I looked up the Delta recipe and read your article, thanks (google translate works .. kinda
). For convenience sake here's a quick chart :
Caffenol recipes for 1000ml
References :
When I first started caffenol, there where not so many recipes on the net, I think there where about 3 websites that had some information about caffenol. One of the best ressources at the time for …
Welcome everybody, after more than 15000 hits and readers from more than 60 countries in less than 5 months, here's a chart for your conveni...
for my german friends... Don't worry, this blog stays in englisch language. This post is an exeption. Das Bild kann wie alles von mir oh...
Hello coffee (ab)users, I'm very happy to present Eiriks report about his reduced soda/ascorbic-acid versions. Have a nice reading, an...
I guess it's all relative. CCM/H can be considered hot compared to other caffenol recipes like Delta, but it's not as active as, for example, XTOL stock (5-6min for fomapan 100 at box speed). Delta is not much different than CM/CH regarding the quantity of ascorbic acid and instant coffee, but went the route of a significant lowering of sodium carbonate. I guess it lowers the PH below 9 and render the mixture much less active. But why lowering the wasing soda so much while keeping Vit. C (not cheap !) and instant coffee to somewhat high quantities ? the article I've found (see references above) didn't explain much.
In your article (
https://blog.erdmenger.de/2023/09/01/artlog-architekturfotografie-und-caffenol-push-entwicklung/) you explain that CM was better than Delta for a 2 stop push, but also note that the extended developement with delta was barely enough. It would be interesting to compare the two recipes using developement times that gives the same density in the highlights.
In the meantime, my working theory is that the caffenol C recipes don't matter much as long as there's enough developing agents and the PH is in a given range (8-10.5 ??) : the same results can probably be achieved tinkering with the quantitites of each components or using the developement time as the only variable.
If we divide the 15min CM/CH-time by 1.44 we get around 10min for a box speed development with this very receipt. Interesting to see that you even need to down the time to 9min …
Interesting indeed that the 1.44 "rule" applied to CCM/H 15min starting point gives 10min, that's pretty close to where I'm at. As Donal Qualls pointed out, difference in agitation scheme play a role, and I'd add that we all have our personnal preferences regarding how dense we like our negatives. I usually print at what should be a grade 3 on my color head so I'm not a fan of high contrast ones. But this remark encouraged me to try a developement right away with CCH(rs) using real shots, 9min at 20°c : the negatives are drying right now and they look good
I'll try a quick scan and maybe a print tomorrow.