Developers choices

[TareqPhoto]

Hey all,

I would like ask, what are the things or the reasons for you to choose one developer over another?
How can i know this developer is better for this film than another one? Is it an experience or it is just done scientifically in labs to find out the results?
If i have a film, how can i know which developer will serve me better for this film than another?

Now i have 5 developers for B&W, all will work fine if i follow the instructions, but i would like to know what i should based on when i choose a developer over the another.

I want to know, which developer(s) is(are) good enough to be used for Adox, Fuji Acros, Rollei, and Fomapan? I have those and even i can use any developer i have but i want to know which are the best combo for those.

 

[tkamiya]

There is no better or worse developers. There are different developers. What's better for you depends on what you are looking for.

For example, Kodak has this chart.
http://www.kodak.com/global/en/prof...wFilmProcessing/selecting.jhtml?pq-path=14053

Which will tell you how each developer affects the result of developing a given film.

 

[Sirius Glass]

There is no better or worse developers. There are different developers. What's better for you depends on what you are looking for.

For example, Kodak has this chart.
http://www.kodak.com/global/en/prof...wFilmProcessing/selecting.jhtml?pq-path=14053

Which will tell you how each developer affects the result of developing a given film.

That is the best recommendation that one can give for Kodak developers. Based on that, you can understand why I use XTOL.

Steve

 

[TareqPhoto]

But i am not talking about Kodak developers only, there are developers of another brands, also I may like XTOL, but other will tell that HC-110 is my favorite, many i heard prefer Rodinal, and so, is that depending on how someone looking for out of it or something else?
I don't care much if more grain or less, i prefer maybe sharper image, some photos i like it contrasty, now how can i know which developer will give me certain look or result, and there is no developer that can give good results overall even not perfect for each?

 

[vedmak]

IMHO for slow film you use developers like Rodinal, for fast something like Xtol, Pyro developers are suggested when shooting high contrast, however, my personal preference would be to stick to one type of film and developer (that has been around for a while, and has no manufacturing defects like Foma) and try to work with the Zone system to get the results you looking for.

 

[Jim Noel]

The only way for you to answer this question to your satisfaction is to do your own testing. A very important part of the test is to make a final print on the paper of your choice utilizing the paper developer of your choice. Each of these is an important part of producing prints which met your specifications.

 

[ntenny]

You may want to get hold of a copy of the Film Developing Cookbook. It was really helpful to me when I started grappling with the same set of questions.

Generally, acutance (perceived "edge sharpness") and fine grain are "competitive" with one another, and the biggest differences between most developers have to do with how they balance those two qualities. (Xtol and HC-110 are fairly moderate, or perhaps slightly skewed towards acutance; Rodinal is the consummate sharp-and-grainy developer; and Perceptol is probably the best known super-fine-grain developer, I guess.)

Beyond that basic characterisation, the differences between developers are probably smaller than most of us like to think. It's fun to play with different chemistry, but I think you have to be pretty good in all other aspects of your process before your choice of developer becomes the limiting factor in your results.

-NT

 

[wclark5179]

I've used many developers the past 50 plus years and my favorite still is D-76/ID-11.

I believe some people choose for particular reasons that may or may not suit you. My recommendation is to find a developer that you get to know real well, becomes your friend, then broaden your horizon with different developers.

 

[pentaxuser]

You can't define most developers as being suitable for some films and not others. It really doesn't work that way. In terms of rules some developers give extra fine grain such as Ilford Perceptol but may reduce the speed of films so a 400 speed film should be reduced to say 320 or 250 to give full shadow detail. Some will help increase the speed of film such as Microphen. Others give more apparent sharpness but at the expense of grain such as Rodinal. it is worth reading the manufacturers' technical sheets.

If you really want to find out about developers and the chemistry involved I'd recommend that you get a book like the Film Developing Cookbook but there is no such thing as the "magic bullet" by which I mean the perfect combination of film and developer which is objectively and scientifically better than any other combination.

pentaxuser

 

[Ian Grant]

In 45+ years of film processing I'd have to say that the three best developers I've used are Rodinal, Xtol & Pyrocat HD.

I used ID-11 (D76) for years before switching to Adox Borax MQ, similar but better sharpness, tonality & film speed. I dallied with HC110, Ilfotech etc in the early to mid 80's. then switched to Rodinal for my slower films, AP100/APX100, AP25/APX25 & TMX and Xtol for my TMY and stayed with these for nearly 20 years. All commercial work was Xtol (replenished.

