Developer for FP4+, HP5+ and Tri-X

[Thomas Bertilsson]

For those that use PMK Pyro, what do you use for a fixer?

Ilford Hypam works great. It's fairly neutral pH.
Otherwise TF-4 or TF-5 from Photographers' Formulary should be good.

 

[Del Boy]

Thanks!

I've been using Rodinal for everything but might try Pyro.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Jack - the pyro stain shouldn't be much of a problem. Just make a similarly stained step tablet to make your trial curves. But really, even that
tends to be overkill for simple black and white masking. I can't elaborate too much here on how I do it. I mainly used supplementary masks with HP5 because I deliberately overdevelop these negs to accentuate the midtone expansion, then reined in the extremes with masks. I use FP4 for sheet film, smaller-grained TMX for small format originals (though I never shoot HP5 itself in anything smaller than 8x10). I get the mask to differently see thru the pyro stain analogously to how the printing paper does by exposing it thru a deep blue filter. Then I develop this to allow gamma using D76 or preferably, a very dilute HC-110 tweak which gives me a much straighter line than D76. A densitometer helps when you're starting out, but with a bit of experience you can simply eyeball your originals and know what to do, or in a worst case
bracket the masks about a stop either side of the estimated one. Unless you have one of those UV-reading XRite units intended for the graphics trade and coveted by alt printers, it's tricky to make an ordinary densitometer work well in this particular application. You want to
end up with a pretty subtle mask. Lith masks are a different subject. Much easier to do than explain, but I hope this helps.

 

[JackRosa]

Thanks Drew

Jack - the pyro stain shouldn't be much of a problem. Just make a similarly stained step tablet to make your trial curves. But really, even that
tends to be overkill for simple black and white masking. I can't elaborate too much here on how I do it. I mainly used supplementary masks with HP5 because I deliberately overdevelop these negs to accentuate the midtone expansion, then reined in the extremes with masks. I use FP4 for sheet film, smaller-grained TMX for small format originals (though I never shoot HP5 itself in anything smaller than 8x10). I get the mask to differently see thru the pyro stain analogously to how the printing paper does by exposing it thru a deep blue filter. Then I develop this to allow gamma using D76 or preferably, a very dilute HC-110 tweak which gives me a much straighter line than D76. A densitometer helps when you're starting out, but with a bit of experience you can simply eyeball your originals and know what to do, or in a worst case
bracket the masks about a stop either side of the estimated one. Unless you have one of those UV-reading XRite units intended for the graphics trade and coveted by alt printers, it's tricky to make an ordinary densitometer work well in this particular application. You want to
end up with a pretty subtle mask. Lith masks are a different subject. Much easier to do than explain, but I hope this helps.

Thank you Drew. Your explanation surely helps. I especially appreciate you taking the time to share your insight.

 

[JackRosa]

Thanks Michael

I won't get into the chemistry here, but film developers are formulated differently than print developers. In addition to curve shape, film developers are formulated based on varying balances of emulsion speed, sharpness and granularity. These are interrelated, and you can't go too far on one of them without giving something up on the others. The most modern formulations (as of when research stopped) pushed the envelope as far as possible.

The goals and requirements are not the same for print developers, and when you optimize for certain things, you have to compromise on other things.

If 130 gives you negatives you are pleased with, in the end that is all that counts of course. But objectively I'd bet a developer such as XTOL (for example) will kick its butt when it comes to image structure, emulsion speed and/or tone reproduction.

As an aside, regarding Pyro and masks, you can still make them. It just takes a little extra trial/error and less densitometer.

Thank you, Michael. I sincerely appreciate you taking the time to share your insight with me (and all participating in this thread).

 

[JackRosa]

THANKS TO ALL.

I want to take a minute to say that this thread has been most informative and fun and that I appreciate my fellow APUGers taking the time to share their insight.

