Developer Advised By Leica and others

[Mustafa Umut Sarac]

During a PM traffic , my friend told me Leica Company advised to Leica users , Rodinal as main developer . Is it true and is there any other advises made by Cooke , Goerz , Zeiss , Schneider , French makers , LOMO , EKRAN and all other Russian Cinema Lens Makers ?

Umut

 

[Ian Grant]

It's true that an ideal combination of film and developer APX100 and Rodibnal is particularygood with a Leica using Leitz lenses. Some of the finest (highest) quality prints I've seen from 35mm negatives were made with this combination The high resolving power of Leitz lenses and the acutance of Rodinal/APX100 along with the exceptional fine grain are the key.

Ian

 

[Mustafa Umut Sarac]

I searched the web and found this combination is brighter than my taste. I read 1/25 and 1/50 dilutions are like different developers , one for contrast , other is mellower.

Is it possible to compare this 1/50 dilution with Pyrocat HD ? Does it make sense ?

Thank you Ian ,

Umut

 

[ntenny]

I guess the more general point is that in an image chain optimized for resolving power, which certainly is one of the traditional Leitz strengths, an acutance developer like Rodinal makes sense to avoid losing all that nice resolution in the development stage.

But it seems like there could be a contrary argument---especially in 35mm where grain can be a big deal, and especially if one had to shoot fast film for whatever reason---in which one optimizes all the rest of the process for resolution, precisely to be able to use a fine-grain developer at the end, and so end up with fine grain and *good* (albeit downgraded from "ideal") sharpness. Like everything else, it depends on where you want to end up.

-NT

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Rodinal does not stain film. Pyrocat does. So no, they are not comparable in that extent, especially when you print with variable contrast paper and do split grade printing. Pyrocat offers more possibilities in that sense.

Other than that they are both capable of giving very sharp results, medium grain, and are both good at extreme minimal agitation, yielding interesting edge effects.

Rodinal 1+25 has a lot of energy, and will yield a negative with a beautifully pronounced grain, which results in a print with great texture. 1+50 you have less developer activity, so your development times get longer. With reduced agitation you can therefore increase effective film speed in high contrast situations (where you need it), all while you tame those highlights nicely.
So, 1+25 and 1+50 offer different possibilities, but the differences are not really that pronounced, and you'd have to look at prints side by side to really know.

Hope that helps.

- Thomas

I searched the web and found this combination is brighter than my taste. I read 1/25 and 1/50 dilutions are like different developers , one for contrast , other is mellower.

Is it possible to compare this 1/50 dilution with Pyrocat HD ? Does it make sense ?

Thank you Ian ,

Umut

 

[Mustafa Umut Sarac]

Thank you for your all answers.

How Pyrocat HD developed film ends at a Mini Lab , BW Special option , scanner or if needed under 100 dollar desk top scanner ?

Umut

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Thank you for your all answers.

How Pyrocat HD developed film ends at a Mini Lab , BW Special option , scanner or if needed under 100 dollar desk top scanner ?

Umut

I don't have experience with that, so I can't answer your question. I only know what happens when I print them in the darkroom. Scanning - I only use that for proofing, so I don't pay attention to quality.

If you scan black and white film, use the green channel.

- Thomas

 

[Ian Grant]

I searched the web and found this combination is brighter than my taste. I read 1/25 and 1/50 dilutions are like different developers , one for contrast , other is mellower.

Is it possible to compare this 1/50 dilution with Pyrocat HD ? Does it make sense ?

Thank you Ian ,

Umut

Makes sense because although Pyrocat HD is a staining developer the resulting negatives have similar acutance etc, but personally I find I find Pyrocat is slightly better in terms of fine, grain, acutance and tonality.

Ian

 

[Mustafa Umut Sarac]

Ian ,

Have you ever been scanned a pyro negative with desktop or minilab scanner. I am using 3 rolls a month and my only darkroom is street minilab and its scanner for APUG. My photoshop color to bw conversions are faraway better than my only BW film , Arista Edu 400. By the way , I changed my attitude towards Ilford , for my eyes , Ilford Pan F is better than Tri X and I will try to buy from city center. And is pyrocat mc or hd or rodinal comes in powder form ? What about their prices compared and shell life ? And Ian , do you buy them from Istanbul ?

Thank you ,

Umut

 

[brucemuir]

Leitz is the teacher.
The developer is the student.

The student has to spend much time in the classroom to learn it's capabilities.
Some students are better at certain subjects than others.
Seek the knowledge and get to know the students strengths.

Disclaimer: I'm usually not so smarmy but couldn't resit this time.

 

[Mustafa Umut Sarac]

Bruce ,

I used same words at a post before. I really impressed to see how Leica users feel about their lenses. Personally I am living and photographing in 300 meters diameter of my home for last 10 years. I am going out of this circle once a year. So Leica and Rollei became tired of taking the same things. After seeing
Ilya1963s gallery picture , I believe film and developer can carry the hobby further. I am using 6th or 7th Leica and this is the most accessible because I am not working any longer. So the low contrast colors transformed to more colorful by lens and too much color , contrast transformed to half white .
I am trying to understand this lens but its a Elmar and I used its Grandfather.

Umut

 

[Ian Grant]

Umut

I have scanned Pyrocat HD negative, actually Ilford HP5, to make digital negative s for Platinum/Palladium printing and the results were superb, I also printed the same negatives on Forte Polywarmtone. Either way the results were excellent.

Maybe you should join the Hybrid group here on APUG and ask for recommendations on how you can get the best results.

Ian

Ian ,

Have you ever been scanned a pyro negative with desktop or minilab scanner. I am using 3 rolls a month and my only darkroom is street minilab and its scanner for APUG. My photoshop color to bw conversions are faraway better than my only BW film , Arista Edu 400. By the way , I changed my attitude towards Ilford , for my eyes , Ilford Pan F is better than Tri X and I will try to buy from city center. And is pyrocat mc or hd or rodinal comes in powder form ? What about their prices compared and shell life ? And Ian , do you buy them from Istanbul ?

Thank you ,

Umut

 

[brucemuir]

Umut,
My apologies as my comments were in jest. I generally try to respect this place because it is a refuge from a lot of drivel on the web.

My point being if a lens is great it will look good developed in urine.

Sorry, but as I posted I was just printing a neg from a Jupiter 9 Zeiss clone that is really impressing me.

 

[Mustafa Umut Sarac]

Yes , my eyes on cheaper stuff and Soviet clones are excellent. At 90s , from screwdriver to underwear came to Istanbul from CCCP and I found chance to try them new or old but excellent shape. I noticed old Leica clones have buttery mechanism and may be better than Leica. But my eyes are on Submariner or Paratrooper Leica Clones. They are decorated like Pasta but black ones really catches the eye. My sister was at DC for speaking at a conference and next April , She will be at Harvard for phd study.
I will visit your website with hoping to see Russian lenses.

Umut

 

[erikg]

Can't say about mini lab but pyrocat negs scan very nicely both on high end scanner and desktop Epson.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

AFAIK, the only developer that Leica ever "recommended" was Ethol TEC. This developer was used when Leica demonstrated their lenses in North America. They didn't really recommend any particular brand of developer and usually kept the bottle out of sight. Why would they recommend Rodinal and antagonize all the other developer manufacturers. Companies just don't do this.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

I have done the occasional scan from a pyro-developed negative on an Epson V750 scanner, which is one of the better prosumer scanners. It works, but I'm never happy with the results. I'd far rather scan from a finished darkroom print, which looks more like what I would have wanted it to look like than trying to make the negative scan look like what a print should.

 

[Ian Grant]

AFAIK, the only developer that Leica ever "recommended" was Ethol TEC. This developer was used when Leica demonstrated their lenses in North America. They didn't really recommend any particular brand of developer and usually kept the bottle out of sight. Why would they recommend Rodinal and antagonize all the other developer manufacturers. Companies just don't do this.

Leitz aren't a US company but their official publications did make recommedations about developers particularly in Europe, at one time there was far less cross availability of chemistry between the US and Europe.

Of course US publications like the Leica Manual (Morgan) recommended US developers but it wasn't an official Leica publication. Recommendations changed as films were improved.

Leica themselves published their Two bath developer and Rodinal and Neofyn were also both recommended in their newsletters.

Europe differed from the US in that all the major manufacturers made a Rodinal type developer, Ilford - Certinal, May & Baker (now Chanpion) - Azol, and Kodak -Kodinol.

In addition to compete with developers like Neofyn (later changed to Neofin) a Beutler type developer, Ilford released Hyfin, Kodal - HDD and Johnsons - Definol.

So there was a different approach to developers for miniature film formats in Europe compared to the US and this began in the early 1930's and lasted into the 1970's with Rodinal and Neofin still available today.

Ian

 

[John Wiegerink]

Leica two bath

Leitz aren't a US company but their official publications did make recommedations about developers particularly in Europe, at one time there was far less cross availability of chemistry between the US and Europe.

Of course US publications like the Leica Manual (Morgan) recommended US developers but it wasn't an official Leica publication. Recommendations changed as films were improved.

Leica themselves published their Two bath developer and Rodinal and Neofyn were also both recommended in their newsletters.

Europe differed from the US in that all the major manufacturers made a Rodinal type developer, Ilford - Certinal, May & Baker (now Chanpion) - Azol, and Kodak -Kodinol.

In addition to compete with developers like Neofyn (later changed to Neofin) a Beutler type developer, Ilford released Hyfin, Kodal - HDD and Johnsons - Definol.

So there was a different approach to developers for miniature film formats in Europe compared to the US and this began in the early 1930's and lasted into the 1970's with Rodinal and Neofin still available today.

Ian

Ian,
Wasn't Leica's two bath developer just basically a D-23 two bath clone? Really nothing special then. JohnW

 

[Ian Grant]

Ian,
Wasn't Leica's two bath developer just basically a D-23 two bath clone? Really nothing special then. JohnW

Other way around as the Leica two bath developer was formulated before WWII and D23/D25 during wartime.

The Two bath developers go back to the early 1930's, so it's the splitting D23 to a two bath that's the clone. You need to remember that many of Kodak's developers were derived from other company's products, there's a link between Wellington Buffered Borax and D76.

Ian