• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

D76 vs Thornton's 2 Bath HD developer, Ilford Delta 100 in 4x5

Stand development and variations on that theme (ie dilute developer, long development time with minimal or no agitation) are extreme procedures so generalization regarding the sensitometry / curve shape is problematic. It will depend on the film but also likely be quite variable depending on the developer composition and dilution. One developer/dilution might tend toward compression at one or both ends of the characteristic curve while a different developer/dilution might not do that. Repeatability is also somewhat less straight forward than people might assume.

 
John Wiegerink said:
I do see a slight difference when I switch back and forth between the two. I see it in the contrast of the belfry shutters and the shadows under the shrubs, but both pictures are very, very close for sure.
Click to expand...

not enough difference for me to deal with a two-bath developer.
 
This thread is interesting to me because it touches on several issues that have been on my mind. Developer preference is a complicated thing and based on many ideas. What is being photographed and how do we want that to look, how are we printing our negatives and what process do we use for that, and which film do we use, among many others including our states of mind and body, which can also change over time. Too many variables.

In recent years, I am a woodland photographer. In the woods we have mostly low ket situations with mostly darker tones with occasional clouds in the sky or sunlit patches of earth among shadowy details. I like compensating developers because they raise the contrast in the lower tones, which is mostly what I have in my photography. The high tones are not as important but do need some control to avoid muddy looking overall low contrast development. That's my interpretation of this dilemma.

My developer of choice for many years has been D23 at a 1:3 dilution. This gives a very compensating curve that I like along with excellent edge effects and mackie lines that emphasize the complex texture of the woodland. I print using alt processes using enlarged positives/negatives that I make in my darkroom. I recently decided this developer was too compensating, so began experimenting with other metol based developers such as Suzuki's DS1 and DS2 developers and most recently Gainers Original MC developer. My negatives are having the blahs now. Low contrast muddiness to include all the tones without any emphasis. These viatamin C developers have much finer grain, but are also much less compensating and have lower acutance as well, which go together.

Over the last year, I've been mostly experimenting with developers and doing much less really good photography, at least in 35mm. For my 35mm woodland photography using Kentmere 100, I've returned to using D23 at 1:3 which gives the best results for my case. However, for HRU xray film that I shoot in 4x5 I have switched to Gainers MC original developer. This Xray film likes a low contrast development where it approaches a strait line film curve. It likes D23 just fine, but that is too expensive for this film in large format in my opinion. That's another factor.

Experimenting with films and film developers takes lots of time and is usually not as productive as time spent photographing. But from time to time it has to be done.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register