Cinestill DF96 monobath

[Huss]

It dissolves the emulsion, leaving you with a totally clear film strip.
And contaminates the reusable monobath developer. I had to run it through a coffee filter to remove the debris.
Hopefully the monobath still works..

 

[grainyvision]

I will never understand the latest trend of using a monobath. Almost every recent "why did this happen" developer problem I've seen has been linked back to Df96

 

[Anon Ymous]

I will never understand the latest trend of using a monobath...

Me neither. IMHO, monobaths are a solution looking for a problem. They come with all sorts of shortcomings that you need to have a very serious reason to use one, which is highly unlikely to exist nowadays. And while one could in theory use a monobath successfully, it has to be formulated for each specific film and/or use scenario. I really don't see the point.

 

[SilverShutter]

I will never understand the latest trend of using a monobath. Almost every recent "why did this happen" developer problem I've seen has been linked back to Df96

There's an appeal on a one step process, if it works. Certainly DF96 can work for some films, but in general I think it's less of a hassle to just use something simple like Rodinal and Ilford Rapid fix for more experimental stuff, and leave DF96 for true and tested films.

 

[Wallendo]

I would be interested in knowing the details of processing, so see why this film fails with this monobath.
Did the developer cause the emulsion to sloug?. Was it a reaction to the fixer? Did some unexpected chemical reaction between the two cause the problem? Was it a temperature related issue? A time-related issue? Was there chemical residue from a previous roll that set off the problem?
It is basically an academic issue to me, but it does suggest the film itself has some issue which may be manifested with more traditional developers also.

 

[NortheastPhotographic]

Ugh monobaths. Why give up the creative freedom of developers for B&W films? If you want to simplify B&W shoot XP2 Super.

 

[Huss]

I love using the Monobath and have had excellent results with everything apart from Silberra Orta50.
Someone asked about fixing? All you do is pour in the monobath, then fix by washing w water.

Delta 400 120 (Mockba 5) in DF96 monobath:



Anyway, this is a heads up to others who may use DF96, to avoid Silberra Orta50.

If you have a different process, great! Love a different developer, fantastic! Well done!

No issues w Tri-X, Hp5, PanF, Delta 400, Arista 400, Tmax100, Tmax 400 etc

 

[Huss]

I would be interested in knowing the details of processing, so see why this film fails with this monobath.
Did the developer cause the emulsion to sloug?. Was it a reaction to the fixer? Did some unexpected chemical reaction between the two cause the problem? Was it a temperature related issue? A time-related issue? Was there chemical residue from a previous roll that set off the problem?
It is basically an academic issue to me, but it does suggest the film itself has some issue which may be manifested with more traditional developers also.

From a reply on RFF:

I noticed this in the “Full background on Silberra” article on the Silberra website:

“First coatings of ORTA were real problematic: emulsion was going off the substrate, as ISO80 sensitivity gives new qualities to the emulsion (e.g. viscosity is completely different) so Micron had to find right adhesive and hardening component dilution to provide both nice emulsion quality and good adhesive properties. Now that problem is solved...”

...or maybe it's NOT solved, at least in the case of Df96 (which is bound to have different chemical properties than normal developer and fixer.) The two symptoms you describe — the used developer being pink and the film coming out completely clear — do sound as if the emulsion just slid right off the substrate.

 

[Donald Qualls]

The issue with Df96 is most likely that the recommended temperature is 80 F instead of the 68 F most B&W materials are designed around. As far as contents, from the hazmat material on the box and packages, Df96 is nothing more than D96 (a PQ developer with metaborate alkali, apparently) with fixer in it (in the powder version, the fixer comes as hypo crystals in their destinctive form, though I can't swear there isn't some ammonium chloride somewhere else in the mix).

Nothing there that would eat film -- except having to work significantly warmer than the film was tested for.

 

[Huss]

I developed at 70 not 80 - it is in the middle of their range, as I have no issues with spending 6.30 instead of 3.30 minutes!
Also my room temp is 70, so it makes it simpler to keep the dev temp at that level.

Silberra apparently had issues with their emulsions vacating the film base. Guess they still are there using DF96.

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

I love using the Monobath and have had excellent results with everything apart from Silberra Orta50.

Never used a monobath though always intrigued by it. Did you notice higher base fog with DF96 with the films you tried?

 

[Huss]

Never used a monobath though always intrigued by it. Did you notice higher base fog with DF96 with the films you tried?

No. But with films like Tmax and Delta you have to double the dev time to clear the pink/purple dyes in the emulsion. It is mentioned in the instructional data sheet.

https://www.freestylephoto.biz/static/pdf/product_pdf/3m/DF96_instructions.pdf

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

No. But with films like Tmax and Delta you have to double the dev time to clear the pink/purple dyes in the emulsion.

That's nice! The convenience of developing film in one step is simply awesome. Unfortunately I don't have access to DF96, but I should try home brew monobath some day. Thanks for sharing your experience and the heads up on Silberra.

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

It dissolves the emulsion, leaving you with a totally clear film strip.

@Huss: This post from an old thread on monobath developers hints at what might have gone wrong:

Monobaths by their nature (high pH) can cause severe softening of the emulsion and must contain a hardening agent.

MSDS of DF96 mentions a pH of 10.85. If you have pH meter or a pH paper, you can check the pH of DF96 working solution and confirm.

