A question(s) for the wise sages of APUG (developer dilutions and Zone System)

[spb854]

It's me again,

OK..........I need to know something.

I understand HOW to make the dilutions, i.e. 1+25, 1+50 and etc.
I understand that when the dilution is weaker, you have to process
the negatives for a longer period of time.

1- WHAT is the purpose of diluting as exampled above?
(What exactly does it do? i.e. ↑ or ↓ grain, or what?)

2- What's the correlation with diluting and changing the ISO of the film?
(i.e. mfg ISO is 100 and you change it to 50 and mix the developer
to 1+50, or vice versa or doing something different.)

3- Please explain, or point me to a chart, of what this is all about.

Is this something like the N+1 talked about with the Zone System? Lord, that confuses me enough, BUT got a Blackcat Guide to help me understand it. LOL

Try and not confuse me if you can. I have to figure this out in my head and my Tinker Toys are long lost.

The REASON for this question is this....

Recently, I took a roll of Delta 100 film out of the fridge, let it warm up and shot the film of a subject indoors using an attached flash unit (A Q-Flash on auto, camera set to Av f8).
I processed the negatives in Rodinal 1+25 for 9 minutes like it said. (Only developer I've got at the moment.)
The negatives came out nice looking to the eye (meaning no fog, not thin).

When I scanned them, I might as well had been using lith film. It's not my scanning as I've scanned other film the exact same way and they came out very good. (To me, lith is for copying BW print material, NOT using it photographically like some of you do.)
There was very little detail in the shadows, if any, and then there was white.
I was SO disappointed and knew I'd messed up somewhere, but where?

THEN, I saw in a thread that Delta 100 was very contrasty.

What would YOU have done differently? Hopefully it will make it easier for me to understand.

Thanks to those that be,

Steve

 

[David H. Bebbington]

1- WHAT is the purpose of diluting
Development reduces silver salts (compounds) to metallic silver in proportion to the exposure to light they have received. Diluting developer saves money (you need less concentrate) and gives less fine grain but better sharpness, assuming that you extend the development time as recommended for the dilution in question. Dilute developer may have a greater or lesser compensating effect (slowing up development of highlights relative to shadows), particularly if agitation is reduced ("stand" or "semi-stand" development).

2- What's the correlation with diluting and changing the ISO of the film?
None whatsoever - there is a (not quite linear) correlation between dilution and development time. You may also wish to use a lower ISO number and cut development time to reduce contrast (pull processing), or a higher number plus longer development to increase contrast and highlight density (push processing).

3- Please explain, or point me to a chart, of what this is all about.
There is no chart. N+1, n-1 etc. relate to the zone system where the tone scale of the film can be changed by giving 1 stop less exposure and a certain percentage step increase in development time (n+1), which needs to be found experimentally (but may be 10 to 15%). The reverse (more exposure, less development) is n-1, n-2, etc.

If your Delta 100 negs are too contrasty for your particular purpose, you must increase expusure and cut development, no matter whether you think you developed them "correctly" or not. Slow film tends to be inherently more contrasty than fast film, which is why we develop it for a shorter time to acheive a standard contrast. A negative which looks dramatic to the eye is often too contrasty to print or scan well. A modest scanner will handle color negs quite well but will struggle with silver-based b+w. I really do not believe that Delta 100 is inherently more contrasty than other ISO 100 films, being a T-grain film it is not tolerant to exposure or development errors. If you processed a roll of Delta 100 in what you think is the same way as previous films but got massively more contrast, you have made an error somewhere (developer to strong or too hot, dev time too long)

Best regards,

David

 

[Fotohuis]

Hopefully you're able to understand the things maybe due to the language problem (from my side then ).

1- Depends on the used developer. Higher dilutions with Rodinal will give you more sharpness but slighly more grain which can be compensated by less agitation. Dilutions over 1+75 will cause even some staining effect (colorizing of the negative) with Rodinal. (Popular are the pyro type developers to achieve this staining effect). More dilution --> longer developing time for getting the same dense negatives.

2- There is no direct correlation between dilution and iso rate. There are ultra fine grain type developers and there you will always loose speed but you will get finer grain back for this sacrifice. On the other hand you have speed enhanced developers, more speed = more grain.

3- Two examples: SPUR SLD (speed enhanced developer) and SPUR HRX-2 (ultra fine grain developer). Look at the suggested E.I. for the same films and see the differences.
Dead Link Removed
and
Dead Link Removed

4- Zone system: N = normal , N+1 = to expand the zones in less contrastly situations, N-1 = to comprime the zones in contrastly situations. You're going to play wityh the logD curve of the film.

Your Delta problem:
a) Modern technology films like Delta/Tmax are less suitable for the Rodinal developer.
b) These type of films have quickly a steep logD curve
c) When using flash (hard direct light) above problem is going to be a problem very quickly.

Solution: Use a iso 400 film, classical cubic film emulsion.
Use a diffuser on your flash unit and even better reflection screens (like in a studio) and use indirect lighting.
Use a semi-compensating developer in these situations.

Your problem will be now that everybody want to suggest a more suitable film developer combination so I won't do you that favor .

Best regards,

Robert

 

[Roger Hicks]

David has it all dead right, apart from the exact crystal habit of Delta. It's not exactly T-grain; Delta epitaxial technology is (in my book, and Ilford's) rather cleverer. Both are monodisperse but Delta is grainier, sharper and more forgiving of poor exposure and out-of-spec development.

 

[spb854]

Suggested developers are?

Why would you use a staining developer?

I DO understand all the jargon, even the logD curve.

Can you differentiate the most common developers?
(i.e. D-76, Rodinal, etc.) (I'm familiar with these 2)
(i.e. compensating, non-compensating OR
can or cannot be used as such)

I get confused when talking about graininess vs accutance
vs resolution. What I want is a negative that I can
enlarge to about 8 x 10 (maybe 16 x 20) with no grain.
What do you suggest?

Suggested films that I have are:
Acros 100 (120)
FP4 (4 x 5)
Pan F Plus (120)
T-Max 400 (35mm bulk, 4 x 5)
Verichrome Pan (120)

What would you do with these films to achieve the above?

My understanding of compensating developers are they
only convert SOME of the silver to metal, thereby giving
different depths of silver metal on the emulsion, thereby
causing somewhat more detail in the shadows, correct?

Suggest some compensating developers? I get confused
which are which, compensating and non-compensating.

I TRULY appreciate all the replies.

Steve

 

[JBrunner]

In addition to the above wise advice, I would add that your scanner may be enhancing the grain through the sharpness settings or other perhaps even built in features, that may be playing up the graininess (sp?) the Rodinal brings out. If this is the first time you have used this film/developer combo in your scanner, it may be playing around in a new way, unless you you have used this film/developer combo before and scanned with good results. Some scanners are touchy when it comes to film grain, and with Rodinal your going to have some. A real print would show you exactly what you have.
Best

J

 

[fhovie]

MicroPrimer on developers:
Solvent:
D76, D23, D-11, Microdol etc
The concentration usually causes some grain erosion and sometimes a re-deposit elsewhere
Advantages - smoother finer grain
Disadvantages - usually less resolution, less accutance - less sharp - High dilutions cause these mixtures to fall into the last group. (Sodium Sulfite below 60g/liter)

Staining:
Leaves a stain on the negative that is in proportion to development
Pyro anything - Rodinol PMK
Advantages - masks grain - can make a grainy (and sharper) negative appear less grainy. Most stains mask UV and make a negative that has UV densities that are good for alt processes and also will work well for standard enlarging as well. Compensating - can keep the highlights from blowing out while still doing a good job in the shadows. Increases accutance.

Non-Solvent Non-Staining:
PC-TEA
Greatest resolution (the grains do not erode nor are they enhanced) good sharpness (not as good as high accutance developers) Often speed increasing.

There are others but the question needs to be asked first:

What can my developer do for me today?

If you cannot ask that question, use D76

 

[fhovie]

MicroPrimer on film:

Traditional film
Tri-X, Pan-X, FP-4, HP-5
Larger grains - faster speed
Work better with a greater variety of developers (pyro)
Usually greater film latitude and dynamic range
Push and pull more easily
Great reciprocity failure

Tab Film
TMX TMY TMZ, Delta anything
Grains are small round disks rather than crystal lumps
Better resolution, finer grain, less reciprocity failure
Work best with modern Vitamin C developers (XTOL - PC-TEA)

There are others but the question needs to be asked first:

What can my film do for me today?

If you cannot ask that question, use TRI-X

Here is what I use for LF:
Mostly FP4 and always Pyrocat-P
FP4 because it expands contrast well (turns a 5 stop scene into a 9 stop scene for printing and stains well with high accutance)
Pyrocat P because I like all the features I mentioned last post
I do use TRI-X if I have a 10 stop scene and need to compress the contrast.

