A "sharp" developer to use with rotary processing

I know this subject has been covered 100 times, and I did do some searches, but didn't exactly come out with what I was looking for.

Sorry, the "send" button is next to another button.... Ugh, I'll continue...

So normally I used to developers, Rodinal 1:50 for almost all of my normal developing, and DD-X for my push processing.

In general I get very good results with both developers, however now that I've switched to rotary processing, the images that I get using Rodinal tend to be less sharp in the grain level of viewing, so if I end up printing large images, I can see less sure edges.

I will preface this by saying that I use the scanner to scan my film, I do not yet using enlarger. That said when the scanner scans the film I can see green distinction, in that distinction of edges is much murkier now that I'm using a rotary processor.

I also tend to like a little more contrasting my images but that of course is simply an adjustment of my development times and exposures with this new system.

But the sharpness, I'm told is less with Rodinal and that in general Rodinal isn't good for rotary processing.

The only other film I was half happy with was HC-110(B) but the times are too short for many films.

I've also used Ilfsol 3, and tried that in the rotary, with some of the worst grain I've ever seen, yet other negs were just fine using a ilfsol 3 on hand processing (even with HP5+).

So what developers would others recommend for rotary, to get sharper grained images (not finer grain, sharper edges).

I know this is subjective, but looking for new developer options.

Edit: to make a few restrictions clear, I thought a lost world help narrow it down.

1. No Powders
2. No Pyro
3. No replenishing (one shot only).

I know it makes things tough, if I have to I'll stick to DD-X but was hoping to cut costs a little for non-pushing...

Thanks.

I like XTOL. I like replenished XTOL much more. Do a search for XTOL on APUG and will find a ton of advice and examples, some of which is actually good and useful

Sirius Glass said:

I like XTOL. I like replenished XTOL much more. Do a search for XTOL on APUG and will find a ton of advice and examples, some of which is actually good and useful

Click to expand...

Please refer to the last sentence in my post, thanks.

liquid and rotary...
try sprint, download their chart for times
and use that as a starting point

if i wasnt a coffee fiend or using ansco 130 ...

i would only use sprint, its easy and predictable
liiquid and 1:9
and local

I scan and do rotary processing too (since 2003), and I doubt any developer difference cannot be masked by a tag of sharpening in post.

I have used XTol, divided Pyro, and 777. The difference, if one can see, is definitely not in the sharpness department.

OTOH, if you really want to try something different, go for XTol.

jnanian said:

try sprint, download their chart for times
and use that as a starting point

if i wasnt a coffee fiend or using ansco 130 ...

i would only use sprint, its easy and predictable
liiquid and 1:9

Click to expand...

Does sprint give a sharp edge neg though? Compared to say Rodinal?

didjiman said:

I scan and do rotary processing too (since 2003), and I doubt any developer difference cannot be masked by a tag of sharpening in post.

I have used XTol, divided Pyro, and 777. The difference, if one can see, is definitely not in the sharpness department.

OTOH, if you really want to try something different, go for XTol.

Click to expand...

Never heard of 777... Will look it up, won't do xtol, or pyro.

The thing is, I don't always want to be scanning, someday I plan to actually print my negs, so in preparation for that I would like to avoid having to do post work on the computer to correct issues, I would rather have them not show up in the first place in the negative itself.

Thanks.

The 777 is a replenishing dev so that won't work either... Hmmm

StoneNYC said:

Please refer to the last sentence in my post, thanks.

Click to expand...

Got it. I will not mention XTOL in this thread.

Sirius Glass said:

Got it. I will not mention XTOL in this thread.

Click to expand...

It's ok, I babble and people skim, so I made a list instead to help people notice it easier, I know it's odd, but it's a liquid life for me (mostly, I have a can if DK-50 I'll try for kicks but not on a regular basis).

Thanks for trying to help.

Stone, why do you put such artificial restrictions on yourself? XTOL sounds like a great choice for what you are doing. It's not expensive, it's more or less environmentally friendly, relatively non-toxic, and it has a great reputation for exactly what you are asking about! If you are afraid of mixing powders buy a good organic vapor respirator ( they don't cost very much, really! ) and do it outside. Then you'll have 5 liters! You'll only have to mix up powders once every 6 months!

Edit: I get the thing about pyro... it's pretty toxic and you need to figure out about disposal. I stay away from a few things too like dichromates. But insisting on liquid chems does limit things!

Have you tried a more dilute HC-110?

NedL said:

Stone, why do you put such artificial restrictions on yourself? XTOL sounds like a great choice for what you are doing. It's not expensive, it's more or less environmentally friendly, relatively non-toxic, and it has a great reputation for exactly what you are asking about! If you are afraid of mixing powders buy a good organic vapor respirator ( they don't cost very much, really! ) and do it outside. Then you'll have 5 liters! You'll only have to mix up powders once every 6 months!

Edit: I get the thing about pyro... it's pretty toxic and you need to figure out about disposal. I stay away from a few things too like dichromates. But insisting on liquid chems does limit things!

Click to expand...

Well, to give you an idea, I currently have moved back to my parents, and I'm not allowed to keep high volumes of chems lying around, there are rules I must abide to, and one is I get 2 boxes to store my chems/dev stuff in to store in the basement, the rest must be kept in my bedroom. It's embarrassing to have to say that, which is why I don't like to explain and wish people would leave me alone about WHY. I'm not allowed to be outside with my respirator and gloves because "I might scare the neighbors" etc and it's just not acceptable, so I do everything in the kitchen at night after everyone is asleep. The "banging" was too much (knocking air bubbles) and was gifted a Beseler rotary thing and JOBO, and timed with an unfortunate demise to my MOD54 (not a design flaw, and not my bad handling, and let's leave it there) but the "destroyer" of the MOD was kind and got me a 2509n and I already had the tank, so ... Switching to rotary with restrictions....

eddie said:

Have you tried a more dilute HC-110?

Click to expand...

No, it was my understanding the sharpness of HC-110(B) would be lessened by the higher dilution.?

StoneNYC said:

Does sprint give a sharp edge neg though? Compared to say Rodinal?

Click to expand...

it might be ...

regarding 777 ...

777 is a powder, and i dont think bluegrass packaging
has made a new batch to sell ( it is a proptietary formula)
in years, i spoke with the lady that mixes it
about 8 months ago and she ran out of ingredients
and was trying to source new suppliers.

it was a commercial developer used by folks who processed film for magnum photographers
back in the day as well as others .. it gave film a beautiful look and prints just glowed ..
some called it defender 777, d-777, harvey's panthermic 777 its all the same stuff that bluegrass
bought the formula to, and never published.
there has been major speculation about the formula but
its all guesses, educated guesses, but still just guesses ..
you can get a guessed-formula that is discussed ...
on unblinkingeye.com ... ( http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/Harvey/harvey.html )
at the photographer's formulary, from what i remember they sell a kit based on the unblinking eye article
or you can just buy the ingredients and scale them out yourself ..
but ... from what the lady who mixes it ( at bluegrass ) told me it is " that website's guess is waaaay off "
besides, its powder, and ... it doesnt fit your criteria ( being liquid )

StoneNYC said:

No, it was my understanding the sharpness of HC-110(B) would be lessened by the higher dilution.?

Click to expand...

I'm thinking going 1:40 or 45, rather than 1:31. Shouldn't be any drop in sharpness, but will allow you to extend development time.

I don't want to hijack Stone's thread, who always has very specific requirements and get upset when people don't follow his rules... In any case, apparently there is a much bigger story to 777 than what Bluegrass let on. I will post it on another thread when I have a chance. Suffice to say that 777 is not dead....

eddie said:

I'm thinking going 1:40 or 45, rather than 1:31. Shouldn't be any drop in sharpness, but will allow you to extend development time.

Click to expand...

I could try, I've run out of it, I would have to buy the new stuff... I still hear mixed reports about how it's different than the less viscous version.

If you must use liquid high acutance developer, please read up on Barry Thornton and his two bath Xactol. It works great with rotary and scanning.

I've seen no difference in my film, or prints, since switching from the old HC to the new version. Since it's the only version available, might as well dive in and get used to it...

eddie said:

I'm thinking going 1:40 or 45, rather than 1:31. Shouldn't be any drop in sharpness, but will allow you to extend development time.

Click to expand...

I use HC-110 exclusively so I can't say how its acutance compares to other developers, but I have standardized all of my rotary developing at 1:39. The thing about rotary development (I've found) is that short development times are not an issue. Four minutes in HC-110 gives me perfectly even negs. I wouldn't use such a short time for hand tanks or trays, but in tubes everything's golden. Can't speak to the new syrup, though. I still have four bottles of the old stuff.

Jonathan

didjiman said:

If you must use liquid high acutance developer, please read up on Barry Thornton and his two bath Xactol. It works great with rotary and scanning.

Click to expand...

Looked into it, it's a pyro developer...

jcoldslabs said:

I use HC-110 exclusively so I can't say how its acutance compares to other developers, but I have standardized all of my rotary developing at 1:39. The thing about rotary development (I've found) is that short development times are not an issue. Four minutes in HC-110 gives me perfectly even negs. I wouldn't use such a short time for hand tanks or trays, but in tubes everything's golden. Can't speak to the new syrup, though. I still have four bottles of the old stuff.

Jonathan

Click to expand...

That makes sense (about rotary times not being as difficult, still I don't like to be so short as 4 minutes when pouring bough for 6-7 rolls of film takes an extra 20 seconds, and then another 10 seconds to get the lid on and move the tank to the rotary part.

If I had a JOBO and lift... I would not care one bit about short times.

If my tax return is large enough I may just get a CPP2 with lift... That will be 3 months away though... And hopefully a new place to live.

eddie said:

I've seen no difference in my film, or prints, since switching from the old HC to the new version. Since it's the only version available, might as well dive in and get used to it...

Click to expand...

True

Kodak developed HC-110 for commercial photofiniishers using processing machines. Combine this with the fact that it was also designed to replace D-76. Seems that it should produce fine grain with rotary processing.

Gerald C Koch said:

Kodak developed HC-110 for commercial photofiniishers using processing machines. Combine this with the fact that it was also designed to replace D-76. Seems that it should produce fine grain with rotary processing.

Click to expand...

Thanks, that sounds promising... Hadn't thought of it like that.