In reading opposing views, I learn a great deal and then use the acquired knowledge to guide me in further testing. I know that in the end, whether one knows the chemistry of photography or the math behind curves, etc., what counts is the final product. Having a technical background, my inclination is to constantly better understand the science of this medium.

Testing by itself gets me from point A to point B, but the insight I receive from you fellows allows me to go from point B to point C, where point C is farther in the the knowledge curve than point B.

Thus . . . THANK YOU for contributing to this thread; thank you for taking the time to share your insights.

 

[JackRosa]

Thanks Thomas

Jack,

How do you print? Silver gelatin? Fixed or variable contrast? Or do you scan?

It matters a lot, because any pyro developer stains the negative, which will mess with the contrast of variable contrast emulsions. Especially PMK with its green/brown stain can be difficult to work around and get enough contrast when printing on VC paper. With graded paper it's an entirely different story.

With Tri-X, D76 is a classic beautiful look. Dilute 1:1 and have at it. I've had luck with HP5+ and FP4+ in that developer as well. Very good results.

If you like really intense and beautiful highlights, Developer 12 from Photographers' Formulary is really interesting. Completely different tonality to Rodinal. (It's the recipe for Edwal Developer 12 that they're using).

Otherwise, Rodinal is a great developer that is very flexible. D76 will give you less prominent grain, but the negs will not be as sharp. In the grand scheme of things it probably doesn't matter much.

Thank you, Thomas.
No scanning for me - wet prints
Variable contrast paper / Fiber (thus the issue with staining developers)
I love intense highlights and will probably try Developer 12. Thank you for this suggestion.
I already developed a roll of FP4 in D-76 and the negs look very good. Next step is printing. I intend to try D76 with Tri-X and possibly also with HP5.

THANKS again for the insight and suggestions.

 

[moltogordo]

Your film choice is very close to mine - I use HP5, Tri-X and I'm searching for a replacement for Plus X, and the films in the running are FP4, Aristo Edu, and TMAX 100.

I use HC110 for HP5, at a 1:63 dilution rate (syrup to water), for 11 - 12 minutes. It gives a beautiful, full range negative.

I use Rodinal for Tri-X, at 1:50, for about 14-16 minutes. I like higher dilutions because it allows a bit of sloppiness that faster times don't, and I'm basically lazy. When I want impact/grain on subminiature negs, I use this film and Rodinal at either 1:25 or 1:9 with double the normal agitation.

I've not settled on a developer for the slower film, but I'm leaning toward XTol. I've just gotten back into film this summer, and have some catching up to do on the available films and developers. I used to use Plus-X in Edwal FG7, but that's a lost cause now. I frankly quite like this Aristo Edu, and Kodak TMax 100 is very good, too. They both respond to XTol nicely.

FP4 was never a film I cared for too much. I got pinholes in my 4x5 sheet film and sometimes in 120 roll film, so I went to Plus-X which I loved. I still have a 100ft roll in the freezer, but as there is no longer FG7, I'll use what's left of it with D76, I think.

I rate all my films at the package speed, and very seldom push or pull.

 

[moltogordo]

This has indeed been a fun thread, and I've learned a lot. As I mentioned above, I'm just getting back into film, and I'm tending to use what is familiar. I found out about HC110 at a 1:63 dilution on HP5, from a friend of mine who was a professional printer. He liked it because it gave two quarts of solution (ie two tanks of developer) for a printing session, and seemed to "smooth out" the rough edges of HP5. I used this combo for years, and its' my starting point for getting back into film. I especially liked it for my Mamiya C330 negs.

I tried to find a couple of examples to post of this developer/film combo, and found two: These are both scans of 5x7 prints (the prof, my theory teacher at UBC was Cort Hultberg - this print is scanned from a beaded surface (Luminos Y) so the sharpness is not there as it should be) and the other is a scanned 5x7 print on Luminos Lustre Matte. Both prints were shot with an Olympus Pen FT, the 38mm lens, exposures not recorded. I got better results from my half-frame SLR with this combination than I did with anything else with an ASA 400 film.