More recently I switched to Pyrocat HD, it's like Rodinal on steroids, I now use it for all films & formats (35mm - 10x8) from Pan F to Neopan 400 and the negatives are so easy to print, wonderful tonality, biting sharpness and good film speed.

You make your choice and then need to stick with one, at the most two developers, learn how they work with the films you use and hone the combination to give you great results.

Ian

 

[Brandon D.]

I would like ask, what are the things or the reasons for you to choose one developer over another?
How can i know this developer is better for this film than another one? Is it an experience or it is just done scientifically in labs to find out the results?
If i have a film, how can i know which developer will serve me better for this film than another?

I'm sure many of us just do our own trial-and-error and go with developers that suit our own personal preferences and our own developing methods. It's almost like asking, "What are the things or reasons for you to choose one dog over another as a pet?" It's tough to make these sorts of decisions without testing things out for yourself and seeing the results of your tests. Regardless of how a film seems statistically, you still may not like it after you've tried it a few times. There is no right or wrong.

Think about the end result you want in your work, and then find the developers that give you that result easiest. Research is not a substitute for actual experience; they're both necessary in making a firm decision about your developer choice.

 

[RobertV]

In general you can make a choice for slow or higher speed films. Classical cubical or Tgrain type films and of course it will depends on your film format.

Some people made the choice on longer lifetime. And sometimes the choice is limited due to availability or the hassle to mix a powder or not or the use of destilled water.

Already mentioned: Rodinal, very suitable for slow and medium speed cubical type films. The tremendous life time of this liquid Para Amino Phenol developer is a big plus.
APX25, APX100, Pan F+, Efke 25-100 Rollei Pan 25 even Acros 100 will do fine. If you want the highest acutance and sharpness you can switch for the Efke films to Beutler A+B.

You want to push Tri-X 400: Diafine 2 bath on E.I. 1250 is a perfect solution, just to mention some good combinations.

You're working on 35mm and want less grain: Perceptol, CG512 on half iso rate can be a nice solution.

T grain type films: Delta in DD-X, Tmax in Xtol.

A general purpose developer: D76/ID 11 can be perfect with FP4+, PXP, Neopan just to mention something.

Some people prefer pyro developers. But when printing via Split Grade it can have some disadvantages and the ingredients Pyro Catechine or Pyrogallol are poisoned.

All kind of different reasons to use it or not.

THE best developer is not there same like THE best film. Somehow the film developer combination is always a compromise.

 

[Jeff Kubach]

I sometimes use T-Max developer for T-Max film. But overall I always count on D-76.

Jeff

 

[tkamiya]

I really don't think you are going to get a kind of answer you are looking for, Tareq... What you'll get as results are dependent upon more things than just the developer. Things like agitation, temperature, time, etc will all make some difference. All you get is the tendency of the developer and what people like in their environment and processing.

This is more like asking what car is the best. Not only people make decision based on technical specs, but emotional attachment, beliefs, and personal bias has a lot to do with it. Other than people like Ron (Photo Engineer) and few others, I don't think anyone really has done scientific test in precise lab environment. Even then, there is no guarantee that you or I (mere mortals!) can replicate their expert experience.

 

[Anscojohn]

Hey all,

I would like ask, what are the things or the reasons for you to choose one developer over another?
How can i know this developer is better for this film than another one? Is it an experience or it is just done scientifically in labs to find out the results?
If i have a film, how can i know which developer will serve me better for this film than another?

Now i have 5 developers for B&W, all will work fine if i follow the instructions, but i would like to know what i should based on when i choose a developer over the another.

I want to know, which developer(s) is(are) good enough to be used for Adox, Fuji Acros, Rollei, and Fomapan? I have those and even i can use any developer i have but i want to know which are the best combo for those.

*********
D76/Id-11

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Two developer examples of why you need to do your own testing, based on what you want, Tareq:

1. Xtol - excels if you photograph things where the sun strikes the subject matter directly, or you have fairly high contrast scenes. Xtol tends to respond very well to techniques with reduced agitation, to 'calm down' scenes with very bright light and high contrast.
2. Rodinal - builds density and contrast for as long as you want it to. This developer really excels when you photograph objects in medium to low contrast - it is a very very powerful developer that responds very well to agitation increase and development time increase. This helps you to build texture and contrast in subjects where there might not be much.

