Acufine vs Diafine

[drmoss_ca]

I'm a user of Diafine for many years. My single bath developers include T-Max, Rodinal, HC-110 and D-76. I was reading a description of Acufine today which said it had the same speed increase as Diafine. Would I be correct in guessing it is a single bath version of Diafine, or is it completely different? I was also reading about ACU-1, which seems to be a one-shot version of Acufine, but since no one will ship it to me in Canada I can't find out for myself! Freestyle is sending me some Acufine and I'm curious about what I should expect.

Chris

 

[Paul Howell]

I'm a user of Diafine for many years. My single bath developers include T-Max, Rodinal, HC-110 and D-76. I was reading a description of Acufine today which said it had the same speed increase as Diafine. Would I be correct in guessing it is a single bath version of Diafine, or is it completely different? I was also reading about ACU-1, which seems to be a one-shot version of Acufine, but since no one will ship it to me in Canada I can't find out for myself! Freestyle is sending me some Acufine and I'm curious about what I should expect.

Chris

Diafine is very different from Acufine, not the same beast at all, Acufine is sharper with more grain, more contrast, I have used both, for MF and LF when grain has not been an issue and need for speed I liked Acufine.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

Since Diafine, Acufine and Acu-1 are proprietary it is impossible to discern if they have any relation to one another. Ansel Adams in his book The Negative recommends becoming completely familiar with one film and one developer before considering changing to something else. I have to say you are already using four developers. Do you really need to add another at this point.

Acufine and Acu-1 are phenidone based developers and as such really only provide a 2/3 stop increase in speed. Anything else is really only hype. This has been discussed many times on APUG. I have used both and was unimpressed with the results. Diafine is also phenidone based.

 

[john_s]

I used both year ago with Tri-X. I much preferred the Acufine, but that was mainly because of the contrast level I was looking for (higher than Diafine). Acufine was a bit on the grainy side, but it suited my subject matter.

 

[gone]

I always meant to try Diafine, but never have. I have some Acufine, and use it now and then. It's actually a great developer, at least for Tri-X, which is all I shoot. Very sharp! It doesn't quite have the same tones as D76, and it doesn't keep as long as TD-16, which is why I went to that from D76, but I always got good results from Acufine. Unlike John, I haven't noticed grain issues. In fact, it's a little too smooth for my tastes, especially with 120 film. If I can find them, I'll post some shots here.

OK, just to give you a selection, the first shot is a crop from a Zeiss Ikonta w/ Novar 120 neg. The second is from a Rolleicord w/ Triotar, the third is from a Super Ikonta w/ Novar, and the last is from a Nikon N8008s w/ Leica R 90 Elmarit. All were shot w/ Tri-X and a yellow filter, except the last shot, where I used a red filter. Boy, I miss that Rolleicord. That Triotar lens rocked!

 

[john_s]

........ I always got good results from Acufine. Unlike John, I haven't noticed grain issues. In fact, it's a little too smooth for my tastes, especially with 120 film.

I should have added that I was using it in the early 1970s in a not well lit indoor skating rink with 35mm Tri-X rated at 1000ASA or maybe more.

And of course, 120 size film makes a world of difference!

 

[drmoss_ca]

Thank you all for your thoughts.

Chris