Karl, regarding carry over, the next time you develop a roll of film using either of your 2 bath formulations, immerse a film strip in part B immediately after the second bath is over for your roll. Alternatively, add 20ml of part A to part B and do a similar exercise. Check if the film strip darkens after a few minutes. If it does then it means that the carryover part A itself acts as a developer and therefore highlights will continue to build density (ie no developer exhaustion in the highlights). If the film strip doesn't darken then your 2 bath developer works like a conventional 2 bath developer.
On the first point I was just checking that the concentrations of Salicylic acid and TEA used in the DS-12 concentrate would also be about right in 2B-4 and not completely irrelevant to your case, that's all.Hi Alan, I am not sure what point you are making here. Are you suggesting that I am using too much ascorbic acid? I am happy with the results so far. Also, not sure about what to conclude from the comparison. First I'm certainly not as experienced as Ryuji, but furthermore DS-12 is not a two bath developer and I explained that I think effective two baths need to have a higher concentration of agents to work with thinner emulsion films. This developer works nicely on Fomapan films, for example, where as Barry Thornton's really doesn't work well at all with them in my experience. You get pretty thin negatives on a single pass.
@Raghu Kuvempunagar @Alan Johnson Are you saying there is something specific about carryover into the second bath with a phenidone/ascorbate developer? I used Diafine for years without seeing major issues. It's a phenidone/hydroquinone 2 bath. Shouldn't the build up of bromide largely counteract that? This is how that normally works. And once you have too much bromide, you get drag. So there is a spot where you want to get rid of it, but it ought to be 6-10 rolls I should think. Unless you are saying there is something specific about ascorbic acid developers here, or because an extremely minute amount of developer is still effective?
Karl, good work, both pics are quite nice.
On the first point I was just checking that the concentrations of Salicylic acid and TEA used in the DS-12 concentrate would also be about right in 2B-4 and not completely irrelevant to your case, that's all.
On the second point, Raghu's quote comes from an old thread where I tried to make a 2-bath vit-C developer but found the P-C combination is so active that even the small amount carried over from the A bath on the surface of the film (~20ml) and dispersed in the B bath was quite a good developer and produced significant development in addition to that absorbed in the emulsion. This would mean that development would not stop in the highlights when the developer in the emulsion is used up. You could check this as mentioned by Raghu in post 117.
If there is development in the diluted carry over in bath B you have to take a view on whether this is in an amount to be acceptable.
Relayer succeeded with effortless superiority , using a PC A-bath and a Borax B-bath, see post 15 here:
https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/diafine-revisited-ascorbate-version.78123/#post-1072668
I gave up, but it may be possible to improve Relayer's formula.
I'm not following. All other things being equal I would be very surprised if PC was more active than PQ. The PQ combination should be at least as superadditve as PC.
However all other things are not equal. If I remember 2B-1 correctly it has half the Phenidone concentration of 2B-4. There are other differences but that's a big one.
I'm also still not sure why you need bath B to be so alkaline but that's another story.
Sorry, reacting a bit from frustration after some weeks working on and with this developer and not figuring out about the carryover. I think you are right. And Alan says that Relayer's developer doesn't have this problem.
Not clear why Jay never followed this 2 bath work up.
Unlike your 2B-4, Thornton's 2 bath developer is not a true divided developer as substantial development takes place in the first bath and therefore the second bath doesn't need to do the heavy lifting. It seems inevitable that in a true divided developer, part A needs to be concentrated enough and part B has a high enough pH for the second bath to do develop film to the right contrast. This implies that the carryover will be a developer by itself. How does Relayer's developer avoid this? It might be instructive to compare it first with PC-Glycol and then with PG-110B.
300ml of 1+50 dilution working solution of PC-Glycol has 6ml of the concentrate which translates into 0.6g Ascorbic Acid and 0.015g Phenidone. Now, 300ml of part B of Relayer with 20ml of carryover part A has 0.2g Sodium Ascorbate and 0.004g Phenidone. Close enough to PC-Glycol 1:150 dilution which might act as a low contrast developer with Metaborate as the accelerator. So the key difference seems to be that Relayer uses lower pH Borax as the accelerator.
Now let's compare Relayer with a low contrast PC Borax developer (PG110B by Jay Defehr). 300ml working solution of PG-110B at dilution 1:100 contains 0.3g Ascorbic Acid and 0.03g Phenidone. Notice the significantly higher proportion of Phenidone in PG110B but is said that activity level for PC combination is more or less the same for ratios 1:40 to 1:10. This raises a little bit of doubt about carry over not being a weak developer by itself in the case of Relayer, but not something that can't be tested by experiments.
I think you can significantly reduce the carry over by transferring just film on the reel and centre core from A to B, but you need 2 tanks and total darkness for it.
That this carry over problem occurs with the smaller molecule ascorbate and not with the larger molecules metol (Thornton's) and hydroquinone (Diafine) suggests that transfer through the solution to the emulsion surface may be controlled by diffusion (Stokes Einstein equation). If the pH is increased there are more ions, maybe they get into the emulsion from the solution and develop it faster. So the lower pH Borax may work better.
Karl, long, long time ago when I was regular user of 2 baths developers I always developed it "regularly" in tank, pour in, pour out, but recently with BT2B I started to transfer reels to second tank in total darkness and I like it. I think that way film is much faster and more evenly submerged in bath B. I turn lights after first minute agitation and securing the lid. Also I made decision to keep film in both baths for 5 min. If I see any bad effect I will resort to shorter times. 3 minutes time in pour in, pour out situation is just too short for my taste.Good point. You would only have the carryover contained in and on the film. But then this would be a very difficult development process.
The interesting thing is that the alkalinity of Diafine's bath B is around the same as that for both of my developers. So it does hint that the problem is something specific about ascorbic acid.
Different developer agents (and their supper additive combinations) have different range of pH where they are most active. So I don't know if it is prudent to compare alkalinity of Diafine part B with that of PC developers. Anyway, the point I was making on pH in my earlier post was specific to PC developers (and hence the comparison of Relayer with PC-Glycol and PG110B). It appears to me that Relayer's trick of using Borax as a relatively low pH alkali for PC might have helped in making the carryover a relatively weak and non-consequential developer. Reducing the pH further would have risked reduced development and a higher pH would have made carryover problematic.
And Alan did confirm that carryover in Relayer's 2 bath developer does act as a (weak) developer by itself despite using Borax in part B.
Karl, long, long time ago when I was regular user of 2 baths developers I always developed it "regularly" in tank, pour in, pour out, but recently with BT2B I started to transfer reels to second tank in total darkness and I like it. I think that way film is much faster and more evenly submerged in bath B. I turn lights after first minute agitation and securing the lid. Also I made decision to keep film in both baths for 5 min. If I see any bad effect I will resort to shorter times. 3 minutes time in pour in, pour out situation is just too short for my taste.
Sorry, I'm staying away from your chemical discussion. My knowledge of chemistry is close or equal to 0.
Starting from Relayer's formula you could try 20ml of various A solutions in 500ml of his B solution to determine what does not give too much carry over development.
But there are many ways of proceeding.
I looked in my notes to see what that borax bath was that I tested above. It was this formula:
pH was recorded as 9.25 with my pH meter.
- 800ml water
- Borax — 20g
- Sodium sulfite — 35g
- Water to 1L
Already at this pH there was a huge cut in development vs the existing bath B from 2B-4 (pH 11).
You may want to replace Ascorbic Acid in part A by equivalent amount of Sodium Ascorbate and use Borax in part B. As Ascorbic Acid is acidic, some of the Borax could be spent on neutralizing it and thereby reducing the pH around the film surface. By using Sodium Ascorbate, you can avoid this. [Edit] But pH of part A might go up and consequently there could be some development in the first bath itself.
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?