Both developers are fantastic, but they do different things. The important core of your question: You have to figure out what you need from your developer before you can choose it.
That way you can ask the question: What is a good developer for controlling extreme contrast? What is a good developer for expanding contrast when the lighting is flat? Which developer gives the sharpest and most acute grain? Etc. Specific questions. Otherwise it's going to be a recommendation based on what people like. You want a recommendation that is based on your own needs.

 

[TareqPhoto]

Two developer examples of why you need to do your own testing, based on what you want, Tareq:

1. Xtol - excels if you photograph things where the sun strikes the subject matter directly, or you have fairly high contrast scenes. Xtol tends to respond very well to techniques with reduced agitation, to 'calm down' scenes with very bright light and high contrast.
2. Rodinal - builds density and contrast for as long as you want it to. This developer really excels when you photograph objects in medium to low contrast - it is a very very powerful developer that responds very well to agitation increase and development time increase. This helps you to build texture and contrast in subjects where there might not be much.

Both developers are fantastic, but they do different things. The important core of your question: You have to figure out what you need from your developer before you can choose it.
That way you can ask the question: What is a good developer for controlling extreme contrast? What is a good developer for expanding contrast when the lighting is flat? Which developer gives the sharpest and most acute grain? Etc. Specific questions. Otherwise it's going to be a recommendation based on what people like. You want a recommendation that is based on your own needs.

WOW, i love this forum, i can the answers very quickly and many so it will help me very well, thank you very much for that, i appreciate it.

Thomas, i quoted you post because in fact those question i should customize it before but i was late to do, so yes, let's say which developer is good enough [i will not say the best as many will say there is no best] for:

1. Finest grain [even low sharpness or no details, if with it is a plus]
2. Sharpest details [don't main with or without grain]
3. Higher contrast [regardless of the two above]
4. Better for tonality and shadow and DR and B&W grades

I know i have to experiment and test developers to come out which is doing my work at the best as i see, but it is not always i really care that my work is at best, best to me may not be best to others, and that is why i asked because i may print something to others so i should know the difference between the developers, and with all of your experience for 5 years up to maybe 100 years i can depend on most of your answers or experiences, i can't wait for about 10-20 years to find out which are my best developers, and meanwhile i reach that period it will be nice to see what you people found out so far, so if i have this film and use that developer and didn't get same results perfect as someone else using same film and developers even almost identical similar exposures then i can't say it is the developer or the film, it could be me, and also it may also saving my time to test one film and developer if i saw results on the net then i can get there if i like it, should i test 3-4 developers and 6 films to get similar or same result i saw it now after 5 years? and how i should use only one developer and one film for say 1 year and still it didn't give me the result, then i will spend many years as most of you did to test films and developers to have my favorite, but it is simply what i like is what you did already, finer grain or sharper details or higher DR all are fine with me, i care about the subject more than that final look result it came out, and i am not like you in that area where i can access to many films or developers to try and use, Rodinal for example is not shipped to my country [UAE], and i only order by online and all or most stores i use to order don't send this developer to my area, so i will be always limited in my experience than you, and also i may not do something correctly even you all recommend me one developer and one film to has the best result, so i have to know more details about different developers according to your experience, some variables can happen, but not always it will change all the results, if 80% said that Perceptol doing a great job, then why i come and said it is the worse developer i have used or i surprised why you choose this when it didn't help me much for example, but honestly i will tell you that i am new to film and i feel i am not that kind of guy who really go in so small details about each developer mechanism to see if it did a great job or not, and if you experienced managed to use one developer at best and got great fine art work and i didn't then it doesn't mean that the developer was not a good choice, it could be me, and most of the time i may do something wrong with great versatile practical developer then it is my fault, so answer the 4 points up and it will help me or shorten my time testing at least.

ALSO, i wish if someone when answer one point then to include a sample image, post the best sample image of the developer you used, because if you get 90% great results and 10% bad then you post one of the bad and saying it didn't do the job or it is not necessary the best, i care about 90% good more then 10% bad.

And at the end, forgive my ignorance.

 

[2F/2F]

For a general-purpose developer, these are my main considerations:

1. consistency
2. versatility
3. convenience

HC-110/Ilfotec HC are my main developers. Every now and then I will use D-19 for high contrast results. I have just started using Rodinal and D-23. I got PMK pyro at Freestyle the other day to try it out. Sometimes I use A+B lithography developer if I want halftone negs. However, these are special purpose developers. I cannot imagine a better general-purpose developer than HC-110/Ilfotec HC. The quality is excellent, and it is so easy to use, versatile, and consistent.

