I don't know Scala 50 & HR-50 to be the same thing. But I said, that I found much better CMS20 or Spur. For low grain I mean. I don't like in HR-50 that it have narrow correct range (example bracketing) & specific color sensitivity.
Ok, so aren't Hr-50 and Scala 50 worthwile to buy and use?
The reason I'm interested is that it looks like a pretty decent film for things like landscapes and urban/city buildings and such. Plus, it has the ability to give pretty decent infrared rendering. Kind of like two films in one.
Yup, not the speediest, but one can't have everything I guess. I'll be developing my three short rolls tonight in three different lower contrast developers and will post what I find.I also like this film. I have a few more rolls already in the freezer.
Some results. ADOX HR-50 in HR-Dev 1:49 24C 7,5min JOBO constant rotation
First -sunny, Second -cloudy
Those don't look bad at all. Good shadow detail and highlights are not blown to smithereens, either. Did you rate the film at ISO 50?
Due to machine development I used to lower ISO to have lower contrast. 40 ASA.
But I think the hand development, not active, will be much better. This time I made the mistake, even two! I not fill the second botle with stop, and I not closed the fixer bottle, so it was not pumped in time.
I fixed in hand mode after I saw this in 5 (!) minutes
I finally had a chance to do a little developer testing with HR-50 and found a couple that show some promise. The first developer I tried was my trusty favorite Pyrocat-HDC diluted. The negatives showed promise, but I'm going to have to play a little more with this combo. The next was Rodinal 1+100 full stand. The negatives weren't bad, but not what I was after. I then tried Rodinal 1+25 for 10 min. @ 68f semi-stand. Now we're getting somewhere. Since most of my chemicals are at my other residence, I wasn't able to try Karl's two bath, so I decided to go with BTTB 5+5. I must say it almost feels like cheating using this simple 2-bath, but if it works, who cares. Yes, it worked rather well I think, but I still have to fine-tune it a little.
First, I have to say that my antique Microtek M1 flatbed scanner isn't the greatest and that this isn't a hi-tech test. I metered the scene with a spot on the front windows of the old school house, and it was used for all shots. The camera was an old Agfa Super Memar with an excellent 50mm f2 six element coated lens. All scanner setting were set the same for all frames, with black point and white point settings set according to the histogram. No sharpening or any post-processing done.
Here are some of the results that I thought were worth further pursuing:
The Rodinal shots were just a couple of quick snaps. On close inspection of 100% crops I actually think Thornton's 2-bath looks slightly sharper than the Rodinal ones do. I'm going to try a base setting of EI32 with BTTB and go 4 min in bath A and 4.5 min in B bath. I think I'll rate the shots to be developed in Rodinal at EI32 also, but cut the developement time back to about 8 min. I also noticed what looked like very slight bromide drag on the semi stand Rodinal ones. It showed on the top of the window frames on the front windows. If Karl's 2B-1 gives me a slight speed increase it would be welcome since BTTB didn't seem to be very good in the speed department. It wasn't bad, but not the greatest. I actually think Rodinal had better shadow detail and any given speed compared to BTTB. Just my finding and I have to play a little more with this film, but so far I like it and the fact it has near IR ability as well.
Good test John. Looks you’re indeed getting low speed out of BTTB which is normal in my experience. The tonal scale is better in the Rodinal images but some are over exposed. This is surprising because you normally take a bit of a speed loss with a Rodinal, too. The “225” images with low agitation look the best here IMO. I’d give it a 1/4-1/2 stop less exposure for this scene. Hard to say if the lack of sharpness is just the scan? Anyway looks like you’re headed in the right direction.
I have found that BTTB requires an extra stop of exposure for most films to get an optimal negative, sometimes a bit more for certain films. If you're willing to compromise a bit on film speed, BTTB can produce some of most tonally beautiful negatives.
I printed the BTTB developed shots, and they print so easily on the Grade 2 setting of my Ilford Multigrade head that I thought I was printing Pyrocat-HDC negatives. Maybe it's a characteristic of BTTB, ease of printing?
Yes, it is! The Thornton 2 Bath process always gives me negatives that are easy to print, easy to scan, and have excellent tonality.
Note that the 2B-1 will give you negatives that - in comparison to the BTTB negs - will have hotter high values (significantly more density) and more contrast overall. I found the results I got from 2B-1 to be too harsh for my taste and will instead stick with Thornton 2-bath. of course, YMMV.
Yup, I think BTTB with HR-50 is just fine, but you know how we are here...................gotta try a couple other developers too. I also like the fact it's not fussy whether you scan or wet print the negative. At least I have found a keeper for now and could get by just fine with BTTB.
Yup, I totally get that, which is why I had to test Karl's developer to compare with BTTB. As a result, I find I'm back to my base, where it's BTTB, or PMK or occasionally Xtol (well, Adox XT-3) as my top choices.
In his earlier book "Elements" p31, Barry Thornton noted:
"My two bath seems to lift shadow density and contrast and roll off the highlights more while leaving the critical mid-tones better separated"
On p93 "...the second bath....I agitate just once at 2 minutes and have no problem with streaking....." "The second bath effectively makes the metol work at high dilution aiding definition even more."
My experience with it supports this idea, absolutely.In his earlier book "Elements" p31, Barry Thornton noted:
"My two bath seems to lift shadow density and contrast and roll off the highlights more while leaving the critical mid-tones better separated"
Yup, I totally get that, which is why I had to test Karl's developer to compare with BTTB. As a result, I find I'm back to my base, where it's BTTB, or PMK or occasionally Xtol (well, Adox XT-3) as my top choices.
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?