 

[Donald Qualls]

@Huss:MSDS of DF96 mentions a pH of 10.85. If you have pH meter or a pH paper, you can check the pH of DF96 working solution and confirm.

Best keep your Orta 50 out of Caffenol, too, then, if that's the cause. Sodium carbonate (the accelerator in all the Caffenol variants I'm familiar with) has a solution pH of 11. The final developer might be lower, because coffee and vitamin C are slightly acidic, but it's likely well above 10.

 

[Huss]

Yeah, I already learnt my lesson! It is fine with all my other emulsions so far. But I just received some of that new Ilford ORTHO Plus 80.
Should I be concerned? It seems that Ilford would have its act down, while Silberra actually mentioned they had issues.

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

Silberra Orto 50 could be an old film that is not hardened to the extent modern films are. Would be very surprised if you face similar problem with Ilford Ortho film.

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

Best keep your Orta 50 out of Caffenol, too, then, if that's the cause. Sodium carbonate (the accelerator in all the Caffenol variants I'm familiar with) has a solution pH of 11. The final developer might be lower, because coffee and vitamin C are slightly acidic, but it's likely well above 10.

The hypothesis can be quite easily tested without needing to use the monobath. OP can dissolve ten grams of Sodium Carbonate or 2 grams of Lye in 500ml water and dip the leader of Silberra film into it for about five minutes around 70F and see what happens to it.

Interestingly Silberra recommends using D76, XTol & ID-11 for this film.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Interestingly Silberra recommends using D76, XTol & ID-11 for this film.

D-76 and ID-11 are essentially the same developer, and all of these, as I recall, use a less alkaline accelerator (borax or metaborate, as I recall). Dektol uses carbonate, as do most C-41 formulas I've seen.

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

D-76 and ID-11 are essentially the same developer, and all of these, as I recall, use a less alkaline accelerator (borax or metaborate, as I recall). Dektol uses carbonate, as do most C-41 formulas I've seen.

Yes, the recommended developers have lower pH than the monobath. I wonder if the monobath also has some Thiocyanate (halide solvent) in it which could also be softening the emulsion.

 

[Donald Qualls]

I wonder if the monobath also has some Thiocyanate (halide solvent) in it which could also be softening the emulsion.

Can't swear it doesn't, but I'd expect that to speed the fixing action, which is in a race with development. Then again, D96 (on which Df96 is based) is used for cine films, some of which are processed by reversal; silver solvents are recommended in first developer for reversal.

 

[Huss]

Me neither. IMHO, monobaths are a solution looking for a problem. They come with all sorts of shortcomings that you need to have a very serious reason to use one, which is highly unlikely to exist nowadays. And while one could in theory use a monobath successfully, it has to be formulated for each specific film and/or use scenario. I really don't see the point.

I have found zero shortcomings, using many different types of film. Outside Silberra ORTA of course.
It is super quick and easy, and cheap. One chemical for everything for $20 for 16+rolls of film. As well as not having to store anything apart from the one bottle that it came in.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Even cheaper if you buy it as powder -- save a couple bucks on the chemical, then another $10 on the shipping, and get it faster because it can ship USPS Priority instead of ground-only ORM-D.

 

[Anon Ymous]

I have found zero shortcomings, using many different types of film. Outside Silberra ORTA of course.
It is super quick and easy, and cheap. One chemical for everything for $20 for 16+rolls of film. As well as not having to store anything apart from the one bottle that it came in.

Of course you get an image, but is it as good as the one you could get with a conventional developer? You might not care at all and be more than pleased, but it's not that simple. A monobath is a balancing act. You have two different processes running parallelly, development and fixation. It is obviously mandatory to fix film completely, which means that there is a minimum processing time. But what if this time is too long and you get too high contrast? What if it's too short and you get low contrast? And what if you wanted to push process your film? How about pull processing? That's what I was talking about previously. You can do all these things with a monobath, but it has to be specifically formulated for each film and use case scenario, which excludes a "universal" formula from being adequate. These are the shortcomings, which may, or may not apply to you. If you are happy with a monobath, I will not be the one to judge what you should do, this is up to you. But a marginally shorter processing time and one less bottle of chemicals to store isn't much of a pro as far as I am concerned.

Best regards

 

[Huss]

Of course you get an image, but is it as good as the one you could get with a conventional developer? You might not care at all and be more than pleased, but it's not that simple. A monobath is a balancing act. You have two different processes running parallelly, development and fixation. It is obviously mandatory to fix film completely, which means that there is a minimum processing time. But what if this time is too long and you get too high contrast? What if it's too short and you get low contrast? And what if you wanted to push process your film? How about pull processing? That's what I was talking about previously. You can do all these things with a monobath, but it has to be specifically formulated for each film and use case scenario, which excludes a "universal" formula from being adequate. These are the shortcomings, which may, or may not apply to you. If you are happy with a monobath, I will not be the one to judge what you should do, this is up to you. But a marginally shorter processing time and one less bottle of chemicals to store isn't much of a pro as far as I am concerned.

Best regards

You can push and pull process the film. Just follow the provided instructions.

Arista 400 in DF96:



Again, this is not a critique of DF96. Just a heads up to not use it with Silberra ORTA50!
I'm not saying there aren't other developers out there that you may prefer. I'm saying don't use it with Silberra ORTA50 as it dissolves the emulsion!