After baby steps with Caffenol - suggest a "classic" developer..!

[GLS]

Pyrocat HD in glycol:

http://stores.photoformulary.com/pyrocat-hd-in-glycol/

+1

 

[pentaxuser]

If it's store bought, then how about D-76? It's pretty classic. Pretty versatile. Pretty cheap. The shelf life isn't super long once mixed, but you can do what I do. I just mix up a small amount of powder at a time, and then store the liquid in plastic soda bottles where I squeeze all of the air out of the bottle. They can last several months in the liquid form if you keep them away from air. And if you seal off the opened package of powder with tape (or buy small packages so you don't need to reseal the package), the powder will last for years, so long as it doesn't get exposed to humidity.

jim, I take it that when you mix up only a portion of the package you haven't experienced any adverse consequences from the powder being accidentally divided into unequal portions of its constituent chemicals?

I have seen the same suggestion as your mentioned only occasionally and each time enough other members gave stern warnings about the consequence of subdividing the powder.

Strangely enough this hasn't been picked up by anyone here. What is difficult to do on Photrio is to gather evidence of what is the incidence of faulty developer as a result of subdividing it. I am never sure if all of those expressing caution do so because each of them has suffered or are simply repeating the warning because it has become " the consensus " without them having tried it at all

I presume that the conventional wisdom is that somehow the contents are properly shaken at the manufacturing location but then no matter how much anyone tries it becomes impossible to re-shake the contents at home to replicate the factory shaking each time so the only safe way is to use all if it in one go for stock

Can I ask: How many times and over what period have you being doing this without a problem?

What no-one can argue with is that it is the ideal solution provided it works to the extent that no discernible difference is noticed in each film developed

I do wonder if at times replies can prey on people's uncertainty for he best of motives and unfortunately dissuade them from doing things that Kodak, Ilford etc has not written in to the instructions

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[Donald Qualls]

One of the issues is that there isn't any way to be sure the powder is uniformly mixed. I know I've seen enough examples of granular materials of different colors that clearly stratified in some fashion (sand with stripes, sugar and cinnamon in layers when you're putting them on your toast, etc.). The materials in developer powder are different particle sizes and densities, so there's no reason to expect them to remain uniformly mixed (or ever to have been so, though presumably the manufacturer thought they were, because it's terribly inefficient to individually dispense ingredients into the bags vs. filling them with a premixed material).

No, I've never been caught on it -- because I've never tried mixing a partial envelope of powder. It never would have occurred to me that it was a good idea to do so, any more than it would be a good idea to take two shovels full off the top of a bin of dry premix concrete that's been shipped across the country by rail and truck, and expect to get good concrete from it.

If I routinely need to mix just a single tankful of some particular developer, I'll mix it from ingredients. I've got metol, phenidone, hydroquinone, vitamin C, sulfite, sodium carbonate, borax, and potassium iodide on hand (need to buy a new can of lye). On the other hand, it's often more convenient to buy a bag of premixed powder and just dump it all into a suitable amount of warm water, stir, make up to final volume, and come back next day when it's down to room temperature.

 

[Randy Stewart]

D-76 is an excellent general developer which usually works well with nearly all films. Optimum image quality, depending on what you prefer, is a 1:1 or 1:2 working solution, used one-shot and then discarded. You can buy it nearly anywhere that photo chemicals are sold. Ilford's equivalent is ID-11. You can try it as a purchased product, but if you like it, you can switch to compounding it yourself. The benefits of compounding are that it's always fresh and the "per liter" cost is trivial compared to the commercial product. It is not significantly more difficult to prepare than the Caffinal you have already used. To extend useful life if you have to purchase an excessive amount at one time, mix the stock solution as directed, then break it up in smaller quantities for storage. If you are truly motivated, try freezing the stored bottles (uncapped at first to allow for expansion). A frozen solution will last practically for ever, assuming you have the freezer space. Use amber glass bottles rather than the plastic ones labelled for photographic purposes. The plastic bottles are not a great oxygen barrier, and they cost way too much. Amber glass bottles of all sizes and cap types are very economically available at Glass Bottle Outlet (Google). DO NOT buy a bag of D-76 and mix up part of the contents for use. The chemical components have different weights and tend to settle in different distributions inside the bag. You would have no idea what you are actually taking out to mix up.

The one possible issue posed by freezing chemical solutions is that when thawed for use, some chemical parts may have precipitated and may be difficult to get back into solution. I've had complete success using this technique with my E-6 chemicals, which I compound in larger volumes for convenience but rarely use. One batch tends to last me 1 - 2 years, and I've had no issues. It's been more than 40 years since I used D-76, and I have no track record re its freezing and thawing performance.

Good luck.

 

[Donald Qualls]

I'd be very wary of freezing solutions in glass bottles. However, another way (tested by me) to get a developer to last much longer than it has any right to do is to mix the stock solution in half the specified amount of water. Last week, I succesfully developed film in Dektol that I mixed this way in 2004-2005. Don't forget your dilution needs to be compensated -- instead of the standard 1+9 for Dektol used for film, I diluted at 1+19 to reach the correct working solution strength. As a bonus, this double strength stock will not actually freeze, at least down to about 10F (the jar I opened had been stored in an unheated shed for the past four winters, with temperatures going at least down to 10F on occasion -- jar wasn't broken, indicating the solution never froze).

Mixing in half the water requires fairly hot water -- but most home water heaters can produce high enough temperature to do the job.

 

[ProfessorC1983]

Since the topic was raised and I've been curious: what exactly are the disadvantages (aside from cost which isn't as important to me) of using D-76 1:1 as a one-shot developer? I've seen some folks saying a new batch needs to be "seasoned" with a few rolls before it's consistent, but I'd rather not get into replenishing and worrying about inconsistent dev times, at least not quite yet. One of the things I like about Rodinal is that it's one-shot. So would D-76 be a poor choice to use this way, as opposed to HC-110?

 

[Donald Qualls]

As far as I'm concerned, the only disadvantage of D-76 one-shot (1+1, 1+2) is cost relative to replenished stock. If you mix you own from ingredients, it saves money (but so does mixing your own replenisher; you can make processing a roll almost free). Then again, if you one-shot, you don't have to worry about having enough volume to keep your replenished stock in good condition.

A few years ago, I was processing regularly in Parodinal (homebrew Rodinal-alike made from generic acetaminophen -- which, at that time, I bought at Costco for just over a penny a caplet) with home mixed fixer, and I figured it cost a nickel to process a roll of 35mm. D-76 will be a little more (metol and hydroquinone to buy, and more sulfite) and everything costs a bit more now than it did fifteen years ago -- but if you buy thiosulfate by the bucket at the pool and spa supplier, you can probably get your cost below a quarter a roll, one-shot -- and still compete with that nickel if you mix your own replenisher.

Some folks prefer the look of diluted D-76; if that's you, dilute and one-shot and good to go. If that's not you, mix your own and replenish your stock.

 

[abruzzi]

A couple of general observations:

- Caffenol can make some nice developer, but there is no standard, and your generally mixing things that are not necessarily consistent (i.e. if you’re using instant coffee, the instant you use and the instant the person who wrote the recipe used may be very different.). IMO this makes it less than ideal for beginners. The little I’ve tried it, the results have been all over the place. It’s much better if you take the time to test and adjust enough to get a good response for the ingredients you have on hand.

- the benefit of canned commercial developers (especially for a beginner) is you can skip the massive dev chart, and go directly to the manufacturer’s data sheet and you’ll find times for D76, Xtol, HC110, Rodinal, and some others (depending on manufacturer).

- if you are a love volume developer as you stated, I would start out with HC110 or Rodinal. Both of these developers are one shot, high dilution, with a long shelf life for the undiluted raw liquid. D67 you need to mix up a gallon and store it (and use it up in 6 months) Xtol, my favorite, is the same except the package is 5/liters. With Rodinal, you just pour out 10ml, mix it with 490ml of water, and dump it when you’re done. (Assuming 1:50). HC110 you just measure out to 1:32 or similar. The raw liquid stays in the bottle, and lasts forever. You lose nothing if you happen to take 6 months off from developing.

 

[Bormental]

Since the topic was raised and I've been curious: what exactly are the disadvantages (aside from cost which isn't as important to me) of using D-76 1:1 as a one-shot developer?

To address your question directly: the difference of 1:1 vs full-strength one-shot D76 is minimal, but it comes down to slightly harsher grain. Some mention vague tonality difference (depends on your taste) but I'd argue that any kind of post-processing, however lightweight, will have a bigger impact on tonality than developer dilution. But the character of the grain will, especially in smooth / bright areas like cloudy skies (because grain has a nasty tendency to get amplified/distorted by monitors) or fine features like people's eyes or hair, and this is harder to address in post-processing IMO. So, after months of experimentation I am settling on full-strength D76 (HP5+ and FP4+) and Xtol for Delta 100 & 400. Although to be fair, Delta 100 is such fine film that I don't mind diluting Xtol 1:1 to process it.

Also, I always dilute 1:1 when I develop 120 film. The grain is not an issue with medium format and I feel I would be wasting developer using it full-strength at 500ml per roll.

Disclaimer: I actually never used Kodak's D76. I've been mostly using ID-11 and Ultrafine version of D76 and I did not notice any differences between these two. I am assuming D76 is a well-known formula with multiple manufacturers selling it.

 

[Adrian Bacon]

Low-volume beginner developer, I started out with Caffenol, and will continue with it, but I owe it to myself to try a classic developer. I know the names, read about them, but no experience to go by.

I guess it would have to:
- offer long self life, due to low volume
- not require high level skills, error-tolerant
- mix well with the cheaper film grades I use (before maturing to fancier ones!)

Probably the oldest and most classic developer of all is Rodinal. It keeps very well, and is super easy to mix.

 

[jay moussy]

Probably the oldest and most classic developer of all is Rodinal. It keeps very well, and is super easy to mix.

I sort of came to that as well, just waiting for the new batches to come along!
Adopt a currently available clone (TBD)?

 

[Donald Qualls]

Or you can mix your own. If you have sodium sulfite and potassium bromide on hand, you can get acetaminophen/paracetamol and drain opener lye locally (grocery/pharmacy, and home improvement store). Handling the lye requires some care (gloves and goggles/face shield, correct mixing procedure) but isn't difficult. The only Rodinal I've ever used is Parodinal. The concentrate keeps well, too -- I've kept it in a partially filled open jar for more than six months until I used it up, worked the same at the end (concentrate the color of Coca-Cola) as it did when fresh (barely pink).

 

[koraks]

If you use potassium hydroxide and potassium sulfite instead of the sodium species, you'll get an even more pleasing concentrate as it won't throw down a precipitate.

 

[Donald Qualls]

If you use potassium hydroxide and potassium sulfite instead of the sodium species, you'll get an even more pleasing concentrate as it won't throw down a precipitate.

Of courese, it'll cost ten times as much, but that's still fairly cheap by the time you dilute 1+49.

 

[grat]

This thread proves if you ask 10 photographers what their favorite developer is, you'll get at least 11 answers.

 

[koraks]

Of courese, it'll cost ten times as much, but that's still fairly cheap by the time you dilute 1+49.

Certainly, it'll be more costly, but as you said, the cost per roll/sheet is still small. The latter is often the case BTW. I think most of us have a tendency to think about the economics of film development, but let's face it - it's almost always one of the cheapest parts in the chain.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Certainly, it'll be more costly, but as you said, the cost per roll/sheet is still small. The latter is often the case BTW. I think most of us have a tendency to think about the economics of film development, but let's face it - it's almost always one of the cheapest parts in the chain.

On the other side of that, you can buy enough lye (comes in 1 lb cans) and sulfite (by the 5 lb jar/bucket) and acetaminophen (500 tablets, $7) and potassium bromide (100 g bottle about $7) for a multi-year supply of Parodinal for under $50. I don't know for certain, but I'd guess a single pound of potassium sulfite might cost more than that.

I've been pretty happy with the Parodinal I mixed from the easy ingredients. I tend to avoid stuff I have to buy special (separate from other photo supplies), unless it's cheap.

 

[grainyvision]

Assuming you want to mix your own developer, pick up a copy of Darkroom Cookbook (or Film Developing Cookbook if you want a LOT more depth, I'd recommend the darkroom one for most people) first and foremost. Understanding developers is the important key to figuring out which one you likely want to use... and the book includes a huge reference of different film developers of all different types.

