2 bath film developers?

[cmacd123]

Never tried Diafine, partly because I habitually shoot at box speed, and would mess up if I had some rolls that had to be shot with underexposure.

I did buy a box of it, and read the instructions. Apparently the way it works is that the developing agents are in the first bath, and the activator is in the second. You will lose some of the first by carry out and you are to top up BOTH baths, discarding enough of the bath B so that you can put the same amount on both. No mater how much film you put through the first bath it does not develop there so the developing agents are not used there.

All in all interesting, I wonder if there is any easy to get set-up that gives good results at box speed. With the trouble buying raw chemicals I don't want to go back to mixing stuff from scratch.

 

[David Allen]

With Thornton's two-bath, I use part A for 30 rolls always make 10% more than you need for your tank as, over time there is a slight bit of carry over from bath A to bath B) and mix up two lots of part B and use them each for 15 rolls.

It probably could do a lot more but it is so simple and cheap to make so I have never risked more (taking chances with developing films is a false economy).

There are many other two-bath formulas (such as the one my father developed in the late 1970s and which was capable of 100s of rolls during his workshops) where you replenish part B and these last practically for ever. I switched to Thornton's a couple of years ago because tests showed me that it gave results that better suited my paper (Adox Fine Print Vario Classic) and developer (Dokumol 1 + 6) combination. Now that the Adox is out of production, I am currently testing Foma and Kentmere papers with well know negatives (developed in both my father's two-bath and Thornton's). The best final match will determine which two-bath I will use in the future.

What is clear is that I will continue using a two-bath developer for my films as it allows me to expose for the shadow value that I want (early morning light is pretty contrasty here in Berlin at the moment) with no concern about the highlights blowing out.

Best,

David
www.dsallen.de

 

[Adrian Twiss]

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.

 

[Roger Cole]

With Diafine I never bothered with the top off A and discard B. I just pour it back in the bottles and keep re-using. Capacity is about 60 rolls of 35mm per quart, really! But I play it safe and dump after about 50.

 

[grahamp]

I find that general solution loss out-paces exhaustion with Thornton's recipe. But I'm using a Jobo with Lift for roll film and 5x4, and that seems to keep more residual solution in the tank and pipes than a hand-stack. I am just happy that I have a developer I can have around that is not subject to supply variables. It may not be the optimum developer for all occasions, but for N. California (38 degrees N.) it seems to meet my general needs.

 

[Harry Lime]

Hallo again,

Any experiences on capacity or topping-up?

I mix BT2B in 1 liter batches and have settled on 15 rolls of 135 per mix.

The developer gets softer as you use it. I assume this is due to exhaustion of bath B.

 

[Slixtiesix]

Has anybody experience with Diafine and Perceptol and can tell me how they compare? Especially with PanF+, FP4+ and HP5+? I´m a great fan of Perceptol but the speed loss is annoying. I´ve read that speed is even increased with Diafine?

 

[Harry Lime]

Diafine will push Tri-X to 1000/1250/1600 with very good results. It's a proven combination and the two seem made for each other.
I've also shot Delta3200 @ 1600 in Diafine and was very happy with the results.

If you skew your exposure in favor of the shadows, the compensating action of the two-bath process does a really good job of protecting your highlights.

Diafine is not going to change the speed of your film, but will at the very least give you full box speed.

 

[pentaxuser]

If you skew your exposure in favor of the shadows, the compensating action of the two-bath process does a really good job of protecting your highlights.

Just as a form of confirmation of Harry's above point, I have been going through the 1981 version of Ansel Adams "The Negative" and he shows an example of a high contrast scene developed in HC110 and a two bath developer. The difference is astounding.

pentaxuser

 

[filmamigo]

Thanks for pointing out that example from Ansel, pentaxuser.

My 2008 printing of "The Negative" has those sample photos on page 229, under Water-bath And Two-Solution development.

Looking at these photos quickly puts to rest the question of "why 2-bath?"

 

[Roger Cole]

Diafine will push Tri-X to 1000/1250/1600 with very good results. It's a proven combination and the two seem made for each other.
I've also shot Delta3200 @ 1600 in Diafine and was very happy with the results.

If you skew your exposure in favor of the shadows, the compensating action of the two-bath process does a really good job of protecting your highlights.

Diafine is not going to change the speed of your film, but will at the very least give you full box speed.

It may not change the speed as measured at .1 over fb+f with a densitometer, but as you say it will give you a very effective push with most films and especially so with Tri-X and in my opinion I don't like Tri-X negatives, and some others, shot at box speed and developed in Diafine.

 

[doughowk]

For several years I've been using Rodinal/Adonal and have liked the results. However, many of the negatives have been difficult to print because of the extended density range. Even alt processes such as pt/pd have been a struggle. I recently started using Divided D23 with very good results. Here, in Florida, I normally have to deal with high contrast scenes and the compensating developer is a definite advantage. Btw, Steve Anchell's "Film Developer Cookbook" has 6 formulae variations for Divided D23.

 

[Jonathan R]

I have used 2-baths for years, for all the reasons already given. The one disadvantage I can see is a tendency to produce condensed muddy-looking mid-tones in return for great shadow detail and nicely restrained highlights. I used to use Emofin (with everything from Delta 100 to Delta 3200, and especially with Tri-X), but it is relatively expensive, a bit 'hot' when first mixed, and I don't know what's in it. So I switched to Barry Thornton's 2-bath, which I have used with HP5+ and FP4+. Take a look: http://photo.net/photos/Jonathan_Reynolds.


PS - I currently rate HP5+ at 640 ISO for BT2B. I used to rate Tri-X at 800 when using Emofin. These settings have worked very well for me. No change over box speed for slower or thinner emulsioned films.

 

[Sim2]

Hallo all,

Thanks for all the inputs here - all useful stuff.

I'm going to give 2 bath dev a try! Diafine seems difficult to get hold of in the U.K. and the Emofin seems a tad expensive and whilst the Barry Thornton formula is great to know that it exists, may well be not so brilliant as a test case as chems have to be measured/mixed etc. I know it's very easy but it is also a variable. So going to have a go with the Speedibrew mix and see how we go. Just going to have to duplicate some shots so I can see any difference between my usual ID11 and the different dev - fun times ahead!

Sim2.

 

[pdeeh]

Diafine seems difficult to get hold of in the U.K.

Diafine can be got from Mr Cad and Ag Photographic. But it's not cheap

 

[Dali]

Diafine can be got from Mr Cad and Ag Photographic. But it's not cheap

Yes but it lasts forever. So at the end of the day, it is cheap.

 

[Stephanie Brim]

The last time I bought Diafine, which was probably about 4 years ago, it was $20. I looked at the recent price and went, "Yup, time to try Pyro." Heh.

 

[LarryP]

yes the quart size has gone up a lot but the gallon size from freestyle isn't too bad. If you figure you can do 200 rolls it comes out to about 25 cents a roll not a give away but it's affordable.

 

[Roger Cole]

yes the quart size has gone up a lot but the gallon size from freestyle isn't too bad. If you figure you can do 200 rolls it comes out to about 25 cents a roll not a give away but it's affordable.

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.

 

[Harry Lime]

>Diafine seems difficult to get hold of in the U.K.

http://www.silverprint.co.uk/

 

[Jonathan R]

Hallo all,
...whilst the Barry Thornton formula is great to know that it exists, may well be not so brilliant as a test case as chems have to be measured/mixed etc. I know it's very easy but it is also a variable.
Sim2.

Don't be discouraged by that. It is also a very forgiving formula, so you almost cannot screw up. The only mildly dodgy thing is to avoid inhaling/touching/broadcasting the metol dust. An advantage of mixing your own is that you can very cheaply replace Bath B after 7 or 8 films. The whole mix is ridiculously cheap anyway. A further advantage for those of us living in chalk country (I am in Wiltshire too!) is that you can dissolve a few grammes of Calgon in the water before the other ingredients, to avoid limescale issues.

With any 2-bath formula, always filter chemicals out of the bottle and back in again. If you filter them in order of use you don't need to worry about cross-contamination. I use the simple Paterson filter, and line up the two dev baths and the fixer in labelled beakers ready to grab. They go back into the same beakers after use, and are filtered back into the bottles when I tidy up You don't need to measure out the volumes carefully out of the bottle.

Acid stop baths react dramatically with some 2 bath formulae, depending on the alkali used. I don't use a stop-bath for film any longer, I just fill a beaker with filtered tap water at room temperature.

There was some anxiety that thin emulsion films wouldn't carry enough developer to allow the 2-bath principle to work. My experience is that actually 2-baths are perfectly OK with thin-emulsion films like Delta 100, but they produce their gorgeous best with old-fashioned emulsions like Tri-X, HP5+, FP4+.

 

[Harry Lime]

There was some anxiety that thin emulsion films wouldn't carry enough developer to allow the 2-bath principle to work. My experience is that actually 2-baths are perfectly OK with thin-emulsion films like Delta 100, but they produce their gorgeous best with old-fashioned emulsions like Tri-X, HP5+, FP4+.

I agree having shot hundreds of rolls of the new TMY-2 400 and souped them in BT2B. If anything I would say that the 2 bath process tamed a lot of the contrast issues I had with TMY-2 400 and made shooting with it a lot more forgiving.

 

[Sim2]

Hallo all, again,

Houston we are go! Placed an order for the Speedibrews 2 bath dev - testing beckons! Thanks for the encouragement with BT formula, it's good to know it's there and may well edge my way towards it when I know what to expect from a "pre-mixed" bundle of chems - eliminating the variables and all that. Sounds like 2bath may well be another string to the bow, when needed. Looking forward to seeing some results.
Cheers for all the input.
Sim2.

 

[drkhalsa]

Good to hear!

 

[Richard Man]

If you do your post processing digitally, then 2-bath is also a great way to tame the varying contrast in rollfilms. Google Sandy King and 2-bath Pyrocat and you will see a few threads here and there, including on APUG.

I have used it with great success with my 35mm XPan negatives and now also 617 negs. It makes the negs fairly flat which is great for digital manipulation.

Couple samples: