Best high acutance developer.

Keith Tapscott.

Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2005
Messages
1,820
Location
Plymouth. UK
Format
Multi Format
I read that Barry Thornton considered Johnson's Definol to be the best high acutance developer he ever used.

There have been many other such developers designed by Geoffrey Crawley such as Acutol, Acuspecial and FX39.

Also high definition developers by Tetenal such as Neodyn/Neofin.

Many here like Pyrogallol and Pyrocatechol types.

What do folks here consider to be the best high acutance film developer you have used?
 

cliveh

Subscriber
Joined
Oct 9, 2010
Messages
7,567
Format
35mm RF
Rodinal
 

Alan9940

Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2006
Messages
2,432
Location
Arizona
Format
Multi Format
I've found that Rodinal, Pyrocat-HD and FX-55 provide all the acutance I could ever want.
 

dpurdy

Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2006
Messages
2,675
Location
Portland OR
Format
8x10 Format
I always use Beutlers formula. It is grainy but very sharp. I use it for sheet film and 120 Acros. For other roll films I use a Pyro.
 

pentaxuser

Member
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
20,050
Location
Daventry, No
Format
35mm
Well so far the breaking news is that all the "swing" states have voted for the candidate Rodinal with only Canada expressing any dissent

pentaxuser ( tryíng to ímitate Walter Cronkite with limited success)
 

Alex Benjamin

Subscriber
Joined
Aug 8, 2018
Messages
2,603
Location
Montreal
Format
Multi Format
FP4+ in FX-2 is the highest-acutance negs I've ever got.

Haven't tried FX-1.

Just another Canadian expressing dissent here .
 

Pioneer

Member
Joined
May 29, 2010
Messages
3,882
Location
Elko, Nevada
Format
Multi Format
I like developers I mix myself. I mix up my own PaRodinal and I have never been disappointed. I have also mixed and used FX39 and it works as well but PaRodinal is easier.
 

Milpool

Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2023
Messages
783
Location
n/a
Format
4x5 Format
I suppose this also depends on how you define acutance. Are you talking about traditional acutance (edge sharpness) or including edge effects? The other thing is emulsions have changed since the old rules were codified.
 

retina_restoration

Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2023
Messages
1,269
Location
Wilammette Valley, Oregon
Format
35mm RF

You could easily choose any one of those and get excellent sharp, high acutance results. I don't really think there is a "best" among those you list, because most people who have used them have found the results to be similar. If you are chasing the extreme limits of what is possible, I suppose Pyrocat HD is one of the best for extreme acutance, but the differences aren't as dramatic as people expect.
Ultimately, your choice of film, negative size, lens performance, and your technique are far more important factors than the acutance traits of the developer you use.
 

loccdor

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 12, 2024
Messages
1,602
Location
USA
Format
Multi Format
Low acutance in an image is almost never the fault of the developer. There are like five or ten other things you have to get perfect before you start worrying about that. The only developer I've noticed that has somewhat disappointing results for acutance is Caffenol, but even that isn't super bad.
 

Sirius Glass

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
50,423
Location
Southern California
Format
Multi Format
XTOL stock, 1:1 or replenished.

 

Ian Grant

Subscriber
Joined
Aug 2, 2004
Messages
23,283
Location
West Midland
Format
Multi Format

The right shutter speed to avoid camera shake, or mirror lock on a tripod

Correct exposure and development

The right film/developer combination

The right choice of lens

The optimal aperture


It comes down to craft, Geoffrey Crawley stated that the best lens for high acutance work was the 50mm f2 Summicron. My experience backs that up, I was amazed when I shot my first images with a Leica M3 & 50mm Summicron in the late 1980s, I showed some photographer friends some prints and they thought I'd bought a new MF camera.

What's missed is there are sweet spots in film/developer combinations.

Ian
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
53,361
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
I wonder if Joe Jackson did a special "acutance" version of this number?:
 

loccdor

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 12, 2024
Messages
1,602
Location
USA
Format
Multi Format

Yep that's a good list. But there are hundreds are very sharp lenses out there, especially considering that some of the current ones designed for digital cameras with 50MP sensors can be mounted on film SLRs. I never saw the need to buy Leica stuff, even the Soviet copies of German lenses are pretty good optically most of the time. As are quite a few Japanese designs... with a lot of third party lenses included. My sharpest 28mm lens is an Osawa... who ever heard of them? When it works it works.
 

loccdor

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 12, 2024
Messages
1,602
Location
USA
Format
Multi Format
MattKing said:
I wonder if Joe Jackson did a special "acutance" version of this number?:
Click to expand...

The musical equivalent of sharp I think is Staccato!
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
53,361
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
It is important to remember that acutance is not the same as resolution. In many cases, procedures that enhance acutance actually result in reduced resolution, because the emphasis on the factors that increase the perceived sharpness relate to the edges of detail, rather than the entire contents of that detail.
That is why Tri-X in Rodinal looks "sharper" than T-Max 100 in X-Tol.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…