Developer for Aviphot Pan 200

[gorbas]

Hmmm Alan, I think your curve is adding "posterization" in shadow side of the wall? Is it reverse S one?
As I remember from 30 years ago, I had no problem enlarging 24x36mm HP-5 negative developed in Emofine to 50x60cm. Grain was not issue even at that magnification.

 

[greg zinselmeier]

everybody has their "go to" developer that he/she enjoys. I get it. . .

this is my " go to favorite" for aviphot 200

PYROCAT HD 1:1:100 for 25 1/2 minutes @68 degrees F rated @ 100 ASA

1.pour for 30 sec.
2. aggitate for 1 minute (24 inversions) or 2inversions per 5 seconds.
3. rest for 8 minutes- then 2 inversions
4. rest for 8 minutes- then 2 inversions
5. rest for 8 minutes- pour.

B+F = .13
Zone I= .18
zone II =.23
zoneIII = .33
Zone IV = .56
Zone V = .75
Zone VI = .95
Zone VII= 1.14
Zone VIII = 1.32
Zone IX = 1.45
Zone X = 1.54

Currently my preferred paper is Foma Retrobrom, glossy.

My Dev. for this paper is

Water @ 125 F 750ml
Phenidone 00.44g (10 ml)
Sodium Sulfite 28.35g
Hydroquine 06.29g
Sodium Carbonate 83.00g mono
KBR 00.22g (10 ml)
BZT 00.44g ( 20 ml)

add water to make 2 liters.

Pheidone stock 08.80g / 200 ml
KBR stock 11.00g / 500 ml
bzt Stock 04.40 / 200 ml


When I print, I start with a unexposed negative in the carrier that has been developed and fixed this is my base + fog. I do A test strip on paper (for time) till I reach Max black. I developed for 2 minutes. water bath dev. for a few minutes. then stop, fix, then 2 minutes in kodak selenium toner 50 ml + 950 ml water for 2 to 2.5 minutes. hypo clear wash for an hour.

My zone 1 just emerges from B+F, my zone xIII just registers ever so slightly darker than pure white, Zone IX is pure white.

hope this helps someone

 

[Alan Johnson]

Hmmm Alan, I think your curve is adding "posterization" in shadow side of the wall? Is it reverse S one?
As I remember from 30 years ago, I had no problem enlarging 24x36mm HP-5 negative developed in Emofine to 50x60cm. Grain was not issue even at that magnification.

I believe what you see is the result of low contrast in the dark wall, scanned on auto with a nearly straight curve.
Making a good print would involve darkroom or electronic manipulation but there is some detail in the wall.
Here is a manually adjusted scan:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/98816417@N08/51569590189/in/dateposted-public/

 

[Alan Johnson]

The correct link for the post above is here:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/98816417@N08/51571596622/in/dateposted-public/
Adox CMS-20 @EI 16 on a somewhat dull day processed in MeCD4 required an inverse S contrast reduction:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/98816417@N08/51577870188/in/dateposted-public/
Still useful to be able to process the CMS-20 in the same developer as the Aviphot films under some circumstances.

 

[Alan Johnson]

Rudeofus kindly sent a paper by LFA Mason, J. Photo. Sci 11 1963 p 136 - 139
Among other things, Mason found that a color coupler added to a metol +color developer solution gave a doubling of the silver density produced. Mason suggested that the color developer became superadditive with the metol and regenerated it. I just note this in case anyone wishes to experiment further.
I repeat the MeCD4 formula here:
Bath A
Metol...............................1g
Sodium Sulfite anh..........35g
Color developer CD-4......4g
Sodium Metabisulfite........1g
Water to............................1L

Bath B
Sodium Sulfite anh............35g
Sodium Carbonate anh......30g
Water to..............................1L

Develop 3m +3m 25C, correct the time for other temperatures, I use the Ilfordphoto chart.
Agitate in Bath A 2 inversions every 30s
Agitate in Bath B 2 inversions at start and 2 inversions at half time only.

MeCD4 flattens the S curve of the Aviphot films to some extent giving EI=200 for Aviphot 200 and EI=80 for Aviphot 80.
CD-4 appears generally the least likely of the CD series but it may cause an allergic reaction in some individuals.

 

[greg zinselmeier]

Very interesting. Things that make you “ hmmm”

 

[Nokton48]

Hello Again!

Has anyone here tried the sheet film sizes of the Aviphot 200 being sold here? I just purchased one hundred sheets of 9x12cm. Should be interesting.

Items for sale by panoram_z | eBay

 

[Nokton48]

Rudeofus kindly sent a paper by LFA Mason, J. Photo. Sci 11 1963 p 136 - 139
Among other things, Mason found that a color coupler added to a metol +color developer solution gave a doubling of the silver density produced. Mason suggested that the color developer became superadditive with the metol and regenerated it. I just note this in case anyone wishes to experiment further.
I repeat the MeCD4 formula here:
Bath A
Metol...............................1g
Sodium Sulfite anh..........35g
Color developer CD-4......4g
Sodium Metabisulfite........1g
Water to............................1L

Bath B
Sodium Sulfite anh............35g
Sodium Carbonate anh......30g
Water to..............................1L

Develop 3m +3m 25C, correct the time for other temperatures, I use the Ilfordphoto chart.
Agitate in Bath A 2 inversions every 30s
Agitate in Bath B 2 inversions at start and 2 inversions at half time only.

MeCD4 flattens the S curve of the Aviphot films to some extent giving EI=200 for Aviphot 200 and EI=80 for Aviphot 80.
CD-4 appears generally the least likely of the CD series but it may cause an allergic reaction in some individuals.

Thanks for this! I may try to make this

 

[greg zinselmeier]

I buy the 76m x 24 cm roll, then I cut it down to 8x10 or 4x5. The last roll cost me about 900 USD.last year it cost me 680 USD. go figure. you get about 300 sheets of 8x10. however you lose the 1.5 inches or so. cus it is 9.5 inches tall. the distributor here in the US is in South Carolina. I use a paper cuter and a hole punch to cut and film mark emulsion side, respectively.

 

[abruzzi]

Hello Again!

Has anyone here tried the sheet film sizes of the Aviphot 200 being sold here? I just purchased one hundred sheets of 9x12cm. Should be interesting.

Items for sale by panoram_z | eBay

I’m genuinely curious how well it’s prepared—i.e. are the cuts even and consistent, and does he add notches? I have a box of the Rollei IR in 4x5, and that costs $2 per sheet in 4x5. This could cost as low as $1 for a sheet of 4x5, or $4 for a sheet of 8x10. (If this is on the same thin base as the Rollei, I wonder how well it will work in 8x10?)

 

[greg zinselmeier]

um, I will not trust anyone cutting my film unless it is by a trusted manufacturer. ( i.e ILford, ADOX, KODAK, etc. .. . .) I have gotten my technique down. to hit exactly the dimensions to fit in an 8x10 film Cassette ( holder) . as well as 4x5. I looked into buying from this guy, outfit, company, etc. .. . and I took a pass. that doesn't mean it wont be perfect. All this means Is that I didn't want to take a risk.

 

[greg zinselmeier]

he never said to me in writing, if he notches the film. that is why I took a pass. He may Notch, but he never said out right that he does. Answering that question for me may have been an over sight on his part, But???? im not gonna risk that!!!

 

[Alan Johnson]

The lower contrast obtained with MeCD4 developer used with the Aviphot film derivatives is probably partly due to the negatives being rather thin but there is apparently also an effect of the color developing agent CD-4.
The paper by Mason, see post 141, p139 fig 3 illustrates that color developing agent produces a much flatter curve than Metol. [This is likely due to CD-4 oxide partly blocking the emulsion surface, as does the oxide of phenidone].

There is probably not a lot can be done to improve MeCD4 with Aviphot derivatives by changes to the devloping agent (Nov 2021):
Add metol - would make it more like Emofin, more contrasty for Aviphot, maybe better for "ordinary" film.
Reduce metol - would result in thinner negatives as a secondary developer is used to speed up PPD family developers.
Add CD-4 - may cause more flattening but need longer developing times.
Reduce CD-4 - would increase contrast.
Add color coupler - likely remove adsorbed oxide of CD-4, increasing contrast.

The resolution of fine detail is limited by the grain size with the Aviphot films, not by my lenses or scanner, compare any of my Aviphot derivative photos with Adox CMS-20.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/98816417@N08/51624282237/in/dateposted-public/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/98816417@N08/51577870188/in/dateposted-public/
Adding more sulfite might improve MeCD4 with Aviphot derivative films.

 

[greg zinselmeier]

Thanks for that info Alan.

 

[Alan Johnson]

From post 141, previously I used 35g/L sulfite in bath A but with Rollei 80s at least, the resolution of fine detail seemed to be affected by grain.
I tried 50g/L and 75g/L sulfite to see if this would improve the fine detail.
50g/L sulfite, henceforth MeCD450, is here:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/98816417@N08/51700518448/in/dateposted-public/
75g/L sulfite is here:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/98816417@N08/51700915749/in/dateposted-public/
There is little difference so I propose to change the formula used to MeCD450 in future.
So far 4 different films of the small grain [monodisperse?] type have worked with this type developer to provide a medium contrast image.

 

[Foto Ludens]

I hope that this post is not out of place here, but I thought I'd post my latest result with Rollei Superpan 200 (Aviphot Pan 200) in 510-Pyro 1:100 (film was rated at 100). Last week I loaded my LC-Wide with a short roll and went to the beach with my dogs. I thought that photographing a black dog in the South Texas sun (even if a late November sun), would be a good test of the contrast range of the film. The film was developed for 10 minutes at 71 degrees Fahrenheit, with 30 seconds initial agitation and 2 inversions every 30 seconds thereafter. The resulting contrast range is quite nice:

On my "good" monitor, no highlights are blown out, and there's good shadow detail on my dog's face (just about the only part of her that was not coated with sand!). If anything, I could have pushed the contrast a bit higher... The negatives look great (not thin) to the naked eye, and I inverted the "raw" scan (no exposure adjustment, linear contrast) at a "grade 1" equivalent gamma curve with ColorPerfect software.

 

[Alan Johnson]

Very good picture of a dog, some are better than others at modelling. The contrast of this film has been successfully tamed by your process.

 

[greg zinselmeier]

Do either of you have access to a densitometer? It would be nice if either of you have a log exposure plot of developer time temp dilution for aviphot 200. I’m real curious about how much “ straightening is getting done in the highlights. In terms of density value, zone 8, 9,10,11,12,13 tend to have very little difference density, say .05 to .07 per doubling of exposure. The shoulder is usually quite pronounced.

It is quite easy to adjust time and temp and agitation technique to get a c.i. Of 1.25 or so . But I have not found a way to “straighten” the line.

 

[Alan Johnson]

I don't have a densitometer.
The main reason I believe that MeCD4 and MeCD450 straighten the curve is that they give a near straight line on the gradation curve with the scanner set to auto.
The earlier developer I used , MDS-1, post 9 did not do this, it was necessary to apply a strong reduction in contrast, inverse S.
The CD-4 seems to be the ingredient causing the straightening.
It's not entirely clear if the scanner can be used as a kind of densitometer so the question is not fully settled:
https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/scanner-gradation-and-d-log-e-curves.188041/

 

[Foto Ludens]

Do either of you have access to a densitometer? It would be nice if either of you have a log exposure plot of developer time temp dilution for aviphot 200. I’m real curious about how much “ straightening is getting done in the highlights. In terms of density value, zone 8, 9,10,11,12,13 tend to have very little difference density, say .05 to .07 per doubling of exposure. The shoulder is usually quite pronounced.

It is quite easy to adjust time and temp and agitation technique to get a c.i. Of 1.25 or so . But I have not found a way to “straighten” the line.

Unfortunately, I do not have access to one. I'm just going from practical experience shooting the film, and it scans without any more difficulty than, say, Fomapan 400 (although the contrast is higher, it is not so high that it pushes the limits of my Epson V600 -- by no means a high-end scanner). I don't know how well ColorPerfect's paper grading scale translates the contrast curves of actual paper, but if it is close I'd expect my negatives to print well on VC paper. Worst case, I'd imagine that some split-grade printing might prove helpful (but I never did much of that, so who knows). The negative above was inverted at a "grade 1" equivalent contrast curve, and I'd say that I could have gone a tad higher.

The good thing is that, if you'd like to test it out, 510-Pyro is available commercially (from Bostick & Sullivan), and it's not terribly expensive at $17 for a 100ml bottle (diluted 1:100, it goes a fairly long way). It would be interesting to see what various developers accomplish with this film... Maybe sometime I'll shoot a few identical rolls and develop one in Rodinal, one in PMK, and one in 510 (the 3 developers I have on hand at the moment). But first I'd have to develop my backlog of exposed rolls

 

[greg zinselmeier]

O.k. Allen. Are you getting your cd4 from art craft? I do have a densitometer. I will purchase for Christmas’s break to run test.

Allen why are interested in sodium sulfite in your developer? Why a dissolving agent aka a fine grain developer ingredient?

 

[Alan Johnson]

Hello Greg, it would be useful to see the shape of the curve of Aviphot 200 or 80 when developed in MeCD4, post 141, 3m +3m 25C.
My CD-4 was from minilab suppliers Axel Color International of Italy.
It seemed to me that this one with 35g/L sulfite had fine detail rather limited by grain:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/98816417@N08/51624282237/in/dateposted-public/
Since Thornton, Stoeckler 2 bath developers have more sulfite I tried 50 and 75g/L to see if there was an improvement, post 151.
Not a lot of difference.

 

[relistan]

Hello Greg, it would be useful to see the shape of the curve of Aviphot 200 or 80 when developed in MeCD4, post 141, 3m +3m 25C.
My CD-4 was from minilab suppliers Axel Color International of Italy.
It seemed to me that this one with 35g/L sulfite had fine detail rather limited by grain:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/98816417@N08/51624282237/in/dateposted-public/
Since Thornton, Stoeckler 2 bath developers have more sulfite I tried 50 and 75g/L to see if there was an improvement, post 151.
Not a lot of difference.

Glad to see you continue to work on this, Alan. I have had to pause my experiments for a bit while life intervenes. Hopefully will have more time over the holidays to return to some developer work.

 

[greg zinselmeier]

Ok I’m getting cd4 from art craft. I have only aviphot 200. Idk I’ll make an order for aviphot 80 though. I will run your fine grain developer and I will also run a high accutance developer , I think it will interesting to see the results.

 

[Alan Johnson]

Good to hear that, Greg, it should help to establish if my test scenes have been of adequate brightness range.
In the meantime ,slightly off topic, I have another Agfa product to look at, Copex Rapid. This guy illustrates its S-curve and extreme contrast in D-76: