Yes I agree. Good points here!
Also just got my glass jugs and have transferred the developer to them. Thanks so much!
Photoshop is a superweapon.Almost everything can be fixed in Photoshop. Inconsistency becomes an issue is in situations when other confounding errors are present, for example your exposure and scene contrast may put you right on the edge of losing the highlights, and a bump in developer activity may just be the last straw that makes a Photoshop recovery unlikely. But for an average negative this doesn't apply. I would even say that for an average negative in Photoshop even the choice of developer doesn't matter much. Bend that curve to your will.
I am no chemist, but the page on the DTSC website lists photo chemicals and "photo processing waste" as toxic materials (with a code number) that must be recycled properly. So I follow the instructions. They do not discriminate fixer vs bleach vs developer. Besides, from a practical perspective this makes no difference: if you're already collecting fixer for a hazmat trip, might as well take the developer too.
So we can generally agree that with replenished formula a safe bet is the small tank 1:1 development times?
Steve, I tried doing the ratio conversions from rotary tubes like you suggested but the numbers don't seem that easy (25:34, 3:4, etc) that I don't want to get it wrong.
Just to clarify, if I were to just start replenishing from my first roll instead of properly seasoning and measuring, would the inconsistency be so large that it couldn’t be fixed in photoshop? As a beginner to replenishing I’m inclined to do the simplest and learn along the way to make my process more intricate as I continue to understand it more.
Photoshop is a superweapon.Almost everything can be fixed in Photoshop. [...]
But for an average negative this doesn't apply. I would even say that for an average negative in Photoshop even the choice of developer doesn't matter much. Bend that curve to your will.
What have you observed or learned from your experiences with developers? Have you tried Xtol replenishment with small tanks? What is your method, temps, etc?Not my experience at all. For example, an underexposed negative cannot be fixed in Photoshop, unless your version of Photoshop has an 'invent shadow detail" button that mine doesn't.
The choice of developer for a scanned negative matters immensely, just as much as in a full darkroom workflow. Unless one is happy with random or subpar results, of course.
What have you observed or learned from your experiences with developers? Have you tried Xtol replenishment with small tanks? What is your method, temps, etc?
Or perhaps you're attempting to build a strawman.
What have you observed or learned from your experiences with developers? Have you tried Xtol replenishment with small tanks? What is your method, temps, etc?
Hey Matt,I sense in your posts a desire to be directed toward the "one true path" while still early on your journey.
And that is totally natural!
But I think you will find that a vast majority of these sorts of explorations are better for tweaking or refining approaches that are already working.
I'd suggest starting out with an approach that is relatively simple and commonly used by many. After that is working well for you, it may be time to explore further.
I am a big advocate of replenished X-Tol, and you won't hear from me any discouragement about starting there. But X-Tol 1 + 1 used one shot is really good, and slightly (in my opinion) simpler, so if you decide to start there and switch to replenishment only after your 5 litres are down to 2 litres, than that would be sensible too.
I should have expanded more, my apologies. I started this thread because I'm interested in hearing people's experiences with development methods such as replenishment. Your opinions seemed to suggest you have had some experience with this and I was just curious.I'm confused. Or perhaps you're attempting to build a strawman.
In my comment above, I was responding to a comment of another member who claimed that Photoshop can help you rescue/warp the signal in an average negative to the point that everything can be fixed. I disagree.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?