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

[jay moussy]

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!)

 

[jim10219]

Do you mean like something you can buy in a store, or another formula you mix from scratch?

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.

 

[koraks]

High or low speed films? What's more important for you; fine grain or full emulsion speed? Do you want a mix-your-own like caffenol or prepackaged? Do you prefer a liquid concentrate or a powder to make a stock solution which can then be further diluted? How much/often do you actually develop? Are there any chemicals that bother you in particular? Are you looking for anything touted as "environmentally friendly" or not specifically?

 

[Donald Qualls]

If you won't develop frequently, you probably want a developer that keeps well, either as stock solution or concentrate. Oddly, powder isn't the best for this, because you have to mix the whole one liter or five liter package (dividing powder mixtures is haphazard). If you liked Caffenol and are likely to use the same film that worked well in that, in the future, one of the various Rodinal clones is a good choice -- the concentrate is well known to keep a long time even in an opened and resealed, partially full bottle.

The other long standing choice for this was HC-110, but there was a recent change in formulation, and it's too soon to know how the new HC-110 will keep.

Rodinal is not a fine grain developer, but neither is any version of Caffenol I've seen -- so if Caffenol produced results you like, A-09, Adonal, etc. are likely to do the same.

 

[Lachlan Young]

Kodak D-23 is the obvious first step. About as uncomplicated as it is possible to get & pretty difficult to beat from any qualitative perspective.

 

[John Bragg]

Ilfotec HC or Kodak HC-110, depending what is cheapest where you live.

 

[grain elevator]

D-23 would be for mixing it yourself from raw chemicals, correct? If that's actually what you want to do, there are also some other possibilities that only require very few ingredients, for example PC-TEA and BT two bath.
With caffenol you've handled something at least as complicated as any commercially available developer. I don't understand the usual recommendations of certain developers specifically for beginners - all developers are very easy to use.
Koraks asked the right questions. If you answer them, people can give useful recommendations.

 

[jay moussy]

High or low speed films? What's more important for you; fine grain or full emulsion speed? Do you want a mix-your-own like caffenol or prepackaged? Do you prefer a liquid concentrate or a powder to make a stock solution which can then be further diluted? How much/often do you actually develop? Are there any chemicals that bother you in particular? Are you looking for anything touted as "environmentally friendly" or not specifically?

- film speed: 100 to 400 (FP4 HP5, Fomapan, and soon Arista)
- grain quality: too early for me to define wants like that
- liquid concentrate may be best(?)
- frequency: twice a month
- eco-friendly: yes, haven't looked into developer disposal yet

 

[removed account4]

I'd use sprint film developer. its local ( made in RI ) and is a liquid concentrate you mix 1:9, and the website has extensive data with all films currently available. It is like D76 but doesn't block up highlights if you over process ... and the sprint systems of photography website has lots of info about what to process your film at depending on the kind of conditions or camera ( old film, plastic lens over exposed or under exposed 1 stop &c ) + its the go-developer for many schools, and is readily available right off their website... its been my go-to developer when I'm not messing with caffeine or ansco130 &c / since IDK 1981 --- can't say anything negative about it. I've never used hc110, or d23 or d76 or rodinal ...

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

Pyrocat HD in glycol:

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

 

[MattKing]

Don't over-stress yourself about long life, if you have access to internet purchases or a local store.
Just about everything will last six months or more when made up, so budget for two packages a year, knowing that many will last longer - sometimes much longer.
Many are quite economical, so it isn't a hardship to have to discard a small portion once every six months.
HC-110 is a good choice. I would recommend X-Tol even more, but there is a current shortage and some find the 5 litre amount to be inconvenient.
For powder developers like X-Tol or D-76 or ID-11, I recommend buying two packages and mixing up one. That leaves you with a package in reserve. When it is time to mix up that package, you order a new one to be on hand for when it is needed.

 

[Donald Qualls]

For powder developers like X-Tol or D-76 or ID-11, I recommend buying two packages and mixing up one. That leaves you with a package in reserve. When it is time to mix up that package, you order a new one to be on hand for when it is needed.

This is a very good strategy.

 

[ProfessorC1983]

+1 for Rodinal (actually R09) as a fellow beginner. Cheap and easy to mix since it's a liquid, I can experiment with different dilutions and development times for pushing/pulling various films (I also use FP4 and HP5 exclusively) and I'll gladly trade the higher sharpness for some increased graininess, which I don't even notice since I shoot 6x6.

Once I get into mixing my own chems I plan to try D-23, but I'm sticking with a single developer for now to minimize variables.

