Choosing developer(s)

MikeSeb · Jul 14, 2007

Xtol and PC-TEA compared

joshua, PC-TEA has most of the characteristics you like in Xtol. PC-TEA at 1+50 dilution is about equivalent to Xtol/Mytol 1+2, while 1+100 is similar to 1+3 Xtol/Mytol.

I find Xtol and its cousins finer grained and sharper than D76--others will surely differ--and the tonality is beautiful. The greater the dilution, the smoother the tonality, the greater the sharpness and grain. I find the higher dilutions work great with Ilford Delta and Kodak T-max.

Overall, PC-TEA I find a bit grainier than Xtol/Mytol and about the same sharpness, with tonality of either developer depending on dilution more than on developer per se.

If you like Xtol you will probably like PC-TEA since they are quite similar.

Anscojohn · Jul 14, 2007

Joshua_G said:
Thank you. What are its qualities, concerning "film speed/grain/sharpness (acutance)/gradation"? How does it defer in those qualities from D-23?

********
HC!!0 at EK dilutions are more linear acting than D-23. Subjectively, I would say HC is "sharper" than D23 used stock and replenished. At any speed film speed rating, D23's shadow detail is outstanding. Where D23 falls down (if indeed it does) compared to HC, it is in highlight separation.

One great strength of D23 is with roll film where the exposures are mixed between high contrast and low contrast scenes, or where some negs are under or overexposed. It is possible to give full development with little chance of blocking up the highlights.

Black Dog · Jul 15, 2007

Yes, D23 is really versatile stuff-most 2 baths are based on it (I use Barry Thornton's formula).

Joshua_G · Jul 15, 2007

Thanks for all the replies.

I'd try to sum up the qualities of each developer, mentioned so far.

D-76

The industry standard developer, sharp in 1:1 or 1:3 dilution, easy to use, easy to mix ones own, versatile, keeps well.

D-23

Outstanding shadow detail, high latitude and "forgiving" over-exposure and under-exposure, versatile.

HC-110

Fine grain, crisp, with all round excellent tonality, sharper than D-23, reliable, long lasting, very convenient.

Xtol/Mytol

Finer grained and sharper than D76, beautiful tonality.

PC-TEA

Similar results to Mytol, though a bit grainier and the same sharpness, with superior shelf life and it's much easier to mix than Mytol.

Pyrocat HD

Very high quality, outstanding acutance and tonality, excellent fine-grain.

Pyrocat-MC

?

In my quest for best "film speed/grain/sharpness (acutance)/gradation" qualities, from your recommendations, so far (if I read correctly), Pyrocat-HD is first. Second is probably Xtol/Mytol. Ease of mixing, convenience, durability and cost are much less important to me, though I do care about tolerance to deviations in exposure.

Any other insights into the qualities of different developers?

Which developer is better for push processing?

Ian Grant · Jul 15, 2007

Developer and film combinations are very personal. Over the years I've tried and tested a great many combinations, but only rarely change my working methods.

For years I used Adox Borax MQ, a bit similar to D76, but better grain, tonality & sharpness, also gives the true film speed - not suprising as it's the same formula used for the DIN speed tests. Then I switched to Rodinal, for about 10 years before eventually trying Xtol. Xtol really was a major imrovement compared to ID11/D76 and is probably the best commercially available film developer.

Your comments about Xtol are about right.

However staining developers are different and Sandy Kings Pyrocat is outstanding. Simple cheap and easy to use the results speak for themselves.

Now you ask about push processing, I'd have to say I haven't push processed a conventional film since XP1 was introduced. XP1, and now XP2 are superb films and push process brilliantly in C41 chemistry, I always used the Photocolor C41 kit (now Paterson). I used XP1/XP2 commercially for many years to shoot Rock concerts and grain, sharpness and tonality the films are way ahead of conventional B&W.

Ian

Joshua_G · Jul 15, 2007

Ian Grant said:
Developer and film combinations are very personal.

Indeed. However, it seems to me that the unique qualities of each different film and each different developer are there. The personal aspect is ones preference regarding appearance, or pictorial qualities. Since I shoot various films and various styles and moods, I prefer narrow my experiments to 2, 3 or 4 developers hence my questions.

Ian Grant said:
For years I used Adox Borax MQ, a bit similar to D76, but better grain, tonality & sharpness, also gives the true film speed - not suprising as it's the same formula used for the DIN speed tests. Then I switched to Rodinal, for about 10 years before eventually trying Xtol. Xtol really was a major imrovement compared to ID11/D76 and is probably the best commercially available film developer.
...
However staining developers are different and Sandy Kings Pyrocat is outstanding. Simple cheap and easy to use the results speak for themselves.

Now you ask about push processing, I'd have to say I haven't push processed a conventional film since XP1 was introduced. XP1, and now XP2 are superb films and push process brilliantly in C41 chemistry, I always used the Photocolor C41 kit (now Paterson). I used XP1/XP2 commercially for many years to shoot Rock concerts and grain, sharpness and tonality the films are way ahead of conventional B&W.

Thank you for sharing your experience.

Rick Jones · Jul 15, 2007

My experience with different developers is based on relatively small enlargements (35mm - 5X7, 6X7 - 11X14, 4X5 - 11X14). As a result, to my eye, differences in developers is, at best, very subtle to the point of being indistinguishable. Very likely, larger prints would reveal differences I just can't see. So how are you going to use your negatives - small prints, large prints, scans? For my uses D76 1:1 offers a good balance between fine grain and sharpness plus it's relatively cheap and the stock solution has a good shelf life. If you enjoy the process of mixing your own I say go to it but, unfortunately, I can offer no advice. I have always felt, right or wrong, if someone had developed a formula that was clearly superior everyone would be using it. And certainly someone would make that formula available as a commercially prepared product. So my advice is just pick any developer, learn to use it well and go out and do your work. How you do that work will likely be far more important than the resulting differences seen from variuos developers you might choose.

Black Dog · Jul 18, 2007

I remember the first time I used a staining dev (PMK,with AP400 4x5)....WOW! I looked at the neg and it was sharp enough to shave with....made a print on Record Rapid and the tones glow like nothing else-so if tonality and detail are most important to you, it's a case of no stain, no gain. For finer grain, I use dilute Perceptol or a 2 bath. Paterson Aculux/Acutol with HP5/Fp4 respectively are also very good combos.

psvensson · Jul 18, 2007

Joshua, what films will you be developing? The response to developers varies quite a bit. My experience is chiefly with Delta 400 and Tri-X, and I must say HC-110 has been disappointing with both, excelling neither in fine grain, accutance or speed. Its main selling point is its convenience and longevity, I believe. D-76 1:1 would be a better choice for most films.

Ascorbic acid formulas like Mytol can give results very similar to D-76, but be aware that they should be used right after the ascorbic acid or ascorbate has been dissolved in water - many people find activity declines in a matter of hours after that.

For D400, I used to dissolve in 1l:

2 tbsp sodium sulfite
2 g ascorbic acid
5 ml 1% solution of phenidone in alcohol

and use immediately at 24 C, 13.5 min.

This was inspired by Patrick Gainer's writings, though he will tell you to use some other alkali. Nowadays I use a somewhat more complicated developer with less sulfite that doesn't mush the grain as much.

Black Dog · Jul 18, 2007

I agree-HC110 is definitely better with slower films IMHO. I've been v impressed with both Mytol and D96 (using Neopan SS and Maco 100).

Joshua_G · Jul 18, 2007

Rick Jones said:
I have always felt, right or wrong, if someone had developed a formula that was clearly superior everyone would be using it. And certainly someone would make that formula available as a commercially prepared product

Thank you.
Those who prefer commercially prepared chemicals will obviously resort commercially prepared ones.
Many commercial developers were removed from the marked due to shelf life problems.

Black Dog said:
I use dilute Perceptol or a 2 bath. Paterson Aculux/Acutol with HP5/Fp4 respectively are also very good combos.

Thank you.
In my initial post and afterwards I stressed that availability of developers were I live is meager none of those you mentioned is available.

psvensson said:
Joshua, what films will you be developing.

Thank you.
Various ones by Fuji, Kodak and Ilford, medium speed and high speed, conventional and T Grain.

Black Dog said:
I've been v impressed with both Mytol and D96 (using Neopan SS and Maco 100).

Thank you.
Never heard of D96, or did you mean D-76?

Alan Johnson · Jul 18, 2007

IMO if you want a solvent developer(Xtol/Mytol) and an acutance developer(FX-37) you made a good choice to start with. FX-37 has been said by Geoffrey Crawley,who invented both, to be the closest published formula to FX-39 which Paterson still sell.FX-37 is an acutance developer giving greater sharpness and extra film speed compared to D76 ,with slightly larger grain.It works well with tabular grain films Delta 100, 100 T-max, Acros,but is also suitable for slower traditional films.
For the third developer, how about a staining developer,sharp,good tonal range,a little less film speed.

Black Dog · Jul 18, 2007

The formula for D96 can be found in 'The Film Developing Cookbook' (Anchell &Troop)-it's a metol/ascorbic acid formula.

Tom Hoskinson · Jul 18, 2007

Kodak D-96 is one of Kodak's variations on the D-76 Formula. Kodak recommends D-96 for developing Motion Picture Negative Film.

For the Kodak published D-96 Formula See: http://www.kodak.com/US/plugins/acrobat/en/motion/support/processing/h2415/h2415.pdf

Joshua_G · Jul 19, 2007

Alan Johnson said:
IMO if you want a solvent developer(Xtol/Mytol) and an acutance developer(FX-37) you made a good choice to start with. FX-37 has been said by Geoffrey Crawley,who invented both, to be the closest published formula to FX-39 which Paterson still sell.FX-37 is an acutance developer giving greater sharpness and extra film speed compared to D76 ,with slightly larger grain.It works well with tabular grain films Delta 100, 100 T-max, Acros,but is also suitable for slower traditional films.

Thank you.
This is what I understood from "The Film Developing Cookbook". I wanted to hear others' experiences, concerning those developers and others.

Alan Johnson said:
For the third developer, how about a staining developer,sharp,good tonal range,a little less film speed.

Thank you.
I will try Pyrocat-HD. How is its grain, compared to D-76?

Black Dog said:
The formula for D96 can be found in 'The Film Developing Cookbook' (Anchell &Troop)-it's a metol/ascorbic acid formula.

Thank you.
I looked for it, yet, didn't find it there.

Tom Hoskinson said:
Kodak D-96 is one of Kodak's variations on the D-76 Formula. Kodak recommends D-96 for developing Motion Picture Negative Film.

Thank you.
As such, it is probably tuned for machine processing. Anyhow, there are ample D-76 variations.

Black Dog · Jul 19, 2007

Joshua, there's a list of all the formulae near the front of the book, with the relevant page numbers for each one.

Joshua_G · Jul 19, 2007

Black Dog said:
Joshua, there's a list of all the formulae near the front of the book, with the relevant page numbers for each one.

Thank you.
Okay, I found it D-96A.
What's the difference between D-76A and Xtol/Mytol?

Alan Johnson · Jul 21, 2007

Btw,the formula for FX-37 given in the Film Developing Cookbook is wrong, it gives 10x too much benzotriazole. The correct formula, as originally given in BJP 03-27-96,is given in the Apug articles section,which also mentions Crawley's recent suggestion to replace the benzotriazole by an increase in potassium bromide.I can confirm this works OK.

gainer · Jul 22, 2007

Joshua_G said:
Thank you.
Okay, I found it D-96A.
What's the difference between D-76A and Xtol/Mytol?

Metol and hydroquinone in D-76, phenidone or Dimezone and sodium ascorbate in Xtol/Mytol if you are asking about formulae. Xtol specifies isoascorbate, also known as erythorbate. The ascorbate and erythorbate are mirror images. Ascorbic acid is vitamin C and erythorbic acid is not, but film cannot tell the difference.

Joshua_G · Jul 22, 2007

gainer said:
Metol and hydroquinone in D-76, phenidone or Dimezone and sodium ascorbate in Xtol/Mytol if you are asking about formulae. Xtol specifies isoascorbate, also known as erythorbate. The ascorbate and erythorbate are mirror images. Ascorbic acid is vitamin C and erythorbic acid is not, but film cannot tell the difference.

Thank you.
I meant asking about the differences in pictorial qualities of the negative developed in each developer.

Black Dog · Jul 22, 2007

Something that's worked for me is to establish your (say) 3 favourite films and developers, and then every so often, try a new dev with your chosen films and vice versa. That way you can experiment without just thrashing around.

Choosing developer(s)

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency