Developer comparison: D-23 VS PMK

Nothing

A
Nothing

  • 1
  • 1
  • 74
Where Did They Go?

A
Where Did They Go?

  • 6
  • 4
  • 190
Red

D
Red

  • 5
  • 3
  • 179
The Big Babinski

A
The Big Babinski

  • 2
  • 6
  • 213

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
198,036
Messages
2,768,648
Members
99,537
Latest member
alvarodiazphoto
Recent bookmarks
0
Joined
Jan 28, 2023
Messages
1,021
Location
Wilammette Valley, Oregon
Format
35mm RF
Recently there have been some discussions about various developers and how they act on films, and I thought I'd share an experiment I did back in January. I wanted to compare a "high acutance, compensating" developer with a very simple "average acutance, soft acting" developer to see for myself just how different the two could be.

I exposed four 5x7 sheets of Ilford Delta 100: two exposed at 64 ASA and two exposed with another half stop exposure, just so I had a choice between two exposure variations, for optimal results. One sheet of each exposure was developed in D-23 diluted 1:3 and one sheet of each exposure was developed in PMK (Pyro) at 1:2:100. The lens I used was the f7.7 Kodak Ektar 203mm.

I chose the 1:3 dilution of D-23 because literature I looked at suggested it becomes more of an acutance developer at high dilution, due to the reduced amount of sulfite in the highly diluted solution. Of course, development times become a bit long, but I found 15.5 minutes @ 70F to be acceptable. I used PMK at the standard dilution and time for Delta 100, which was 13 minutes at 1:2:100, @ 70F.

The D-23 negatives and the PMK negatives came out looking remarkably similar, aside from the PMK stain. When scanned, there was only a very small difference in the tonal scale of the PMK negs VS the D-23 negs, and in processing the images in Lightroom, I had to make only minor adjustments of the high values to result in a similar tonal range for each negative. The overall density of the negatives and the available shadow information was very similar for both negatives - they varied only in the highlight density, and that was a minute difference.

I'm guessing you'd like to know how the two developers compared as far as acutance and grain is concerned. PMK is known as an acutance developer with some compensating ability, preserving the fine details and definition of the high values while also masking grain somewhat, thanks to the Pyro stain. D-23 on the other hand - and this is why I chose it to make the comparison - is known as a "soft-acting" developer with low-to-average acutance and average (but sometimes mushy) grain. However, the negative developed in D-23 diluted 1:3 was remarkably similar to the PMK negative: very good acutance, excellent preservation of the subtle high values and crisp grain characteristics. I had difficulty seeing any significant differences in the resulting images from the two developers. There was, however, slightly better preservation of the very highest white values in the PMK negative, as expected. But the highlight information in the D-23 negative could easily have been preserved in print.

Here are some A/B comparisons of the PMK neg and the D-23 neg, at full size, and a crop at 100% to show fine detail. (The scans are uncompressed TIF files, at approximately 6000 x 8000 pixels).
The PMK images are on the left and the D-23 images are on the right.

54550046341_28bf229a68_b.jpg


54550046381_a9c2d68415_h.jpg


Because these are screen captures, they don't show the resolution the full images have, so if you want to see the images at full size, the PMK image can be viewed here, and the D-23 image here. (To view at full size on Flickr, click twice to zoom)
 

Kino

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 20, 2006
Messages
7,677
Location
Orange, Virginia
Format
Multi Format
Thank you for doing that comparison.

I think I prefer the D23 slightly over the PMK, which is a surprise.
 

JensH

Member
Joined
May 30, 2017
Messages
495
Location
Schaumburg, Germany
Format
Multi Format
Thank you for doing that comparison.

I think I prefer the D23 slightly over the PMK, which is a surprise.

Me, too. The D23 image looks smooth in a nice way, PMK makes it look "over sharpened"...
 
OP
OP
retina_restoration
Joined
Jan 28, 2023
Messages
1,021
Location
Wilammette Valley, Oregon
Format
35mm RF
Me, too. The D23 image looks smooth in a nice way, PMK makes it look "over sharpened"...

PMK can have that look sometimes, yes - especially if you are using a sharp lens at its optimal aperture and a sharp, low speed film known for its acutance. Pyrocat HD is even more intense, so I use it sparingly and only for some situations.
But ain't it good to know that D-23 is versatile enough that you can turn it into a high acutance developer by increasing the dilution?! It's not exactly the "soft cousin of D-76".
 
