Amaloco AM74 experiences?

I'll be traveling soon, and will have a local store with several developers available, one of which is Amaloco AM74. The Amaloco web page implies that it's comparable to Rodinal, but the MSDS says (hopefully I can overcome HTML formatting here):

Chemische Charakterisierung:
Zubereitung, enthält u.a.:
Wasser [7732-18-5]______________________________________________> 50%
Diethylenglykol [111-46-6] (Xn, R22)_____________________________1-5%
Hydrochinon [123-31-9] (Xn, N, R22-40-41-43-50-68)Carc3 Mut3_____< 1%
1-Phenyl-3-pyrazolidon [92-43-3] (Xn, N, R22-51/53)______________< 1%
Natriumcarbonat [584-08-7] (Xi, R36/37/38)______________________ 1-5%
Natriumsulfit [7757-83-7]_______________________________________< 20%
Kaliumbromid [7758-02-3]_________________________________________< 2%
Es sind keine anderen chemischen Verbindungen enthalten, die - nach dem heutigen
Stand unserer Kenntnisse- eine Gefahr für Gesundheit und/oder Umwelt bilden.

Looks like a basic PQ developer, possibly Dimezone for the P, and a recommended minimum of 20ml concentrate per roll, so no more than 1:50 dilution in a 1 liter rollfilm tank. Is it similar to HC-110? Some say it's the same as Rollei RHS developer.

Can anyone give me some insight from having used AM74? I'm looking at using a broad range of films, from Pan-F to TMY, and widely varying subject matter, so any advice about good and bad film pairings would be appreciated. I've already checked times at digitaltruth, and have the Dutch version of the datasheet. I'm looking for personal takes on the basic characteristics of AM74 and comparisons with other developers. I'd like to take it more dilute and use longer processing times than the standard 1:7 and 1:5, and the instructions give some guidelines on extending time with greater dilution.

Thanks,
Lee

I have limited experience, since I have been using it for a little over a year and time constraints mean shooting/developing little.
So far I have used AM74 with Rollei Retro (APX100), HP5, FP4, Efke 100 and Foma 400 all in 35mm and I think it is a good all around developer.

I got the Dead Link Removed from Robert (fotohuis) who is the representative for Netherlands and started right away with their recommended dilution/times with good results.

Since the times for EFKE 100 were so short I decided to double dilution and extend time, with good results (I'm not a fine grain person)
but by doubling dilution grain seemed to show up in FOMA400 quite a lot.

I still do my APX100 in Rodinal though, and you can also buy Rodinal here in netherlands from fotohuis.

PS> The pdf is in Dutch so a few keywords
Entwikkeling = development
tijd/tijden = time/times
verdunning = dilution
belicht als = expose as
Temperatuur, agitatie, are easy

Google translation of the Development time part of the pdf:
For all film 25/15 ° - 400/27 ° ISO applies in principle to a standaard dilution 1 + 7 a development time of 5 minutes at 20 ° C.
This rule applies to the Agfa APX 100 films, Ilford HP 5 Plus, the Kodak T-Max 100 and Prof. Tri-X 400 and the Tura P 150.
T-Grainfilms as 400 - and P T-Max 3200, the Fuji Neopan 400 and 1600, the Agfa APX 400 and Tura P 400 could in principle to a standaard dilution of 1 + 7 when a development time, namely 6 min at 20 ° C.
This time applies only to illuminate rated films. For 'push', forced individually develop, see develop and push in 74 AM.
For Efke films and Ilford Pan F Plus, Delta 100 prof, FP 4 Plus, Delta Prof. 400 and the new Fuji Neopan 100 ACROS underlying data so different that a separate listing is necessary. Extensions in the development of multiple use after each film are unnecessary.

I never used AM74, but Rollei RHS, which I think is the same product! I like it, it is rather compensating, the grain is sharp, but the image is IMO not as flat as in Rodinal.

AM74 is an excellent developer and I use it as my standard. According to Amaloco is is not very suitable for TriX 400 and HP5+.

Hans

@ clogz: do you know why?

Thanks for the replies so far. I'll be travelling a lot and will also have household cooking, laundry, shopping, and child care duties for the month. Since I won't have lots of time to experiment, any information is helpful to shorten my learning curve and start getting good results immediately.

One other question I have is whether people find AM74 a "box speed" developer, or if lowering the EI and cutting development a little over the suggested times is worthwhile. I'll most likely be bracketing the first rolls of each film type.

Like titrisol, I prefer longer development times. The Amaloco info sheet calls the 1:7 dilution "stock", and gives the following factors for adjusting development time relative to the 1:7 times when using greater dilutions:

dilution_____development time factor
1:7___________1
1:9___________1.1
1:15__________1.6
1:19__________2.0

Those are the suggested adjustments, so the fraction of those dilutions that are the developer are 1/8, 1/10, 1/16, and 1/20.

I would like to try greater dilutions and extend times to try semi-stand development, but 20ml of the supplied liquid is required per roll of film, so that limits a 1 liter tank with one roll of film to the greatest dilution of 1:50. With that in mind, I ran a regression and came up with potential time extension factors for dilutions of 1:31 and 1:39, which are doublings of the 1:15 and 1:19 dilutions. Those should be near:

dilution_____development time factor
1:31___________4
1:39___________6.4

The 1:19 times for some films may be fine for me with the time adjustment that should be required for semi-stand agitation. I'm wondering if the acutance effects of semi-stand will be evident with AM74, or if they are not in evidence as with HC-110. I'd love to hear from anyone who's tried that route.

Fotohuis says AM74 is a surface developer at dilutions of 1:15 and greater. He also says that graininess increases with greater dilution. The Amaloco recommendations for film developer combinations are here: http://www.amaloco.nl/pdf/overzicht.pdf I'd assume that traditional fast films like HP5+ and Tri-X become too grainy for general recommendation, but it would be nice to have the reason stated.

I'd also be interested in comparisons of grain and tonality with other developers. I'm most familiar with D76, HC-110, Rodinal at higher dilutions, Microdol-X/Perceptol, Ilfosol, and PC-TEA.

Thanks again for all your input. I'm looking to hit the ground running and to concentrate on the photos rather than spending my whole visit working out the process, so every contribution is helpful.

Lee

Hello Philippe,
I have no idea why but found the info on the Amaloco website.

Hans

clogz said:

Hello Philippe,
I have no idea why but found the info on the Amaloco website.

Hans

Click to expand...

R. Vonk tells me by private email that it's large grain size that prevents Amaloco from recommending AM74 with Tri-X and HP5+.

He also confirms that RHS is AM74 packaged for Rollei.

Lee

Grain doesn't bother me, especially when it is well defined... and I mostly use MF and LF (4x5 and 8x10). RHS (!) gives me good results.

It appears from responses here and elsewhere that AM74 is a good general developer, similar in tonality to, but perhaps better (in some unspecified ways) than D-76 with some films. It's considered too grainy in some quarters with Tri-X and HP5+, so those are a happier marriage with D-76 or other developers.

I haven't heard from anyone specifically on higher dilutions or semi-stand development, so it looks like I'm coloring outside the lines on my own. Been there before. Actually, I often live there for long periods.

If anyone has any more to add, I'd appreciate it. I'm still looking specifically for:

1) Do you get "box speed" with Amaloco's AM74 times & temps? Which films are box speed and which need a bit of EI tweaking, and how much in which direction?

2) Semi-stand info with dilution, film, EI, times, agitation routine, and target gamma or output (scanning, point source, condenser, diffuser, contacting platinum/palladium, etc)

3) Tonality comparisons with other specific developers

Thanks for all the responses so far. They have been helpful. If I manage to do much of anything along these lines myself, I'll report back, although that could be many months away.

Lee

Amaloco AM74

I have used AM74 with FP4+ and Pan F+ with good results. I used it at 1:15 so the times wouldn't be too short. With both of these films the grain was tight and sharp. Other developers would probably be better fpr 400 speed films. I don't understand the attraction of stand development. It is supposed to provide more compensation but I donlt know of any evidence that this is the case. Tonality in a final print is affected by many factors. I found it satisfactory with FP4+ and Pan F+.

dynachrome said:

I don't understand the attraction of stand development. It is supposed to provide more compensation but I donlt know of any evidence that this is the case.

Click to expand...

Thanks for your take on AM74.

As for stand development, it's not a new fad, although it is seeing quite a resurgence. It was commonly used earlier in the 20th century. Berenice Abbott describes Atget's use of stand development when she visited him. Ansel Adams used it with HC110 at high dilution to tame contrast close to 30 years ago (see The Negative). There are a number of stand development practitioners here on APUG who could show you their results. Anchell and Troop devote a page to the method with typical effects discussed, and a high recommendation for using it with modern films on pp. 37-38 of the Film Developing Cookbook. Sandy King uses it with Pyrocat-HD to good effect. It can raise effective film speed without blowing highlights. See df cardwell's post on film curves: (there was a url link here which no longer exists) and his interesting take on the cultural homogenization of film processing: (there was a url link here which no longer exists) I'd put the availability of rotary processors and mechanized/nitrogen burst/dip & dunk processing into the mix with df's take on standardized darkroom training as reasons that older methods were "lost", or at least strongly deemphasized.

I'm not saying that stand or semi-stand development is the answer to all life's photographic problems, but it's a very useful tool when you need its properties.

Hope I haven't hijacked my own thread here. I'd prefer to keep this about AM74 rather than debating the merits or existence of stand development and its effects.

Lee

IMHO you get box speed with 1+15 and 100(sh) speed films

With 400 films i used the 1+7 and I think I got enough shdow detail at box speed

I've got a couple of bottles of it here, and if I have any problems, I just call Robert in the Netherlands for help. Still haven't finished shooting enough Fomapan to fill the tank yet. Robert suggested to me either 1:9 or 1:14 as starting points.

Thanks Joe,

Robert is on vacation for the month that I'm in NL.

I have found that the close by shop has a few more developers than they listed in email, so I'm in pretty good shape except for developing at the current daytime temperatures, it's 25C in the house now, but I'll be hoping to run some AM74 soon.

Lee

Well, although far from thorough, with time only to run two rolls of different kinds of film, I do have minimal results to report with AM-74 using semi-stand agitation and increased dilution.

My curve fitting to the AM-74 developer data suggested time adjustments for greater dilutions, done before I traveled in anticipation of this being the best developer option readily available (i.e. about 600 meters from my rental apartment door).

As mentioned in an earlier post, Amoloco suggests the following adjustments for dilutions

Dilution / Time factor
1:7 / 1
1:9 / 1.1
1:15 / 1.6
1:19 / 2

and my extrapolations were

1:29 / 4
1:39 / 6.4

First I did a roll of TMY-2 at 1:19, and after adjustment for temperature as per AM74 instructions and some adjustment for semi-stand, I went with 15 minutes at 70F and initial agitation of 30 seconds and then ten seconds of gentle torus inversion at 5 and 10 minutes. This adjustment estimated from the manufacturer's suggestion of 12 minutes at 68F and "normal" agitation.

My second roll was FP4+ developed at 1:39 for 20 minutes at 24.5C (I switched my digital IR thermometer to Celsius for this roll), using my extrapolated dilution adjustment estimate. Agitation was 30 seconds initial and then 10 seconds of gentle torus inversions at 5, 10, and 15 minutes. I didn't allow for much extended time due to reduced agitation because my initial impressions from the roll of TMY-2 were that it was a bit overdeveloped. Now I think that impression may have been greatly exaggerated because I didn't have access to a proper light box to make my normal visual assessment. Both flat light on stone walls in dusky shade and shots in full sunlight with backlit dunes on the Frysland beaches look nice and contrasty on the TMY-2, but not overbaked or blown out. That's something I was hoping to achieve by using greater dilution and semi-stand.

Both sets of negatives look good on my lightbox back at home in the US, with both films appearing to be at least box speed and close to normal overall contrast for diffusion enlarging. I haven't printed yet, and may not have time to do so for a good while.

Development is even across the frames, so semi-stand use of AM74 and higher dilutions with examples of a T-grain and a more traditional emulsion looks good.

I no longer have access to AM-74 without high shipping costs from the Netherlands to the US, so won't be pursing this any more myself. But if anyone else is interested in pursuing this path, it looks promising. Of course due to limited time and opportunity I don't have a control at both normal dilutions and normal agitation to compare with.

I don't have any more allowance on APUG to post spreadsheets, estimated dilution adjustment curves, or images to this thread if and when I do get time to scan and post.

Thanks to Ruud (here on APUG) who was very helpful in locating resources and great to sit and chat with on my last afternoon in town, and to Photo Rembrandt in Maastricht for their helpfulness and hospitality. My web access was very spotty, and failed the last several days I was in town, and I had no phone at our rental. But when I came in to pick up transparencies, the people at Photo Rembrandt called Ruud because he had asked them about me when he returned to town earlier than expected. They put me on their phone with Ruud so that I could talk with him and arrange an unexpected last minute face-to-face meeting.

Lee