the midtones in the sense it will result in less overall contrast. The reduction tends to be most in the highlights, less in the midtones, and least of all (none) in the shadows. That's the whole idea of compensating development. This also allows a very active formula (Diafine, maybe others discussed here) to get a touch more effective speed without building excess overall and, especially, highlight contrast.

There's nothing else all that special, either good or bad, about the relatively low contrast. Just print on a harder paper and your midtones will look normal. You CAN print on a harder paper and get the midtones where you want them without blowing out the highlights because they are lowered more in contrast.

Jonathan R · Oct 24, 2012

Sim2 said:
Ho hum good news/ bad news,

- any advice on mixing this formula? i.e. temps/order of chems or general advice

Sim2.

mix in this order:

Bath A
600-700 ml water @ 30-40 deg C
2g Calgon
pinch of the sodium sulphite
6.5 g metol (make sure it's fully dissolved b4 next step. BT himself changed this to 6.5 g from 6.25)
85 g sodium sulphite
water to 1 litre

Bath B
2g calgon
12 g sodium metaborate
water to 1 litre

Have fun!

J.

pdeeh · Oct 24, 2012

is that Calgon as in what you put in the dishwasher?

Sim2 · Oct 24, 2012

What does the Calgon add to the mix/do? It is not listed as an ingredient at the BT site.

Roger Cole · Oct 24, 2012

Roger Cole said:
Freestyle only has the gallons. Other places I've seen it (B&H doesn't count unless you are in NYC as they won't ship it) seem to only have the quarts, and it costs as much or nearly so as the Freestyle gallon. I have a gallon mixed, another gallon unopened, and the way the price is going and considering how many other valued materials we've lost I'm tempted to order another gallon every time I order from Freestyle until I have a few in stock. It comes in metal cans so it should last practically forever as powder. Yes, it lasts a long time but does eventually need to be discarded. I figure a few gallons would set me for life.

I just checked and see that Badger now has the gallons much cheaper than Freestyle, and the quarts for less than half the Freestyle gallon. Good to know there's a cheaper source that will ship, and that quarts are no longer prohibitively expensive, even though I have a mixed gallon and one unopened gallon.

Gerald C Koch · Oct 24, 2012

Calgon (sodium hexametaphosphate) is a sequestering agent and prevents calcium salts from precipitating when tap water is used. You can omit it if you use distilled/de-ionized water.

In the above formula some development will occur in bath A. Therefore time and temperature must be observed. In a true two bath developer the pH of bath A is below 7 and no development will take place until the film is transfered to bath B.

Sim2 · Oct 25, 2012

Gerald C Koch said:
Calgon (sodium hexametaphosphate) is a sequestering agent and prevents calcium salts from precipitating when tap water is used. You can omit it if you use distilled/de-ionized water.

Doh! Amended my order and it's on it's way now - without calgon! Oh well, there's always next time... Thanks for the explanation though, good to know why these things are in the mix. Chem mixing beckons at the weekend now.

Sim2.

pdeeh · Oct 25, 2012

Sim2, if you're near a Robert Dyas (which you should be, in Wiltshire) they have an offer on for deionized water - 2 gallons for £6.50 - which if used for making up the developer I presume would obviate the need for Calgon.

Sim2 · Oct 25, 2012

Thanks for the heads-up.

Sim2 · Oct 27, 2012

We're all mixed up!

Ta Da!

Thought that I would let you good people know that I have made my first batch of the BT 2-bath dev today! Went surprisingly well, even remembered to check the battery in the scales before going shopping - yes, needed new battery. Used de-ionised water from our "friends" at tesco.

Both baths are "cooling" down now - may dev tomorrow but most likely during next week.

Thanks for the advice and encouragement.

Sim2.

ParkerSmithPhoto · Oct 29, 2012

Barry Thornton Two Bath developer questions

I just ordered the goodies for BT2B from Photo Formulary. It's about $42 with shipping, and should make at least 6 liters.

On Barry's website, he says about BT2B "What two bath development does is to try and compensate for these variables in each individual negative automatically to produce full toned negatives that print more easily for high quality. This means that a negative of a low contrast subject continues to develop up to produce a good printing contrast, while, more importantly, negatives of high contrast subjects have the highlights held back while the shadows continue to be built up so that detail can be printed easily at both ends of the scale."

I tend to shoot a lot of overcast skies; it's better psychologically for my images to have sheer gray than fluffy white clouds.

Do the BT2B users find that it does give a little more contrast on flat days? That would be an exciting development, so to speak.

Also, how do the Barry Thornton Two Bath developer users rate their films? With Diafine and XTOL, I've always worked at box speed. Does the standard Zone System exposure increase for Zone III (ie. expose ISO 400 film at 200) apply with this developer, or does that somehow not apply?

Also, last question, Thornton recommends little to no agitation in Bath B. With Diafine, I've always given 5 sec per minute in both baths. Any thoughts on how that may affect development with BT2B?

Thanks!

ParkerSmithPhoto · Oct 29, 2012

Adrian Twiss said:
I have also used Barry Thorntons 2 bath with success. In his book edge of darkness Barry suggested three different strengths of solution B for varying light conditions viz: -

For high SBR 7g of Sodium Metaborate per litre of water
For average SBR 12g of Sodium Metaborate per litre of water
For low SBR 20g of Sodium Metaborate per litre of water.

This is very interesting. Can you elaborate on this? I can't find the book at a reasonable price.

David Allen · Oct 29, 2012

ParkerSmithPhoto said:
I just ordered the goodies for BT2B from Photo Formulary. It's about $42 with shipping, and should make at least 6 liters.

On Barry's website, he says about BT2B "What two bath development does is to try and compensate for these variables in each individual negative automatically to produce full toned negatives that print more easily for high quality. This means that a negative of a low contrast subject continues to develop up to produce a good printing contrast, while, more importantly, negatives of high contrast subjects have the highlights held back while the shadows continue to be built up so that detail can be printed easily at both ends of the scale."

I tend to shoot a lot of overcast skies; it's better psychologically for my images to have sheer gray than fluffy white clouds.

Do the BT2B users find that it does give a little more contrast on flat days? That would be an exciting development, so to speak.

Also, how do the Barry Thornton Two Bath developer users rate their films? With Diafine and XTOL, I've always worked at box speed. Does the standard Zone System exposure increase for Zone III (ie. expose ISO 400 film at 200) apply with this developer, or does that somehow not apply?

Also, last question, Thornton recommends little to no agitation in Bath B. With Diafine, I've always given 5 sec per minute in both baths. Any thoughts on how that may affect development with BT2B?

Thanks!

I have always found that, with my equipment (Mamiya 7 with 65mm lens), my film (Delta 400), my way of exposing (Weston Master used to meter the darkest shadows where I want detail) and BTTB developer, that my personal EI is 200.

My personal processing times are 5.5 in each bath (using the standard variant: BATH A | Metol- 6.5gr | Soduim Sulfite (Natriumsulfit) - 85 gr | Water to make 1 liter | BATH B | Sodium Metaborate (Natriummetaborat) - 12gr | Water to make 1 liter) with constant agitation for the first 30 seconds in each bath and then one gentle inversion every 30 seconds.

For the past 10 years I have found the developer to be perfect for my way of working. All of the images on my website were done using the combination described above. However, as you will see, my work depends upon the interplay of strong shadows and I have not used this combination on days with flat lighting.

A friend of mine who likes a softer result than I do uses the standard variant for most of his work and the 20g Sodium Metaborate (Natriummetaborat) variant for duller days. His work is very consistent and I would certainly try this variant if my shooting style changed to preferring softer lighting.

Best,

David
www.dsallen.de

David Allen · Oct 29, 2012

ParkerSmithPhoto said:
This is very interesting. Can you elaborate on this? I can't find the book at a reasonable price.

The reference is to how you mix bath B:

For extremely contrasty scenes mix 7g of Sodium Metaborate per litre of water (I have never found a situation where I needed to use this)
For contrasty to average scenes mix 12g of Sodium Metaborate per litre of water (this is all I have used for the past 10 years)
For low contrast scenes mix 20g of Sodium Metaborate per litre of water (I have never used this as I do not photograph very flatly lit scenes).

Best,

David
www,dsallen.de

ParkerSmithPhoto · Oct 29, 2012

David Allen said:
All of the images on my website were done using the combination described above. However, as you will see, my work depends upon the interplay of strong shadows and I have not used this combination on days with flat lighting.

A friend of mine who likes a softer result than I do uses the standard variant for most of his work and the 20g Sodium Metaborate (Natriummetaborat) variant for duller days. His work is very consistent and I would certainly try this variant if my shooting style changed to preferring softer lighting.

That's very nice work, David. Thanks for the feedback. Are these all silver prints or are you using another process? Using your method, do you find that most of your work fits into a Grade 2 or 3?

If your friend has a website, I'd like to check that out as well.

Thanks again.

jim appleyard · Oct 29, 2012

ParkerSmithPhoto;1412333 Also said:
I can only comment on your last question. I use the standard variant as does Dave Allen as my favorite light is contrasty. I usually shoot at an EI of 1/2 box speed, except for MF Pan-F which I shoot at an EI of 20; 35mm PF gets EI 50.

I give A bath an initial 30 sec. agitation, follwed by 5 sec. ea. min. B bath gets an initial 30 sec. agitation folowed by 1 inversion ea. min.

Depending on the film, I go for 4-5 min. for each bath. YMMV as do meters, methods of agitation, etc.

David Allen · Oct 29, 2012

ParkerSmithPhoto said:
That's very nice work, David. Thanks for the feedback. Are these all silver prints or are you using another process? Using your method, do you find that most of your work fits into a Grade 2 or 3?

If your friend has a website, I'd like to check that out as well.

Thanks again.

Thanks for the kind comments about my work.

All my work is traditionally produced using fibre based silver gelatine paper lightly toned with Selenium.

All of my work prints easily on Grade 3 using an Ilford Multigrade diffusion light source. However, I tend to print a bit harder with some slight dodging of the shadows as I prefer the micro-contrast this gives to the shadows.

I am pretty much of a dinosaur myself and have only had a website since March this year. Unfortunately, my friend is still living in a pre-computer world.

Best,

David
www.dsallen.de

Best,

ParkerSmithPhoto · Oct 30, 2012

David Allen said:
All my work is traditionally produced using fibre based silver gelatine paper lightly toned with Selenium.

All of my work prints easily on Grade 3 using an Ilford Multigrade diffusion light source. However, I tend to print a bit harder with some slight dodging of the shadows as I prefer the micro-contrast this gives to the shadows.

Very impressive. I can see your highlights are well under control, so I'm very excited to test this developer. I like Diafine as well, but the advantage of some contrast control in the B bath is significant.

2 bath film developers?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency