The MSDS generally gives some clues. But not all will be inclined to dive into them. More importantly, I doubt if the >2 developer agent criterion makes much sense.
The MSDS generally gives some clues. But not all will be inclined to dive into them. More importantly, I doubt if the >2 developer agent criterion makes much sense.And how does the OP know how many developing agents are there in a commercial package?
With regard to films, there is clearly a big difference how a film would perform in, say, D-76 stock. Films like Rollei Retro 80S and 400S, Agfa Copex Rapid, Adox CMS 20 and a few others are technical films, they will be essentially ruined if developed in D-76, while "traditional" continuous tone films like FP4, Agfa APX, Rollei RPX, Kentmere (ISO 100) and HP5, Tri-X, Kentmere 400 will perform very well in D-76, even better in 1:1 dilution of it.
Don't use Pan F for a one photo a week time lapse project.
YAWN ... not really, maybe read what I usually write ?? Didn't the OP ask for Opinions and Experiences?XTOL bigot! Never misses a chance to dis XTOL
No. It's all silver based. Any developer in principle will work with any film, personal taste and purpose aside.Are there any other combinations that are chemically incompatible?
Pixophrenic, my question was somewhat tongue in cheek because with every thread like this, my experience is that most of the answers quickly become tongue in cheek. At least you have made an attempt to summarise as far as that is possible what might be OK and not-so-OK combinations in your experience in terms of film groups and developers.
I have no idea how experienced Waffles is nor how experienced he is in the "ways of Photrio " when it comes to these kind of questions but we certainly need to ask ourselves how much our answers are an attempt to satisfy and help the OP and how much they are an attempt to satisfy ourselves.
pentaxuser
Props to you for actually answering my question and staying on topic
So far we have:
1. Don't mix low-speed films (RPX 25, Pan F+ 50, etc) with high-sulphite developers (Xtol, Microphen, etc)
2. Don't mix high-grain films (UltraFine 400, Arista 400, etc) with high-accutance developers (Rodinal, R09, etc)
3. Don't mix technical films (Retro 80, CMX 20, etc) with MQ developers (D-76, ID-11, etc)
Are there any other combinations that are chemically incompatible? For right now, lets avoid the esoteric and alternative processes and stick to what you can usually find in your average camera shop
So far we have:
1. Don't mix low-speed films (RPX 25, Pan F+ 50, etc) with high-sulphite developers (Xtol, Microphen, etc)
2. Don't mix high-grain films (UltraFine 400, Arista 400, etc) with high-accutance developers (Rodinal, R09, etc)
3. Don't mix technical films (Retro 80, CMX 20, etc) with MQ developers (D-76, ID-11, etc)
I wouldn't agree with the first two.
The first one relates to a subjective choice. If you are looking for a certain very smooth appearance (baby photos come to mind), high sulphite developers are excellent.
The second one is also quite subjective (and I don't think Rodinal is technically a high-accutance developer). If you are looking for the atmosphere that goes with grit and grain, then those combinations are perfect, and you get better apparent sharpness as a bonus.
As for number 3, the technical films aren't really designed for normal continuous tone results, so in order to re-purpose them for that use, you need to use special developers.
If the initial question had made reference to particular sorts of characteristics - something like "If I wish to achieve high resolution results, what combinations of film and developer should I avoid?" - then the combinations you refer to above make total sense. The problem is that while one photographer is looking for resolution, the next is looking for sharpness, the third is looking for subtle tonal gradation and the fourth is looking for speed enhancement, and all of them may need different combinations to meet there needs.
Props to you for actually answering my question and staying on topic
So far we have:
1. Don't mix low-speed films (RPX 25, Pan F+ 50, etc) with high-sulphite developers (Xtol, Microphen, etc)
I beg to differ. I've done a fair amount of Pan-F in Microdol-X and it's worked well. Photos are of a burned stump in the High Peaks of the Adirondacks from the fires of the early 20th century.
It is very difficult to say that a combination film-developer will not work.There’s at least 100 threads on this forum asking what the best developer is for such-and-such film, or what the best film is for this-and-that developer. But it seems there is no consensus and everything is in the eye of the beholder (with probably a healthy dose of superstition/witchcraft involved too!)
I’m curious if there are any film/developer combinations that *objectively* don’t make sense, from a chemistry point of view ... so that I can try everything else without wasting time or money beating a dead horse
For example, I’ve been told that Ilford Pan F+ and Kodak Xtol don’t interact well, because the high sulfite content of Xtol will slow the developing time of Pan F+ so much that you lose a lot of the benefits of a slow-speed, fine grain film.
Rodinal stand has it's place.
I've been shooting a lot of 16mm Kodak Microfilm. Rodinal 1:150 for two hours gives excellent tones and results. Otherwise I get high contrast with no grey tones.
Kodak Instamatic 60, Kodak Microfilm rated at ISO 25 more or less, Rodinal 1:150ish two hours stand.
This was a test, ignoring the dirt, grit and scratches I managed to get decent tones out of a toneless film.
That being said, Rodinal and most films don't play very well unless you love grain. At least in 35mm.
That looks quite good. How do you get the film into the cartridges?
And i agree, stand development has its place. In my case, semi-stand development, 1h 1:100 Rodinal, 20°C, 1minute initial agitation, then 4 inversions at 20m and 40m gave me results i like with Adox CMSII 20 (120) exposed at EI12.
getting back to your main question, its kind of a weird one because everyone seems to be a fanboy or fangirl of their favorite developers and films and it ends up being a pie throwing contest if someone says something bad about someone's favorite combination ( as you have seen )
I really don't think there are any film and developer combinations to avoid, most developers are pretty much the same to tell you the truth just avoid being part of the "flavor of the month club", that is using a different roll of film every time you make photographs, and a different developer every time you develop your film. One of the best ways to learn photography, is to use 1 general purpose film, like tri x or hp5+ or whatever, and 1 developer like d76 or ID11, or sprint, or HC110 or whatever, and maybe 1 camera and use it and use it and use it and use it until you know what is going to happen before you develop the film, so it is all second nature. bracket your exposures so you know what over and under exposed negatives look like, scan like, print like, bracket your developing and change your agitation technique so you see what over+under processed and over+under agitated negatives are like. Then when you feel comfortable do whatever it is you want to do with other films and developers. Too many people change everything, including cameras &c so much they don't really know what is going on and they get discouraged. Do you have Henry Hornstein's book yet ? It is pretty much the GO TO manual... https://www.amazon.com/Black-White-...=2025&creative=165953&creativeASIN=0316373052
[/QUOTE]to the OP
life can be really simple if you want it to be, here is a suggestion
use Kodak film
use Kodak chemistry
follow Kodak instructions
you will be delighted with the results and be able to produce magnificent prints
after having mastered the skills of exposure and conventional processing and printmaking you may feel like experimenting with exotic combinations of film chemistry and processing when you have explored to the limits all the capabilities of conventional mainstream film processed normally, some people follow this path others don't, it is optional. My suggestion when starting out is to eliminate as many uncontrolled variables as possible and using conventional chemistry the normal way is a good way to eliminate some uncontrolled variables so that you are better able to concentrate on picture making, which is the purpose, isn't it?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?