Developing Fiber base paper

I have read and heard that a method of developing fiber based paper is to develop to maximum black, and then place the print in a water bath to bring out the white or lighter tones. In the developer the paper is agitated, in the water bath no agitation is suggested. I wonder if such method is used by some here, and is "correct". Moreover, I don't quite understand why-with fiber paper-development will continue for the high tones, but cease for the shadows. What is the chemistry all about?

Thanks fo any and all.

Ed

With waterbath processing, you transfer the print carefully to a waterbath and leave it there without agitation. The developer near the shadows becomes exhausted quickly, and the developer near the highlights becomes exhausted more slowly, which is why the highlights continue to develop.

It's not terribly effective with most modern papers and developers, but it works very well with papers that respond well to amidol. This was true of Azo, and is true of Efke Emaks. With graded papers, it's a good way to reduce contrast to obtain intermediate grades.

Thanks David for the rapid explanation and cogent response. Would the techniques respond to other fiber based graded papers as well, i.e., those that are bromide based such as Slavich? As a corollary, do you know if non -bromide papers respond to Amidol? In addition, might you know if developers other then Amidol might work? I have never used Amidol, and heard that the staining properties can be off putting. Are there developers similar to Amidol, that are not staining? I'll have to ask the folks over at the Formulary, and I'll try to report back tomorrow regarding Amidol "substitues". Very much appreciate the help.

While we're on graded papers.....do you think ( obviously no way to know ) that such papers will be around for a while?

Ed

You have to try it and see. Steve Anchell suggests in _The Darkroom Cookbook_ that emulsions that are less hardened seem to work better with amidol, so it may not matter so much whether the paper is a bromide, chloride, or iodide emulsion. My guess is that a paper that tones easily is a good candidate for amidol. Ilford MGIV FB, for instance doesn't tone very easily compared to other papers, and it also doesn't seem to benefit very much from amidol.

Amidol has the unusual property of developing from the "bottom up," so there's nothing quite like it for waterbath processing. The explanation I've heard for this is that as the developer is absorbed into the emulsion, the pH changes, and by the time it reaches the bottom, development begins. For regular processing without a waterbath, you may find that other developers can give you similar results.

Will there be graded papers? Who knows. If there's no paper at all, I'll be making my own graded paper, which is easier to make than multigrade paper.

You can also use a waterbath with Agfa Neutol WA. I have only used Neutol with Azo, so I can't speak to how well it works with other papers.

I believe Brett Weston used Amidol with the old "blue box" Oriental Segull.

A friend of mine, Peter Schrager, told me he uses Amidol with all sorts of different papers. Peter does't have much Azo, but he purchased 20 lbs of Amidol during the bulk order a couple years ago, so he must be planning on using it with some type of paper.

I have a pretty good stock of Amidol but have been saving it for AZO and it's grandchildren when they are available - I have been using a lot of PC-TEA for prints - good tray life - neutral tone and cheap. I Am using up my Forte and will likely be migrating to Seagull and some of that Freestyle stuff. I wonder if using Amidol will make any real improvements to ordinary printing on Fiber Graded paper?

20 lbs is a lot of amidol. I bought 3 kilos, and I feel set for several years.

I've tried waterbath with Neutol WA and Azo, and it works, but not as well as amidol in my experience.

I use amidol with Kentona and like it a great deal. I had to add some extra KBr and benzotriazole to the MAS formula to prevent yellowing with this paper, but I suspect that the MAS enlarging formula would work OK. I've also used it with EMAKS papers, so I think it makes a difference with ordinary printing. I do not, however, see much difference with Ilford MGIV - if any at all.
juan