CD4-LC low contrast developer for scanning

OP
OP

Alan Johnson

Subscriber
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Messages
3,270
Eterna RDS 4791 was a bit foggy for reasons unknown so I turned to Kodak.
I found two Eastman films which from the MTF chart have a notably high resolution.
2234- available in cassettes in UK but not ? in US.
2369- available as Film Photography Project High-Con 2369 in cassettes.
2234 was tried with CD4-LC developing 20% longer than CMS20 II above, post 72.

It appears that 2234 can be shot at EI =25 (attachment).
The results of the first test suggest it comes close to CMS20 II.

I hope to make a field trial of 2234 followed by a test of 2369.
 

Attachments

  • Eastman 2234.jpg
    114.1 KB · Views: 71
OP
OP

Alan Johnson

Subscriber
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Messages
3,270
I took photographs on different days on CMS20 II and Kodak 2234, both at EI =20 with the same lens, scanned and processed identically.

CMS20 II

Kodak 2234

Initial impression is that the resolution of fine detail and the fineness of grain come in the order:
CMS20 II better than Kodak 2234 better than Adox HR-50 (previous work, EI=50),though the latter can be developed in "ordinary" developers.
 

relistan

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2013
Messages
1,578
Location
Dublin, Ireland
Format
Multi Format

That CMS 20 II looks great here. Practically grainless.
 

John Wiegerink

Subscriber
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
3,632
Location
Lake Station, MI
Format
Multi Format
Alan Johnson said:
The Kodak 2369, sold as Film Photography Project Eastman High-Con 2369 has a clear base like CMS 20 II and somewhat similar shadow density at EI=20 (pic).
Another to field test.
Click to expand...
Alan,
You're right, those two look like they could be twins. Do you think 2369 has slightly better shadow detail?
 
OP
OP

Alan Johnson

Subscriber
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Messages
3,270
John Wiegerink said:
Alan,
You're right, those two look like they could be twins. Do you think 2369 has slightly better shadow detail?
Click to expand...

For the field test I hope to shoot 2369 and CMS 20 II both at EI=20 and compare.
There seems to be little chance that 2369, discontinued in 2011, will take over from CMS 20 II.

35mm Fuji HR-20 microfilm may continue in production but it is currently sold in bulk rolls with a minimum order number and is unperforated (will work in Canon EOS 10s/ EOS 1 maybe).
What a laugh if the EOS 10s (EOS10 in Europe) ended up being able to capture more detail than any Leica.
 
Last edited:
OP
OP

Alan Johnson

Subscriber
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Messages
3,270
For comparison of CMS20 II and Eastman 2369 (=Film Photography Project High-Con 2369), photographs at EI =20 in the same camera with the same lens were taken within a few minutes. They were developed for the same time in CD4-LC and processed similarly during and after scanning.

FPP High-Con 2369

Adox CMS20II

There seems little to choose between them, 2369 may have slightly higher contrast.
It could be used if supplies of CMS20 II are discontinued first, possibly developed in Adotech IV, Rollei RLC or Photoformulary TD-3, I did not try it.
 
Last edited:
OP
OP

Alan Johnson

Subscriber
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Messages
3,270
With a possible limited supply of Adox CMS20 II and FPP High-Con 2369 I tried expired unperforated microfilm.
A bulk roll of Imagelink 1461 expired 2001 was loaded into cassettes. A Computrol loader (similar to Watson) was used, with no perforations the exposure counter did not operate and the number of exposures loaded was estimated from the crank rotations. Some say that any scratches with this type of loader are mostly due to grit in the cassette. A 2 inch length of perforated film was attached to the unperforated film with sellotape and this loaded satisfactorily into a Canon EOS 10 (10s in US), one of few cameras designed to cope with unperforated film.

At EI=20 in fresh CD4-LC the results are not quite as good as those from CMS20 II on the 33 year old Imagelink which shows hardly visible tiny white specks at high magnification:

 

Attachments

  • Leader to load EOS 10.jpg
    658.5 KB · Views: 53
  • IMG_20241203_190229.png
    1.4 MB · Views: 46

John Wiegerink

Subscriber
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
3,632
Location
Lake Station, MI
Format
Multi Format
wow! That's some pretty fine detail. Contrast looks pretty good also with a fair amount of shadow detail. Job well done!
 
OP
OP

Alan Johnson

Subscriber
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Messages
3,270
Good keeping properties make CD4-LC a preferred low contrast homebrew developer for occasional use.
Others I tried were TDLC-102 which did not keep well,

TDLC-102 developer (Bill Troop)

This one shot developer can give pictorial results with Adox CMS20 II or Spur Ultra R 800. It is detailed in The Film Developing Cookbook 1998 p97 and in FDC 2020 p132. In FDC 2020 p134 it is noted that HQMS might replace glycin. I made and use a 10x concentrate: Demin water 40C...
www.photrio.com
and H&W Control in Glycol which gave posterisation.

H&W Control developer in glycol

Low contrast developers for microfilms are discussed in The Film Developing Cookbook 2020 p129-138 and in FDC 1998 p95-102. Amongst commercial developers are Adotech IV, Rollei RLC and Photoformulary TD-3. Dilute "ordinary" developers may work if the film EI is reduced sufficiently from box...
www.photrio.com

Here is one with CD4-LC:
 

Yezishu

Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2024
Messages
125
Location
Hong Kong
Format
35mm
I hope you don’t mind me asking some basic and perhaps self-evident questions here. For those microfilms, would using sodium sulfite at 30g/L produce a significant solvent effect ( "some silver is dissolved and precipitates out slowly")? When developing some microfilms, I noticed that the developer solution (sodium sulfite 20g/L, Dimezone 0.8g/L, ascorbic acid 0.8g/L) became cloudy, which surprised me, as I thought this will happens at around 70–80g/L.
 
Last edited:
OP
OP

Alan Johnson

Subscriber
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Messages
3,270
The Film Developing Cookbook 2020 p131 notes:
"There is another good reason for lowering sulfite when a document film is used. Sulfite at any level has a solvent action which initiates solution physical development. The finer the grained the film, the more pronounced this action. Document films are exceedingly fine grained. Sulfite should be reduced to a minimum on the assumption that doing so will improve the image quality."
It goes on to suggest a POTA modification containing 10g/L sodium sulfite.
So it does appear that a version of CD4-LC with only 10g/L sulfite might give better image quality.

On the other hand, when CD-4 is used in C41 developers, hydroxylamine sulfate, HAS, is added as a preservative.
To keep things relatively simple in CD4-LC, as a preservative HAS was omitted and sulfite used at 30g/L rather than the 10g/L recommended in FDC p131.
 
Last edited:

Yezishu

Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2024
Messages
125
Location
Hong Kong
Format
35mm
Thank you for clarifying my doubts! I am trying to use a type of microfilm as a reversal film because its base is very transparent. That means to combine a low-contrast developer with a solvent effect. Now I think I can simply add more sodium sulfite rathre than extra sodium thiocyanate or sodium thiosulfate.
 
OP
OP

Alan Johnson

Subscriber
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Messages
3,270
King Mono 50 film, not to be confused with King Mono King Slow ISO 12 film, is a sound recording film sold by Fotoimpex and also available on AliExpress and elsewhere.

King Film Mono 50: Was steckt dahinter? - APHOG Forum

Bei Fotoimpex gibt es einen sogenannten King Film Mono 50 [URL:https://www.fotoimpex.de/shop/filme/king-film-mono-50-13536.html]. Leider keine weiteren Angaben, außer dass es ein Schwarzweißfilm im Format 135-36 sein soll und umgespulter Kodak Kinofilm.…
forum.aphog.com

Experimentally I shot it at EI=25 and developed in CD4-LC for the equivalent to 9m 20C in fresh developer to get pictorial results on scanning:


It seems to be worth another test at EI=50.
 

relistan

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2013
Messages
1,578
Location
Dublin, Ireland
Format
Multi Format

Agreed, looks like it could have gone one more stop
 
OP
OP

Alan Johnson

Subscriber
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Messages
3,270
A better result with King Mono 50 was obtained by exposing it at EI=50 and developing it in CD4-LC for 20% less than the time given in post 72, Sept 15 2024.
A water stop, I.5min fix and 5min water wash was used.
King Mono 50 at EI=50 has finer grain and better resolution of fine detail in my test than its Aviphot 80 derived competition. I don't see any tiny specks in the deep shadows at high magnification with the King Mono 50.


It seems likely that this film is Kodak 2374, which is sold in North America by Film Photography Project. They explain the manufacturer's mark problem. It is possible to avoid this by taking 3 shots of any anticipated keepers IMO.

35mm BW Film - Eastman Kodak Hi-Fi 2374

Eastman Hi Fi 2374 35mm Black & White FilmOne Roll / iso 50 / 24 exposures / non-DX-Coded ISO 50 - RECOMMENDED FOR MANUAL 35mm CAMERAS Eastman 2374 - Panchromatic Sound Recording Film 2374 (ESTAR) - "...is a high contrast, panchromatic black-and-white film designed for recording variable-area...
filmphotographystore.com
 
Last edited:

destroya

Subscriber
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
1,213
Location
Willamette Valley, OR
Format
Multi Format

how grey is the base? kodak lists the film as having a grey ESTAR base. I thought the estar base was clear? hoping this could be a good film for reversal processing as its very cheap if you buy it direct from kodak, assuming you still can, unlike the color films. works out to less than $2 US a roll. info from their online price catalog.......

KODAK Panchromatic Sound Recording Film 2374 / E / PSR683 / ESTAR Gray Base / 35 mm x 2050 ft roll / On Core / KS-1866
8253593 1 1+ $625.77 02/01/2025

john
 
OP
OP

Alan Johnson

Subscriber
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Messages
3,270

It's not clear like CMS20 John. They are both fixed for about 1.5 min.
 

Attachments

  • KM 50 base.jpg
    1.4 MB · Views: 26

relistan

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2013
Messages
1,578
Location
Dublin, Ireland
Format
Multi Format

Very good result, Alan. Certainly better than all of their examples!
 
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…