Both of these pictures date from 1972, when I was in 1st year university.

You folks are WAYY up on me in this stuff, so I'd appreciate some advice on my search for a 100 ASA film/developer combination. As I said above, I seem to like Aristo Edu or TMax 100 in Xtol, but any suggestions would be appreciated! Thanks!!!

 

[JW PHOTO]

This has indeed been a fun thread, and I've learned a lot. As I mentioned above, I'm just getting back into film, and I'm tending to use what is familiar. I found out about HC110 at a 1:63 dilution on HP5, from a friend of mine who was a professional printer. He liked it because it gave two quarts of solution (ie two tanks of developer) for a printing session, and seemed to "smooth out" the rough edges of HP5. I used this combo for years, and its' my starting point for getting back into film. I especially liked it for my Mamiya C330 negs.

I tried to find a couple of examples to post of this developer/film combo, and found two: These are both scans of 5x7 prints (the prof, my theory teacher at UBC was Cort Hultberg - this print is scanned from a beaded surface (Luminos Y) so the sharpness is not there as it should be) and the other is a scanned 5x7 print on Luminos Lustre Matte. Both prints were shot with an Olympus Pen FT, the 38mm lens, exposures not recorded. I got better results from my half-frame SLR with this combination than I did with anything else with an ASA 400 film.

Both of these pictures date from 1972, when I was in 1st year university.

You folks are WAYY up on me in this stuff, so I'd appreciate some advice on my search for a 100 ASA film/developer combination. As I said above, I seem to like Aristo Edu or TMax 100 in Xtol, but any suggestions would be appreciated! Thanks!!!

I know I might get slammed for this, but I've begun playing a little with Shanghai GP3 100 120 film and it might be something for you to try. It's an older conventional style film that is not bad at all. Earlier batches were not good as to the film curl and paper backing number bleeding onto the film. The later batches(2016 expiration date) seems to have solved those two problems and now it's pretty easy to work with. I've only run one roll through Rodinal 1:100 stand-developed 1hr., but it came out very nice and shows me this film has a lot of potential. I've used Foma/Arista 100 and 200 ISO films and I actually like the GP3 much better. I, too, like PlusX and VerichromePan and I think I can get this film to fit somewhere in between the two. Just me of course. I still like Fuji Acros and Delta100, but GP3 is just "different" in a good way. Oh, and it's pretty cheap on the auction site too, but make sure you go fro and expiration date of 2016 or later, if you should want to try it. I have a couple of picture examples further down in this forum, titled: GP3 100 exp 2015 film. These are the ones souped in Rodinal 1:100. JohnW

 

[moltogordo]

Thanks, JW! Oddly enough, I just loaded a roll of Shanghai into my Seagull TLR a few days ago, with the intention of taking an authentic "Peoples' Republic of China" photo set. It's an older film, but if I like it, I'll get some of the new dated stuff.

Thanks!

 

[JW PHOTO]

Thanks, JW! Oddly enough, I just loaded a roll of Shanghai into my Seagull TLR a few days ago, with the intention of taking an authentic "Peoples' Republic of China" photo set. It's an older film, but if I like it, I'll get some of the new dated stuff.

Thanks!

If you like this older stuff, which I thought was not so good and near junk, then you'll really love the newer emulsion. They are "NOT" the same thing and the 2016+ film has all the positive things going for it except it still has the crummy backing paper, but I can live with that. My next run will be using WD2D+ pyro, which is still one of my all-time favorite developers. I'll post results when I have them. JohnW

 

[moltogordo]

If you like this older stuff, which I thought was not so good and near junk, then you'll really love the newer emulsion. They are "NOT" the same thing and the 2016+ film has all the positive things going for it except it still has the crummy backing paper, but I can live with that. My next run will be using WD2D+ pyro, which is still one of my all-time favorite developers. I'll post results when I have them. JohnW

Took your word and ordered 10 rolls of 2016 dated film, $30 and free shipping. Thanks!

 

[JW PHOTO]

Took your word and ordered 10 rolls of 2016 dated film, $30 and free shipping. Thanks!

I don't think you'll be disappointed and please post your experience with it. I won't be developing the three rolls I shot this holiday anytime soon since I have some pretty serious medical issues to get out of the way first. When I do get to them I'll post the results. John W

 

[JackRosa]

Negs Developed in PMK

I play with various things but when I want things to absolutely turn out and print easily, I fall back on PyroCat. Great shelf life for my erratic usage patterns and the controlled highlights make printing very easy. HP5+ and skin tones with PyroCat have a sort of 3D look that I've not gotten with other combinations. Exposure for me is roughly 1/2 box speed and a good starting point and about what your practice is already. I would certainly give it a try. PS- I've had my best luck scanning these negatives vs traditional, non-staining developers if that matters to you.

I use the MC version but the original HD is likely easier to quickly mix up and will give almost identical results for some trial runs for you.

Chris: do you print your PMK-developed negs on graded paper or VC paper??? / SORRY - wrong post / intended for Chris

 

[JackRosa]

Chris:

Do you print your PMK-developed negs on graded paper or VC paper?

 

[moltogordo]

JW - Really sorry to hear about your health issues. Having recovered from a stroke 4 years ago, by which I lost my right eye, I'm very empathetic to this kind of thing.

I just completed developing my Shanghai (old style) film. The negs are drying but look just excellent! I developed them in D76 1:1 at 14 minutes, agitation once every minute. I experienced no difficulty with the curling of the film - I use Paterson reels and tanks for 120, and it was an easy load.

I'll post the results print wise when I do them, probably about 2 weeks. I have a couple of dozen developed rolls to contact print (from shooting film with cameras in my collection) before I do any printing.

Thanks for your help.

 

[JW PHOTO]

JW - Really sorry to hear about your health issues. Having recovered from a stroke 4 years ago, by which I lost my right eye, I'm very empathetic to this kind of thing.

I just completed developing my Shanghai (old style) film. The negs are drying but look just excellent! I developed them in D76 1:1 at 14 minutes, agitation once every minute. I experienced no difficulty with the curling of the film - I use Paterson reels and tanks for 120, and it was an easy load.

I'll post the results print wise when I do them, probably about 2 weeks. I have a couple of dozen developed rolls to contact print (from shooting film with cameras in my collection) before I do any printing.

Thanks for your help.

Thanks moltogordo, but it is what it is I guess. I think we all take our health for granted until we get older and see it start slipping away. When we're young we think we're going to live forever.
I sure didn't want to hijack this thread, but I think we're still fairly on topic talking about ISO 100 film replacements. I'm glad you had a good experience with this new batch of GP3 100 and your findings mirror mine. I just adjusted the focusing on my 3.5F Rolleiflex and to test it I put a roll of GP3 in and shot the test. I only used five exposures for the test and the rest were random shots. I then developed the roll in Wimberly's WD2H+ pyro that I mixed myself. It allows slightly higher contrast over my WD2D+ pyro and I thought that would help in this test on focus. I used 9.5 minutes and the negs look slightly over-developed. For my next roll I will cut back to about 8 minutes until I have time to do some proper testing. To make a long story short, other than the slight over exposure, the negatives look fantastic and sharper by far than the ones I did in Rodinal 1:100 @ 1hr.. I'll scan these when I return home on Monday and see how they compare. I won't be printing until after the 16th when I get some of this medical stuff out of the way. In the meantime I'll be placing an order for 10 more rolls that's for sure. John W

 

[moltogordo]

Shanghai update: Actually, John, this was the older film I developed - the new stuff hasn't arrived yet. It still loaded easy, but it does curl when dried. I put it in envelopes, so again, there is no problem. I'm a printer, not a scanner.

Like an idiot, though, I wiped off the excess water/photo flo bath with a cloth that left a bit of lint residue on the film - the tooth on the emulsion side is fairly coarse, and I scratched one or two frames taking it off with the anti-stat cloth when it was dry. Again, like an idiot, I used a non hardening fixer (which I simply DON'T do for film) and on another couple of frames, Edwal Anti-scratch is going to have to be employed . . . if the shots are worth printing.

So the final upshot is that the D76 1:1 produced very nice negatives, and as I spent some time in university days rescuing abused film for my boss's clients, I'll be able to print these if they're worth printing - contact sheets next.

All said and done, I'll certainly use this film again, and my faith in D76 for this film is there, and I'm looking forward to the arrival of the new 2016 batch. I'll have to try HC110 1:64 next time; that's what I usually use for HP5 at 11 minutes and 68 degrees. I'll try your Pyro formula one day - next turn of the wheel. Thanks again.

 

[JW PHOTO]

I haven't had any "soft-emulsion problems" so far with this new "2016" stuff and I use a home-brewed TF2 fixer. Also, Like I said before, no real curl problem either. Now, if I use Pyro I do now that it hardens the emulsion also and that's an additional advantage to using a pyro developer. Remember. let us all know your feelings about the "2016" GP3. John W

 

[rince]

I mostly use D76 1:1 with HP5+ and Tri-X in 120 and 4x5 if exposed normally. If I have to push I usually use Xtol, even though I have to say, I love the look of Tri-X with D76. The tonality is great and especially the midtones are nicely separated. It gives you a little bit of grain, but not to prominent.

 

[JackRosa]

Thanks Rince

I mostly use D76 1:1 with HP5+ and Tri-X in 120 and 4x5 if exposed normally. If I have to push I usually use Xtol, even though I have to say, I love the look of Tri-X with D76. The tonality is great and especially the midtones are nicely separated. It gives you a little bit of grain, but not to prominent.

Thanks. What are your EI's for Tri-X and HP5 when developing in D76 1:1 and what development times do you use in 120 format? Thanks in advance.

 

[rince]

Thanks. What are your EI's for Tri-X and HP5 when developing in D76 1:1 and what development times do you use in 120 format? Thanks in advance.

Hi,
For HP5 my EI is 200 and I usually go with 20C and 13:00 minutes and with Tri-X it is 9:45 min for me in D76 1:1 rated at 200 also.

Thx
Dennis


Gesendet von meinem iPhone mit Tapatalk

 

[JackRosa]

Thanks Dennis

Thanks. What are your EI's for Tri-X and HP5 when developing in D76 1:1 and what development times do you use in 120 format? Thanks in advance.

Thanks Dennis. I will give d76 a try. I bought 2 bags to make 1 gallon/ea. and they arrived this week. I will be trying both, HP5 and Tri-X in D76 this week. I appreciate you sharing your experience and insight.

PS. I developed FP4, HP5, and Tri-X in PD-130 (1+10) and will run a comparison between the D76-developed negs and the PD-130-developed negs and will post my observations/conclusions. I also developed in Rodinal (1+50) and 1+100 (stand development) and will post my observations once the tests are complete.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Thanks Dennis. I will give d76 a try. I bought 2 bags to make 1 gallon/ea. and they arrived this week. I will be trying both, HP5 and Tri-X in D76 this week. I appreciate you sharing your experience and insight.

PS. I developed FP4, HP5, and Tri-X in PD-130 (1+10) and will run a comparison between the D76-developed negs and the PD-130-developed negs and will post my observations/conclusions. I also developed in Rodinal (1+50) and 1+100 (stand development) and will post my observations once the tests are complete.

Sounds very thorough. Good luck with the tests, and I hope it'll be worthwhile for you. Tri-X in D76 is such a classic combination. Can't really go wrong. Tri-X in Rodinal is also a classic combination. Your comparison to 130 should be very interesting to see.