510 Pyro and Pyrocat HD, is there really a difference?

pentaxuser said:

Isn't the OP asking about differences between 510 Pyro and Pyrocat HD so what's the relevance of PMK, other than it is another staining developer that is different from the two the OP want to know about ?

pentaxuser

Click to expand...

Because 510 stains and prints more like PMK than does HD. It's just a point of reference from those of us who have used all three.

One of thing that commends 510 (and why I have "fixins'" here for it) is that it handles big SBRs much like PMK - that is to say, it manages highlights very well - but works much better than PMK with 35mm wherein grain can become an issue.

As noted upthread, HD[C] doesn't shoulder off highlights anywhere near as much so big SBRs have to managed more carefully.

Just from my very limited playing with 510-pyro I think it handles highlights (reins them in) a little better than Pyrocat-HDC. I should also add that I am using the old 510-pyro recipe that called for .25g of phenidone and not the newer .375 phenidone one.

When I anticipate developing in 510-Pyro, I meter for detailed shadows in Zone III, then take the shot. I never worry about the high end because I know 510 can handle it. However, if I'm planning to develop in Pyrocat-HD (never used the C variant) I place my shadows as before, but I'll also spot meter around the scene to determine SBR. Neither is more cumbersome to use, rather it's nice to have options when out in the field.

Alan9940 said:

When I anticipate developing in 510-Pyro, I meter for detailed shadows in Zone III, then take the shot. I never worry about the high end because I know 510 can handle it. However, if I'm planning to develop in Pyrocat-HD (never used the C variant) I place my shadows as before, but I'll also spot meter around the scene to determine SBR. Neither is more cumbersome to use, rather it's nice to have options when out in the field.

Click to expand...

Both are very good developers and you won't go wrong using either one. Both are also good for stand and semi-stand developing, if you are into that.

tykos said:

after some problems with bad chemicals, i finally have a working pyrocat-hdc.
When wet printing i'm finding that the contrast is really low (landscapes, pretty normal contrast scenes), too much to obtain a decent print, with no local contrast in the midtones.
Is it me or it's more suitable for very high contrast scenes?

Click to expand...

T, i can't offer a solution other than what's been said about exposure & agitation. But i've used Pyrocat since it was introduced (before that i used PMK) & it is my standard developer for anything. Here are two examples of Tmax (400 & 100) w yellow filter processed in Pyrocat HD and wet printed. Lots of mid tone separation.

GregY said:

T, i can't offer a solution other than what's been said about exposure & agitation. But i've used Pyrocat since it was introduced & it is my standard developer for anything. Here are two examples of Tmax (100 & 400)View attachment 415742 w yellow filter processed in Pyrocat HD and wet printed. Lots of mid tone separation.
View attachment 415741

Click to expand...

Greg,
That ought to answer any questions as to whether or not Pyrocat-HD is any good or not. That said, I bet you'd do well with 510-pyro also. Love that mountain scene! One thing we lack in Michigan is mountains. Plenty of water, but no real mountains.

chuckroast said:

Very much consistent with my own findings, but PMK has two drawbacks in my exprience: It's too grainy for 35mm, and you cannot use it for semistand/EMA extended development because it oxidizes too fast and develops unevenly if it's not agitated a lot.

Click to expand...

I have zero issues with PMK for 35mm but I typically use Rodinal for 35mm. I also haven't found a need for semistand developing either. One of the major benefits of staining/tanning developers is the highlights tend to take care of themselves. I don't think I've ever had a neg that had blown highlights with PMK/Pyrocat.