OP
OP
retina_restoration
Joined
Jan 28, 2023
Messages
1,021
Location
Wilammette Valley, Oregon
Format
35mm RF
Thank you for doing that comparison.

I think I prefer the D23 slightly over the PMK, which is a surprise.

Me too. It has a tonality that is less exaggerated than the PMK image. But its all a matter of taste - neither one is "wrong".

Thank you for taking the time to share. That was interesting.
You're welcome. Glad you found it interesting.
 

JensH

Member
Joined
May 30, 2017
Messages
495
Location
Schaumburg, Germany
Format
Multi Format
Interestingly, I would say I can get a similar look using Pyrocat (the Windisch variant without Metol etc.) with FP4+, TX or TMX using my Rolleiflex with uncoated 4.5/7.5cm Tessar.

But those are too many variables to make a general point.

Anyway D23 is a candidate for my future 13x18cm (uncoated Protar VII) / FP4+ / Lupex G3 contact printing dream...
 
Last edited:

chuckroast

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 2, 2023
Messages
2,148
Location
All Over The Place
Format
Multi Format
Recently there have been some discussions about various developers and how they act on films, and I thought I'd share an experiment I did back in January. I wanted to compare a "high acutance, compensating" developer with a very simple "average acutance, soft acting" developer to see for myself just how different the two could be.

I exposed four 5x7 sheets of Ilford Delta 100: two exposed at 64 ASA and two exposed with another half stop exposure, just so I had a choice between two exposure variations, for optimal results. One sheet of each exposure was developed in D-23 diluted 1:3 and one sheet of each exposure was developed in PMK (Pyro) at 1:2:100. The lens I used was the f7.7 Kodak Ektar 203mm.

I chose the 1:3 dilution of D-23 because literature I looked at suggested it becomes more of an acutance developer at high dilution, due to the reduced amount of sulfite in the highly diluted solution. Of course, development times become a bit long, but I found 15.5 minutes @ 70F to be acceptable. I used PMK at the standard dilution and time for Delta 100, which was 13 minutes at 1:2:100, @ 70F.

The D-23 negatives and the PMK negatives came out looking remarkably similar, aside from the PMK stain. When scanned, there was only a very small difference in the tonal scale of the PMK negs VS the D-23 negs, and in processing the images in Lightroom, I had to make only minor adjustments of the high values to result in a similar tonal range for each negative. The overall density of the negatives and the available shadow information was very similar for both negatives - they varied only in the highlight density, and that was a minute difference.

I'm guessing you'd like to know how the two developers compared as far as acutance and grain is concerned. PMK is known as an acutance developer with some compensating ability, preserving the fine details and definition of the high values while also masking grain somewhat, thanks to the Pyro stain. D-23 on the other hand - and this is why I chose it to make the comparison - is known as a "soft-acting" developer with low-to-average acutance and average (but sometimes mushy) grain. However, the negative developed in D-23 diluted 1:3 was remarkably similar to the PMK negative: very good acutance, excellent preservation of the subtle high values and crisp grain characteristics. I had difficulty seeing any significant differences in the resulting images from the two developers. There was, however, slightly better preservation of the very highest white values in the PMK negative, as expected. But the highlight information in the D-23 negative could easily have been preserved in print.

Here are some A/B comparisons of the PMK neg and the D-23 neg, at full size, and a crop at 100% to show fine detail. (The scans are uncompressed TIF files, at approximately 6000 x 8000 pixels).
The PMK images are on the left and the D-23 images are on the right.

54550046341_28bf229a68_b.jpg


54550046381_a9c2d68415_h.jpg


Because these are screen captures, they don't show the resolution the full images have, so if you want to see the images at full size, the PMK image can be viewed here, and the D-23 image here. (To view at full size on Flickr, click twice to zoom)

Having used both a fair bit, I find the results consistent with what I have seen. However, the one thing PMK excels at is edge effect. What PMK does to clouds, for example, is other worldly. It's just not a great developer for 35mm where it shows more grain than I care for..
 

GregY

Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2005
Messages
3,113
Location
Alberta
Format
Large Format
Having used both a fair bit, I find the results consistent with what I have seen. However, the one thing PMK excels at is edge effect. What PMK does to clouds, for example, is other worldly. It's just not a great developer for 35mm where it shows more grain than I care for..

That characteristic in clouds reeled me in years ago.
 
Joined
Jul 28, 2016
Messages
2,655
Location
India
Format
Multi Format
I chose the 1:3 dilution of D-23 because literature I looked at suggested it becomes more of an acutance developer at high dilution, due to the reduced amount of sulfite in the highly diluted solution.


Quoting from Haist Vol1 Chapter High-Acutance Developers page #419:

"In some cases, conventional fine-grain developers, such as Kodak Developer D-76, are diluted with water to form the dilute developing solution that gives increased image edge effects, resulting in increased acutance values for the image."

You may be able to do better than 1:3 by using even more dilute developer and adding adding a suitable amount of Sodium Carbonate or Sodium Hydroxide to it. Both D-23 and D-76 work as high-acutance developers at 1+9 dilution with the added Sodium Hydroxide (about 0.5-1.0 g/l).
 

koraks

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Nov 29, 2018
Messages
21,628
Location
Europe
Format
Multi Format
Thanks for posting this @retina_restoration ; for me, this proves one more that the strong preference we may have for certain developers should be seen in the light of the often marginal differences they have in a real-world application.

More importantly - that's another particularly successful photo, very true to the distinctive/characteristic style you have developed. A pleasure to view. I quite like how you used the edge of the image circle as an integral part of the composition; I would have never thought of doing that, and it works so well here!
 

albireo

Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2017
Messages
1,332
Location
Europe
Format
Multi Format
Fantastic comparison, thanks for sharing. And beautiful photo.

If you had the time to do a D23 1:3 vs D76 1:3 or XT3/XTOL 1:3 as above I think many people would be interested in your results, too!
 
  • cjbecker
  • cjbecker
  • Deleted
  • Reason: Accidental post
OP
OP
retina_restoration
Joined
Jan 28, 2023
Messages
1,021
Location
Wilammette Valley, Oregon
Format
35mm RF
Thank you for taking the time to share. That was interesting.

Thanks for posting this @retina_restoration ; for me, this proves one more that the strong preference we may have for certain developers should be seen in the light of the often marginal differences they have in a real-world application.
That's what I took from the exercise also. It seems to me that people sometimes attribute properties to a developer that are more imagined than real. We tend to see what we want to see - it's part of being human.

I'm not suggesting that D-23 isn't a "soft-acting" developer when used as a stock solution or low dilution, because I have done testing of it, comparing it to Pyrocat HD, and it does give a softer look: fine grained, but lacking in the "hyperacutance" of Pyrocat HD. However, it's useful to know that a simple developer like D-23 can serve as an acutance developer simply by diluting it more. Knowing what your chemistry can and cannot do is a valuable and important component of your darkroom tool kit, IMO.
More often than not, the simple tools you already have at your disposal are all you need. The "magic" is in learning what they can do for you.
More importantly - that's another particularly successful photo, very true to the distinctive/characteristic style you have developed. A pleasure to view. I quite like how you used the edge of the image circle as an integral part of the composition; I would have never thought of doing that, and it works so well here!
Thanks. But my composition relied entirely on the lighting conditions and circumstance, not some clever use of image circle: the upper right is the shadow created by the eave of the house, and the lower right just happens to be a dark patch created by the shrubbery.
But thanks, I'm glad you appreciate my creative choices.

Just a suggestion, take a look at the photos by John Davies using FP4 developed in diluted ID11.

Thanks, I will.
 
OP
OP
retina_restoration
Joined
Jan 28, 2023
Messages
1,021
Location
Wilammette Valley, Oregon
Format
35mm RF
Fantastic comparison, thanks for sharing. And beautiful photo.

If you had the time to do a D23 1:3 vs D76 1:3 or XT3/XTOL 1:3 as above I think many people would be interested in your results, too!

Thanks. If anyone wants to do other comparison tests, I encourage them to do so. I don't often make these kinds of technical tests - I'd rather be using my time to make the photographs I want. Why don't you do that test?!
 

albireo

Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2017
Messages
1,332
Location
Europe
Format
Multi Format
Thanks. If anyone wants to do other comparison tests, I encourage them to do so. I don't often make these kinds of technical tests - I'd rather be using my time to make the photographs I want. Why don't you do that test?!

I was hinting at an ongoing thread where a beginner is losing sleep on whether they should prefer D23 to D76. A test like yours above should put to rest the idea that playing with developers will make a huge difference in one's photography.
 

chuckroast

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 2, 2023
Messages
2,148
Location
All Over The Place
Format
Multi Format
Quoting from Haist Vol1 Chapter High-Acutance Developers page #419:

"In some cases, conventional fine-grain developers, such as Kodak Developer D-76, are diluted with water to form the dilute developing solution that gives increased image edge effects, resulting in increased acutance values for the image."