For MF I use
TRI-X and Pyrocat-P(ASA200) or PC-TEA/Sulfite (ASA1600)
One film - multipurpose - I like the sharpness and tonality -

For Pinhole I use TMX - with PC-TEA - great reciprocity

Since what I use is for the specific needs I have, what you use would be for the specific needs you have. If you don't know your needs or why you need them - try D-76 and TRI-X

 

[David H. Bebbington]

Why would you use a staining developer?

Lots of APUGers would, I personally use D76 1+1 for everything.

Can you differentiate the most common developers?
(i.e. D-76, Rodinal, etc.) (I'm familiar with these 2)

D76 is the virtual standard developer, basically fine grain, slightly more so if used undiluted, slightly more grain and better sharpness if used diluted. A greater compensating effect will obtained with greater dilution and/or reduced agitation. Rodinal is non-fine-grain, gives a tight pronounced grain pattern with fast film, fine grain with enhanced sharpness with slow film.

What I want is a negative that I can enlarge to about 8 x 10 (maybe 16 x 20) with no grain.

8x10 is no problem, 35 mm Pan F, Delta 100 or FP4 Plus will be fine, 35 mm Delta 400 too if exposed and processed correctly. Rollfilm or LF will only be better.
16x20 - it really depends how hard you are going to look. 35 mm Pan F would be a good bet, I would probably use 120 FP4 Plus in 6x7 size, virtually any 4x5" film fine (16x20 is only a 4x linear enlargement with 4x5").

Verichrome Pan (120) is an old-fashioned film which is double-coated (fast and slow emulsions together on the same base). VP does superbly what it was designed to do, namely give a lot of exposure latitude with very simple cameras. Old-style films in my opinion can give pleasing results with large format, in 35 mm and MF the additional grain and lower sharpness are usually a problem.

What would you do with these films to achieve the above?

Develop them in D76. If you want finer grain, BY FAR the easiest thing is to use slower bigger film, rather than look for a magic developer.

My understanding of compensating developers are they
only convert SOME of the silver to metal, thereby giving
different depths of silver metal on the emulsion, thereby
causing somewhat more detail in the shadows, correct?

All developers convert only part of the silver salts in the film emulsion to silver, otherwise they would turn the film solid black all over. Compensation basically works by the fact that the highlights of a negative image develop most strongly, generating chemical by-products. Normal agitation washes these away - if you agitate less, they will remain and inhibit further development of the highlights, while continuing to develop the shadows. This effect is more pronounced with dilute developer, since this gets exhausted faster.

Suggest some compensating developers? Some APUGers are big fans of Pyrocat, which I have never used but which is a modernized version of the 19th century pyro[gallol] developer. Make an advanced search of the APUG site, you'll turn up plenty of info.


Regards,

David

 

[k_jupiter]

It's funny... I agree with David's statement...

"Why would you use a staining developer?

Lots of APUGers would, I personally use D76 1+1 for everything. "

Yet I don't use D-76 1+1 / Tri-X any more. It gives perfectly consistent results, fine tones, excellent film speed. All of my original portfolio from 20 years ago was developed in this combination.

But... Life is too short for the tried and true. Adventures in processing have shown me amazing new combinations I would have never known if I stayed with the developer that got me through school.

I found APX100 and W2D2+... Blows the socks off anything else I have ever used.
Pan F and Rodinal 1+200 stand developed. Almost graphic effects while still maintaining good tonality. Something to do with edge effects.
Efke 100 and Pyrocat HD in LF rotating processing... Keep your fingernails off the emulsion, almost bulletproof processing...
Tri-X and Panthermic 777. Intense 1930s images...

etc. etc...

Good luck, we all do photography for vastly different reasons.

tim in san jose

 

[spb854]

I've seen "stand development" mentioned in several places.

What is it and how is it done? Can I do it in a one reel processing
tank?

Thanks,
Steve

 

[David H. Bebbington]

I've seen "stand development" mentioned in several places.

What is it and how is it done? Can I do it in a one reel processing
tank?

Thanks,
Steve

An advanced forum search reveals 634 references to this subject!
Try this for a start:
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Just one point - stand development relates to agitation (or lack of it), so of course you can do it in a normal tank.

Regards,

David

 

[gainer]

In a nutshell, stand development is development without agitation.

 

[gainer]

Of course, if you develop in a nutshell you must have a very large nut or a very small negative.