 

[TareqPhoto]

For a general-purpose developer, these are my main considerations:

1. consistency
2. versatility
3. convenience

HC-110/Ilfotec HC are my main developers. Every now and then I will use D-19 for high contrast results. I have just started using Rodinal and D-23. I got PMK pyro at Freestyle the other day to try it out. Sometimes I use A+B lithography developer if I want halftone negs. However, these are special purpose developers. I cannot imagine a better general-purpose developer than HC-110/Ilfotec HC. The quality is excellent, and it is so easy to use, versatile, and consistent.

Cool, good that it is doing the job for you and you happy with it, maybe one day i will have a time to test it and see, i heard good things about HC-110.

 

[Brandon D.]

For a general-purpose developer, these are my main considerations:

1. consistency
2. versatility
3. convenience

That's why I love Kodak XTOL. It has made developing so easy to learn for me. In fact, I've just developed two batches of film today and I still have one more to go. I'm still a beginner, but everytime I see my negatives after each run, I immediately feel more and more confident about this process, . It's starting to feel like second nature, and I worry less and less about developing (let alone the developer itself).

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

Nothing beats trial and error. How about doing some research on your favorite photographer to find out what film/developer combinations they use? Flickr is also a good place to post some discussions. Good luck in finding your favorite developer. My favorite 2 are PMK pyro and HC-110. Both I used in college photo labs and never tried anything else.

 

[srs5694]

TareqPhoto, IIRC you're just starting out with B&W processing. If my memory is correct, I recommend you pick one of those five developers you say you've got and use it exclusively for your next couple dozen rolls, at least. Use it with just one or (at most) two films. The reason is that if you keep changing your developer and film from one roll to another, you'll find it harder to notice effects that aren't related to the film or developer, such as the effects of high- vs. low-contrast scenes, or the effects of errors in development (developing at the wrong temperature, say).

Once you've learned what to expect from one or two film/developer combinations, you can begin experimenting with changes in one or the other to see what sort of effect you'll get. If you know what to expect from, say, Kodak T-Max 100 in XTOL, you'll be better able to evaluate T-Max 100 in Rodinal or Fuji Acros 100 in XTOL -- but if you try Acros 100 in Rodinal (changing both film and developer), you won't know if the differences you see are due to the change in film or the change in developer.

Note that I'm not trying to discourage you from experimenting, and of course you'll have to pick one of those five developers if you follow my advice so you might as well try to get the one that will work best for you, based on others' recommendations. Experimenting with such a wide range of developers while you're first learning the basics, though, is likely to result in slower learning of both the basics and the differences between the developers with which you're experimenting.

 

[2F/2F]

Nothing beats trial and error. How about doing some research on your favorite photographer to find out what film/developer combinations they use? Flickr is also a good place to post some discussions. Good luck in finding your favorite developer. My favorite 2 are PMK pyro and HC-110. Both I used in college photo labs and never tried anything else.

If you like those two, you might like Rodinal as well. I just tried PMK pyro for the first time today. I am just judging on looking through two rolls of 120 film on my light box, but it seems like a very "automatic" developer (seemed to handle a wide range of SBRs very well), and is very easy to mix. In that last way, it is very much like Rodinal and HC-110/Ilfotec HC. With these three developers, I think one could probably be set for life...Well, them and some D-19 maybe!!!

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

Good luck with your Pyro PMK trial

If you like those two, you might like Rodinal as well. I just tried PMK pyro for the first time today. I am just judging on looking through two rolls of 120 film on my light box, but it seems like a very "automatic" developer (seemed to handle a wide range of SBRs very well), and is very easy to mix. In that last way, it is very much like Rodinal and HC-110/Ilfotec HC. With these three developers, I think one could probably be set for life...Well, them and some D-19 maybe!!!

I don't always use it. It depends on what I shoot. The negs are incredibly sharp. The developer renders snow incredibly well. Snow printed on pyro negs has a crystalline quality. I have to warn you pyro pmk is temperamental.

 

[2F/2F]

I have to warn you pyro pmk is temperamental.

Interesting. The thing that struck me about it was how non temperamental and easy to use it was. I followed the directions exactly, mixed it quickly and easily (taking off 4% of the time for every degree F hotter than 68), and came out with two rolls that looked really nice, even though they had been shot in flat light, normal light, and contrasty light. Is the developer inconsistent because it dies quickly? Is that what makes it temperamental?