Otherwise though, it's pretty much a right of passage to mix D-23 at least once. It's the most simple film developer containing just metol and sulfite. The formula for D-76 is known, but many people regard home-mixed D-76 to be superior to packaged D-76. Note that homebrew D-76 has a much shorter shelf life, I wouldn't make it with the intentions of storing it for more than 1 month at a time, while packaged D-76 is usually stable for 6 months. (ie, only make 1L or less of the concentrate at a time). If they ship to you, you can also check out some of Photographer's Formulary's developer kits. They sell a lot of the common ones (though usually with a slightly different name, like "Formulary 130" instead of "Ansco 130") and with these you don't have to worry about sourcing a lot of chemicals to make a single developer. One thing I'd recommend actually avoiding for beginners is staining developers and especially water-free developer syrups. Staining developing agents are of the most toxic in the business and water-free developers, despite having an unmatched shelf-life, are not trivial to mix. You need to heat up a syrupy solvent (usually triethanolamine, sometimes some type of glycol) which includes many dangers, especially since the solvent is pretty universally flammable and off-gasses flammable vapors when heated.

 

[Patrick Robert James]

Everyone will always tell you what they would use, but from what you want, Rodinal and HC-110 fit the bill.

If you want to mix developers yourself, you can get Metol, Sodium Sulfite and Sodium Carbonate and mix three types of developers depending on what you want.

D-23 is a solvent developer made with only Metol and Sodium Sulfite. Easy to use. Classic.

Beutler's is an acutance developer made in two parts. Part A is Metol and Sulfite. Part B is Carbonate. Very high acutance developer.

You can also mix a two bath compensating developer as well, like Stoeklers.

So just with those simple ingredients you can make three completely different developers.

I think that is an answer to your question.

 

[juan]

With regard to earlz’s comments on heating water-free syrup developers, I used Kodak HC-110 and Agfa Rodinal for years and never heated a drop. Perhaps his darkroom was cold enough to require it, but mine was just fine.

 

[koraks]

With regard to earlz’s comments on heating water-free syrup developers, I used Kodak HC-110 and Agfa Rodinal for years and never heated a drop. Perhaps his darkroom was cold enough to require it, but mine was just fine.

1: rodinal isn't water free. It's a water-based solution.
2: I think earlz's comments is about making these water-free based concentrates using glycol or TEA. In order to get the dry chemicals to dissolve in these solvents usually requires heating them up - or waiting/stirring a looooooong time.

 

[jay moussy]

OP here, a lot of good information above, but totally confused about developer disposal - unlike fixer, where there is a known path.

As an example, I have no idea what will actually happen to, say, Rodinal or equivalent, once in my septic system. Some will eventually reach groundwater, I would think, and I am near watershed and aquatic life.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Developing agents will oxidize down to simple chemicals very quickly once they're diluted to the point the sulfite doesn't protect them. The concern in a septic system is mainly the silver that dissolves in high sulfite soups (like D76 or D23 stock). The silver is bad for the septic tank's bacteria ecology. Rodinal, as used for film, has very little sulfite in the working solution (and not much p-aminophenol, for that matter) and shouldn't do any harm, either in your septic or in its outflow.

If you get in the habit of using D76, D23, Xtol, etc. as stock solutions, either replenished or reused and discarded on exhaustion, you should dispose of the portion discarded during replenishment or the exhausted stock in the same way as fixer (silver reclamation preferred). It won't have as much silver as exhausted fixer, but it'll have enough it could cause trouble in a septic (maybe).

 

[nosmok]

I take my spent fixer and pour it over steel wool and let it sit a few weeks to pull the silver out (Ag is a problem not just in septic tanks). Then I take out the wool/silver web, filter the liquid thru a coffee filter, dilute, and dump down the drain to the Los Angeles treatment plant. No complaints yet!

 

[bernard_L]

If it's store bought, then how about D-76? It's pretty classic. Pretty versatile. Pretty cheap. The shelf life isn't super long once mixed, but you can do what I do. I just mix up a small amount of powder at a time, and then store the liquid in plastic soda bottles where I squeeze all of the air out of the bottle. They can last several months in the liquid form if you keep them away from air.

I concur with the long life of the D-76 stock solution in containers impermeable to oxygen. But not with splitting the powder (as pointed out by others). I store the stock solution in a wine pouch (they are designed to keep the wine safe from oxygen) and (non-scientific) experiments show no difference from fresh solution after 1 year storage.