You may be able to do better than 1:3 by using even more dilute developer and adding adding a suitable amount of Sodium Carbonate or Sodium Hydroxide to it. Both D-23 and D-76 work as high-acutance developers at 1+9 dilution with the added Sodium Hydroxide (about 0.5-1.0 g/l).

Upon your recommendation a while back, I tried just this. I used D-23 1+9+0.5g/l Sodium Hydroxide and got razor sharp negatives.

I would not use it for 35mm, however, because it gave me pronounced grain beyond what I like. This is a scan of a workbook print from a 35mm Double-X negative semistand processed in the above developer for 60 min. I am certain it was developed for far too long and hence the left side is far too bright (though there is still detail in the negative, had I bothered). Reducing that time would decrease the grain somewhat, but the hyper-acuity really pops the grain:

1748439052947.png


Here is the same thing with Fomapan 100 9x12:


1748439385714.png
 

Milpool

Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2023
Messages
657
Location
Canada
Format
4x5 Format
Absolutely right. This is a really big thing when it comes to the photographic process. There's also enough flexibility at the printing/output stage that if we get results we like, we can easily be led to attribute way to much to the film / film processing.
That's what I took from the exercise also. It seems to me that people sometimes attribute properties to a developer that are more imagined than real. We tend to see what we want to see - it's part of being human.
 
OP
OP
retina_restoration
Joined
Jan 28, 2023
Messages
1,021
Location
Wilammette Valley, Oregon
Format
35mm RF
I was hinting at an ongoing thread where a beginner is losing sleep on whether they should prefer D23 to D76. A test like yours above should put to rest the idea that playing with developers will make a huge difference in one's photography.

I know the discussion you're referring to, yes. This is exactly why it is often recommended to "learn one film and one developer".
 

chuckroast

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 2, 2023
Messages
2,148
Location
All Over The Place
Format
Multi Format
I know the discussion you're referring to, yes. This is exactly why it is often recommended to "learn one film and one developer".

It is sound advice and those of us who've done this for decades dispense it with good intent. But how many of us actually did this first starting this, I wonder ...
 

GregY

Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2005
Messages
3,113
Location
Alberta
Format
Large Format
I was hinting at an ongoing thread where a beginner is losing sleep on whether they should prefer D23 to D76. A test like yours above should put to rest the idea that playing with developers will make a huge difference in one's photography.

Yes This!
 
OP
OP
retina_restoration
Joined
Jan 28, 2023
Messages
1,021
Location
Wilammette Valley, Oregon
Format
35mm RF
It is sound advice and those of us who've done this for decades dispense it with good intent. But how many of us actually did this first starting this, I wonder ...
I'm certain that you and I stuck to this ideal ;-) but no - I don't imagine many do. It's fine advice, but I don't expect people to actually heed it.
To this day I still do not rely on only one or two films - there are at least 6 different films that I use regularly, plus another 4 or 5 that make an occasional appearance. But at least I can say that at this point I understand the films I use and know how to manipulate them to get results I want.
 

chuckroast

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 2, 2023
Messages
2,148
Location
All Over The Place
Format
Multi Format
I'm certain that you and I stuck to this ideal ;-) but no - I don't imagine many do. It's fine advice, but I don't expect people to actually heed it.
To this day I still do not rely on only one or two films - there are at least 6 different films that I use regularly, plus another 4 or 5 that make an occasional appearance. But at least I can say that at this point I understand the films I use and know how to manipulate them to get results I want.

I went through several phases:

  • Try everything at once... wheeeeeeeee
  • Pick a film and developer
  • Shoot endless gray scale and use a densitometer to check everything (did you know that scrambled eggs is 0.9DU over FB+F?)
  • Discover that the the Cool Kids (Adams, Weston, Picker, the local camera guy) all had favorites - try those
  • Settle into what works into a manageable "blast radius"
  • Explore around the edges of that radius

That only took 50 years. Working on a plan for the next 50.
 

ags2mikon

Subscriber
Joined
Dec 19, 2009
Messages
600
Location
New Mexico
Format
Multi Format
"That only took 50 years. Working on a plan for the next 50." I can concur with that.
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom