Acuspecial FX21 developer as alternative to stand development

[Andrew O'Neill]

I haven't done any TMX yet (but I will!). So far I've developed one 4x5 sheet of TMY, and a couple of HP5. The suggested dilution and time by AC above for TMY was a bit short. HP5 got the same time, and it was close. I'll tackle the other TMY and HP5 sheets later today... Coffee and doughnut time!

 

[Sidd]

Sounds like a mixing error, or mistaking the fixer for the developer resulting in the film being fixed before it could be developed.

These errors should not occur. However, mistakes are done.

 

[Sidd]

How much iodide did you put in the concentrate? And how much hydroxide? If you are unsure about the iodide measurement, it is better to skip it...

8.25 ml of 1% solution of iodide. Shit! I've mixed ten thousand times more! Thank you, Thank you @lamerko . This must be the reason.

 

[koraks]

These errors should not occur. However, mistakes are done.

Yes, we all make them from time to time.

 

[Augustus Caesar]

I haven't done any TMX yet (but I will!). So far I've developed one 4x5 sheet of TMY, and a couple of HP5. The suggested dilution and time by AC above for TMY was a bit short. HP5 got the same time, and it was close. I'll tackle the other TMY and HP5 sheets later today... Coffee and doughnut time!

I use a condenser enlarger, 35mm format. For 4x5, maybe try 13 minutes instead of 11 minutes @ 1+9 dilution on TMY-2, 68F. Agitate once per minute, two inversions.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I use a condenser enlarger, 35mm format. For 4x5, maybe try 13 minutes instead of 11 minutes @ 1+9 dilution on TMY-2, 68F. Agitate once per minute, two inversions.

I already did 13 and 14 minutes...better but not where I want them. Tried a 1+7 dilution. Better. I have been agitating 5 sec each minute... I'm using a tray.

 

[Augustus Caesar]

I already did 13 and 14 minutes...better but not where I want them. Tried a 1+7 dilution. Better. I have been agitating 5 sec each minute... I'm using a tray.

Well, this developer is intended for slow miniature films (KB-14, Pan-F, etc.). Not sure that 4x5 will benefit much from it. Since TMY-2 is a very fine-grain film, FX-21 works very well in 35mm.

Did you print them. or just look? The negatives have a different appearance compared to other developers.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Well, this developer is intended for slow miniature films (KB-14, Pan-F, etc.). Not sure that 4x5 will benefit much from it. Since TMY-2 is a very fine-grain film, FX-21 works very well in 35mm.

Did you print them. or just look? The negatives have a different appearance compared to other developers.

I will print them when I get a decent density range for Alt.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Also going to give it a go with CMS-20.... in 4x5

 

[Augustus Caesar]

I will print them when I get a decent density range for Alt.

Huh? Why? This developer is intended to give exceptional sharpness, control highlight density, and give fine grain.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Huh? Why? This developer is intended to give exceptional sharpness, control highlight density, and give fine grain.

Maybe because I need to see for myself what a developer is capable/not capable of? In my playing around with this developer over that past few weeks, I've learnt a lot....good and bad.

 

[Augustus Caesar]

Maybe because I need to see for myself what a developer is capable/not capable of? In my playing around with this developer over that past few weeks, I've learnt a lot....good and bad.

OK, just curious. How many batches have you mixed up? It may seem counter-intuitive to use it with a faster film, but Kodak T-Max films are more like slow films in the way they behave.

Here's some valuable info:

Paterson 'Acu' Range

Paterson, Chemicals

www.photomemorabilia.co.uk

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

OK, just curious. How many batches have you mixed up? It may seem counter-intuitive to use it with a faster film, but Kodak T-Max films are more like slow films in the way they behave.

Here's some valuable info:

Paterson 'Acu' Range

Paterson, Chemicals

www.photomemorabilia.co.uk

Thanks for the info. I'm mixing up my second batch. I'm actually quite liking TMY in Acuspecial. I know you are not going to like this, but I did semi-stand with one sheet and it was lovely, with nicely controlled high lights. As mentioned, I will also be taking a look at how it handles something like CMS-20 (135 and 4x5), and Pan F 120....and a couple other films that I use.

