D-23 developer vs stand development to tame contrast

[Mainecoonmaniac]

I read and old Darkroom Photography magazine from the 80's about a photographer that used D-23. He would shoot Tri-X at ASA 200 and process it in D-23. His photos had a rich shadow detail and highlights that weren't blocked.

I've been using HC-110 1:100 (from concentrate) to tame contrast for my BW negs. My issue is streaking once in a while. Is D-23 a better way to go?

I'd appreciate some insight on this forgotten developer.

 

[Pioneer]

I have recently started using D-23 instead of D-76 because I can mix small batches from bulk chemicals and use it fresh.

I really haven't seen any major differences between D-76 and D-23 other than the developing times. Since the superadditivity effect of hydroquinone isn't there the developer works slower. But the look is very similar to D-76. If anything it may be slightly higher contrast, but that is only an untested impression on my part.

 

[Paul Howell]

Ansel Adams provided a formula for a 2 bath D 23 which he stated was better in controlling contrast than water bath development. I used D 23 a few times, like Pioneer did not see any advantage over D76.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

Thanks for the response guys! I haven't used D-76 in over 30 years and from what I learned from you fine fellows is that D-23 is a softer working developer. My current go to developer has been replenished HC-110 for most shots. For contrasty scenes, I might start experimenting with D-23. I have a feeling that if I use D-23 on the wrong image, it would look soft and mushy.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

I didn't say that . D-23 isn't a "softer" working developer than D-76. It is formulated differently, but formulated to give virtually the same result. It isn't a soft or low contrast developer.

Ooh sorry for misinterpreting what you said. I was under the mistaken impression that D-23 is a low contrast developer. I stand corrected.

 

[Saganich]

I agree with both previous comments that D23 can be a high or low contrast developer. Low contrast can be achieved by pulling development time or better by splitting development with borax, Kodalk, or Sodium Carbonate; in order of increasing contrast and grain. The split development really tames all but the spectral highlights. Stock D23 can be very contrast rich (like HC110) but if you lighten up agitation to say 5 seconds per 2 minutes that harshness disappears. Dilution also has similar effect on contrast. Mixing stock is easy but using dilution as one shot means you have to mix a lot of stock. I prefer using stock with replenishment.
Whats the cause of the streaking? I see that once in a while as well and may not be worth changing process.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

I agree with both previous comments that D23 can be a high or low contrast developer. Low contrast can be achieved by pulling development time or better by splitting development with borax, Kodalk, or Sodium Carbonate; in order of increasing contrast and grain. The split development really tames all but the spectral highlights. Stock D23 can be very contrast rich (like HC110) but if you lighten up agitation to say 5 seconds per 2 minutes that harshness disappears. Dilution also has similar effect on contrast. Mixing stock is easy but using dilution as one shot means you have to mix a lot of stock. I prefer using stock with replenishment.
Whats the cause of the streaking? I see that once in a while as well and may not be worth changing process.

You may be right in changing from stand development. But sometimes the streaking happens to the best shots. My technique for stand development is HC-110, 1:100. I agitate for a whole minute and let the film stand for an hour or a bit longer.

 

[Jim Noel]

I read and old Darkroom Photography magazine from the 80's about a photographer that used D-23. He would shoot Tri-X at ASA 200 and process it in D-23. His photos had a rich shadow detail and highlights that weren't blocked.

I've been using HC-110 1:100 (from concentrate) to tame contrast for my BW negs. My issue is streaking once in a while. Is D-23 a better way to go?

I'd appreciate some insight on this forgotten developer.

D-23 is NOT a FORGOTTEN developer. Many of us use it for its special properties.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

D-23 is NOT a FORGOTTEN developer. Many of us use it for its special properties.

I stand corrected AGAIN. But what are the special properties? I've only used D-76 a close cousin of D-23. D-76 seems to be a pretty good all around developer.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

Metol is a soft working developing agent. Compare the redox potentials for metol and hydroquinone. A developer like D-23 which does not contain hydroquinone will provide lower contrast and slower contrast buildup with extended development. Kodak uses the same design with its Slectol Soft paper developer which also contains only metol. This formulation was popular when VC papers were not available. It provided less contrast than Dektol.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

I find D-23 useful when using Ilford Pan F Plus which tends to build up contrast rapidly in other developers.

 

[markbarendt]

You may be right in changing from stand development. But sometimes the streaking happens to the best shots. My technique for stand development is HC-110, 1:100. I agitate for a whole minute and let the film stand for an hour or a bit longer.

When was the last time you tried normal or N-1?

 

[Gerald C Koch]

Stand development modifies that development of the lower and higher zones. Density is increased in the lower portion of the H&D curve and reduced in the higher portion. It will therefore produce different results from D-23.

 

[pentaxuser]

It might help the OP if the two opposing factions were able to provide evidence or at least "indicative signs" which substantiated their views. I understand this may be difficult but without it, he is left to either count the "fors" and "againsts" and come to a conclusion or simply try both developers and look at the evidence for himself.

What may also help is if he can be pointed in the direction of developers that are in fact "soft contrast" developers, assuming such developers exist. He and one day maybe I plus others may believe they need to try to tame highlights

pentaxuser

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

My train of thought is.. if D-23 is a soft developer I would agitate normally therefore avoid streaks caused by stand development. I've rarely had streaks with standard developing techniques. However, stand development works most of the time. I'm just curious how D-23 works because I've never used it before.

 

[mdarnton]

I have vibrated back and forth between D23 and D76 for about 45 years. In my experience, D23 has slightly finer grain, at the expense of sharpness and sparkle. What occasionally lures me away from D76 is the ease of making D23 (I have always mixed my own developers), but I always come back to D76. Every few years I switch, hoping the newer films will act differently, but they never do.

My experience with D23 is that it does have slightly lower contrast, but only because the highlights don't develop as much and get as much contrast as I like, not to do with the shadows. It might be more about curve than absolute contrast, though. This is the cause of the lack of sparkle in the prints. I can bring it back with a little bleaching, so it might be a wash, in the end. It's the mushy grain and lesser sharpness of D23 that I don't have any other way of dealing with. Sodium sulfite is a grain solvent, and that's what D23 mostly is.

I have always gotten my best results shooting at EI200 or so, and pulling development accordingly, but I really like shadow detail. I've always done that with both developers, but a bit less so with D23. I see that quite a few people are happy with empty black shadows, and that wouldn't be appropriate for them. If I see a clear spot on my neg that's not in the border area, I'm unhappy.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

My experience with D23 is that it does have slightly lower contrast, but only because the highlights don't develop as much, not to do with the shadows. This is the cause of the lack of sparkle in the prints. I can bring it back with a little bleaching, so it might be a wash, in the end. It's the mushy grain and lesser sharpness of D23 that I don't have any other way of dealing with. Sodium sulfite is a grain solvent, and that's what D23 mostly is.

Thanks for the valuable information. I think I'll D-23 a try and see how it looks like with my current film. I started photography in the 80's and my college photography class only used D-76. Later, my university photography class strictly used HC-110 B. I never got a chance to try out D-23. I have a decent supply of bulk chemistry and I'm going to try to mix a batch. However, the Massive Dev Chart doesn't have D-23 listed with my film. I'm going to take a stab in the dark. Pun intended

Cheers!

 

[howardpan]

Thanks for the valuable information. I think I'll D-23 a try and see how it looks like with my current film. I started photography in the 80's and my college photography class only used D-76. Later, my university photography class strictly used HC-110 B. I never got a chance to try out D-23. I have a decent supply of bulk chemistry and I'm going to try to mix a batch. However, the Massive Dev Chart doesn't have D-23 listed with my film. I'm going to take a stab in the dark. Pun intended

Cheers!

If your purpose is to control contrast while avoiding streaks on your negatives that occur during stand development, have you considered either (1) a divided 2 bath developer such as divided D23 or Thornton's Two Bath developer (which I use) or (2) a semi-stand development process (i.e. increase your agitation to once every 20 or once every 30 minutes)?

 

[baachitraka]

I find D-23 useful when using Ilford Pan F Plus which tends to build up contrast rapidly in other developers.

May also Fomapan benefit from this developer and apart from that nothing so special.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

If your purpose is to control contrast while avoiding streaks on your negatives that occur during stand development, have you considered either (1) a divided 2 bath developer such as divided D23 or Thornton's Two Bath developer (which I use) or (2) a semi-stand development process (i.e. increase your agitation to once every 20 or once every 30 minutes)?

Thanks for the advice regarding agitation every 20 to 30 minutes. Are the streaks from bromide build up?

 

[jim appleyard]

D-76 and D-23 have the same amount of sulfite in them, 100g. D-23 should not have any more mushy grain or lesser sharpness than D-76.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

Some people look upon stand development as having no faults. However the opposite is true. One of these is streaking caused by bromide drag.

Dead Link Removed

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

Some people look upon stand development as having no faults. However the opposite is true. One of these is streaking caused by bromide drag.

Dead Link Removed

Bromide I guess is a double edge sword. It inhibits the development of highlights, but on the other hand, it could cause streaking. Is it because of concentrated bromide in highlight areas leaking into darker tones?

 

[Gerald C Koch]

Bromide I guess is a double edge sword. It inhibits the development of highlights, but on the other hand, it could cause streaking. Is it because of concentrated bromide in highlight areas leaking into darker tones?

Bromide is released by the emulsion into the developer. Being heavier and without any agitation it slides down the film surface where it causes streaks.

 

[Pioneer]

I believe there are two ways of dealing with bromide streaks. First, do not eliminate agitation all together. A couple of gentle agitations every 15 minutes will help control the problem. This is likely what the old timers were doing in their trays but that is my own speculation.

The other way, which is the one I use, is to keep the developer from warming as the process proceeds. I use a small cooler for water and put enough water in it to keep the developing tank cooled. The water is around 18C and when I finish the initial set of agitations I put the tank in the slightly cooler water, cap off the cooler, and leave it alone for the remainder of the stand time. I have not experienced any bromide streaking since I starting doing this.