 

[jay moussy]

Nice answers.
Not sure about disposing of some of the products mentioned, many with hydroquinone..?

I noticed that Xtol has not been mentioned at all in this conversation (I think).
Any particular reason?

Out of stock in most places, it looks like....

 

[Donald Qualls]

Not a trace of hydroquinone in Rodinal-alikes. P-aminophenol (potentially derived from paracetamol/acetaminophen pain tablets), sodium sulfite, potassium iodide/bromide, and sodium/potassium hydroxide. If you mix your own, you can convert most MQ developers into PC (phenidone and ascorbic acid).

 

[baachitraka]

For an indefinite shelf life I'm biased towards replenished developers.
- M-Q Borax
- X-tol etc

But bringing the developer to 20°C during winter days can be boring and in terms of cost they are very very economical.

Otherwise a bottle of Rodinal and HC-110 leads to a stress in life.

 

[takilmaboxer]

Can't go wrong with D-76. If you want to try homebrew, D-23. It is a semi-compensating developer that is forgiving with respect to highlights.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Matt did mention Xtol. I used it for several years before switching to Pyrocat-HD. Xtol mixes up really easily and gives fantastic results. I always used it diluted 1+1. I believe Matt uses a replenishing regime.

 

[Saganich]

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!)

I started with the exact restrictions you posted except that I had to work in secret, so Hc110 and Rodinol worked well for slower film but when I moved to TriX I found I liked D23 better although a little less convenient.

 

[MattKing]

I noticed that Xtol has not been mentioned at all in this conversation (I think).
Any particular reason?

Out of stock in most places, it looks like....

I mentioned it - it is my preference actually, although the 5 litre size concerns some.
As for availability:
From Kodak Alaris' website:
Update: COVID 19 Chemistry shipment delays; May 14, 2020

We are experiencing shipping delays on the products listed below.
KA operations is working as quickly as possible to resolve this.
Please check back on this page for updates.

1058296 1 Gal Professional DEKTOL Developer
1058304 1 Gal Professional Fixer
1058338 5L Professional XTOL Developer
5054184 2X25L TMAX Developer and Replenisher

 

[Lachlan Young]

+1 for Rodinal (actually R09) as a fellow beginner. Cheap and easy to mix since it's a liquid, I can experiment with different dilutions and development times for pushing/pulling various films (I also use FP4 and HP5 exclusively) and I'll gladly trade the higher sharpness for some increased graininess, which I don't even notice since I shoot 6x6.

Once I get into mixing my own chems I plan to try D-23, but I'm sticking with a single developer for now to minimize variables.

This may run contrary to the popular conceptions, but under good quality analytical tests, Rodinal isn't sharper than D-76/ ID-11 at 1+1, it just produces more apparent granularity. And you can always dilute ID-11/ Perceptol/ D-23 to 1+3 and get higher sharpness.

 

[ProfessorC1983]

This may run contrary to the popular conceptions, but under good quality analytical tests, Rodinal isn't sharper than D-76/ ID-11 at 1+1, it just produces more apparent granularity. And you can always dilute ID-11/ Perceptol/ D-23 to 1+3 and get higher sharpness.

Thanks! I'll have to try it once I'm a bit more comfortable mixing chemicals from powder. Currently I don't really know what I'm missing!

 

[Bormental]

Looks like I am the only one here who prefers full-strength results from Xtol and D76 instead of 1:1

I find the gran to be nicer and overall the negatives have a bit gentler (hard to describe) look to them, making them look closer to medium format. Increased dilution only adds harshness and 35mm format has plenty of that already.

To answer the OP's question, I would buy a few 1L packets of ID-11. They are expensive on a per-roll basis, but if you develop infrequently that shouldn't matter. Also, with Kodak constantly tweaking the formula, ID-11 may be "more true" D76 than D76 itself.

 

[Lachlan Young]

Looks like I am the only one here who prefers full-strength results from Xtol and D76 instead of 1:1

I find the gran to be nicer and overall the negatives have a bit gentler (hard to describe) look to them, making them look closer to medium format. Increased dilution only adds harshness and 35mm format has plenty of that already.

High solvency developers and modern emulsion designs can achieve a better balance of high edge sharpness and lower apparent granularity than the tired old cliches about high definition developers. So it may be that you're actually achieving the 'look' that's closer to design aim than many other people. I quite happily use ID-11 etc at full strength.

 

[Bill Burk]

I can help you if you use D-76 1:1.

That’s because it’s my favorite developer and I hardly ever use anything else. (So if you use anything else I won’t have much experience to share).

It lasts forever in sealed quart plastic bottles.