 

[Augustus Caesar]

Thanks for the info. I'm mixing up my second batch. I'm actually quite liking TMY in Acuspecial. I know you are not going to like this, but I did semi-stand with one sheet and it was lovely, with nicely controlled high lights. As mentioned, I will also be taking a look at how it handles something like CMS-20 (135 and 4x5), and Pan F 120....and a couple other films that I use.

OK, but you really don't need to do that. The developer is designed to keep contrast under control using normal agitation. I love it with TMY-2, so now I'm not using any other film. It's best to change dilution rather than time for different film speed classes. I suggest 1+5 for the fastest (Delta 3200, T-Max 3200), 1+9 for TMY-2, Tri-X, HP5, Delta 400, etc. 1+14 for FP4, Acros, T-Max 100, 1+19 for Pan-F and other very slow films. Start at 11 minutes with all films, and vary dilution according to speed.

Again, this is just a suggestion.

This stuff should trounce Rodent-Oil.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Well we'll see if I don't really need to do that...
I also been playing around with dilutions, keeping the time the same, as well as changing the times. 1+7 is quite nice with TMY, as well as HP5. Not sure what Rodent-Oil is, but I think you mean Rodinal, which I have never cared for. Thanks for the film tips!

 

[Augustus Caesar]

Well we'll see if I don't really need to do that...
I also been playing around with dilutions, keeping the time the same, as well as changing the times. 1+7 is quite nice with TMY, as well as HP5. Not sure what Rodent-Oil is, but I think you mean Rodinal, which I have never cared for. Thanks for the film tips!

Well, why not start with normal agitation and see what you get? If you remember, I suggested this developer as an alternative to stand development.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Well, why not start with normal agitation and see what you get? If you remember, I suggested this developer as an alternative to stand development.

I have been. 5sec each minute. FX-21 is not an alternative to stand (which I don't do, by the way. I do semi-stand). Semi-stand with Pyrocat-HD blows FX-21 out of the water when it comes to edge effects. That's mainly why I do semi-stand.

 

[koraks]

Well, why not start with normal agitation and see what you get?

Have you tried that for salted paper, carbon transfer or gum? How did it work/why did you prefer it over alternatives?

 

[MattKing]

Have you tried that for salted paper, carbon transfer or gum? How did it work/why did you prefer it over alternatives?

I have a ~4"x5" digital negative that has been optimized for Van Dyke Brown sitting in my "project" spot. It is accompanied by a corresponding Van Dyke Brown print.
I intend to get around to contact printing it on regular silver gelatin paper, to help illustrate for my own mind the differences imposed by the different printing processes.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I have a ~4"x5" digital negative that has been optimized for Van Dyke Brown sitting in my "project" spot. It is accompanied by a corresponding Van Dyke Brown print.
I intend to get around to contact printing it on regular silver gelatin paper, to help illustrate for my own mind the differences imposed by the different printing processes.

Sounds good, Matt. I look forward to hearing about it. One of my projects is to reinstall my 4x5 enlarger, so that I can muck around with gelatin silver again... A part of me does miss it...just not the price of paper!

 

[Augustus Caesar]

I have been. 5sec each minute. FX-21 is not an alternative to stand (which I don't do, by the way. I do semi-stand). Semi-stand with Pyrocat-HD blows FX-21 out of the water when it comes to edge effects. That's mainly why I do semi-stand.

As far as I know, from the sales literature that described the product, FX-21 was designed to do a better job on the very slow films that were introduced in the 1950s, such as Adox KB-14. Results with the usual developers were poor, with excessive contrast even with very short developing times. High dilution did not work well either (the mid-tones suffered). So, Crawley came up with FX-21 (Acuspecial) for such films. It was not intended as a general-purpose developer, but claimed far better results than other options for the slow films of the time (1960s). I had used KB-14, with limited success, but by the time Acuspecial was discontinued (1983?) I had already moved away from these slow films. Tri-X and FP4 were my most-used films. I tried T-Max 400 when it came out, and was disappointed with the excessive highlight contrast. Then I moved to Delta 400, and used it for a while, and then switched to TMY-2 which was a significant improvement, with more moderate highlight contrast. Meanwhile, FX-39 came out, and I liked the combo of TMY-2 and FX-39, but last year when I found out that the formula for FX-21 was available, I tried it. The results impressed me. Even though TMY-2 is a fast film, it behaves like a slow film because of the fine grain. For the 35mm user, I doubt that anything could be more versatile.