Do Different Developers Mean Different Looking Prints?

[gone]

Am I crazy, or seeing things that aren't there (wouldn't be the first time)? I mainly use D76/TD16 for a developer, occasionally Acufine, and have been playing around lately w/ Rodinal. I've been reading on the internet that today's photographic papers are basically resistant to developers, and no matter what developer you use, you're going to get essentially the same print. And yet I can see a difference, especially between prints made from D76 negatives and prints made from Rodinal negatives. My film is Tri-X and I always print on glossy fiber papers. The tonality and grain look different on the prints.

 

[Tom1956]

Yes, different film developers mean everthing. Otherwise this site would have little reason to exist. I don't know what you read about papers, but it sounds like a load of baloney.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Developers can have a huge effect on the look of a film... even various dilutions of the same developer.

 

[MattKing]

Am I crazy, or seeing things that aren't there (wouldn't be the first time)? I mainly use D76/TD16 for a developer, occasionally Acufine, and have been playing around lately w/ Rodinal. I've been reading on the internet that today's photographic papers are basically resistant to developers, and no matter what developer you use, you're going to get essentially the same print. And yet I can see a difference, especially between prints made from D76 negatives and prints made from Rodinal negatives. My film is Tri-X and I always print on glossy fiber papers. The tonality and grain look different on the prints.

I'm confused.

You refer to photographic papers being resistant to (change in) developers.

But you are also referring to a number of film developers.

Different film developers will definitely affect your negatives in slightly (and sometimes not so slightly) different ways.

And those different negatives will print at least slightly differently.

 

[markbarendt]

I'm confused.

You refer to photographic papers being resistant to (change in) developers.

But you are also referring to a number of film developers.

Different film developers will definitely affect your negatives in slightly (and sometimes not so slightly) different ways.

And those different negatives will print at least slightly differently.

I have the same confusion Matt.

Momus I don't think the paper is "resistant" to changes in film development, the paper is "just a reporter", essentially it just shows us what it's shown.

 

[Regular Rod]

Developers for your negatives have a noticeable effect on your prints and developers for your papers also have a noticeable effect on your prints.

RR

 

[Ian Grant]

It's impossible to tell wthat developer and film combination was used from a print. However the developer and film combination will have an impact on the grain, sharpness and tonality of the negative, some of the differences even out in the printing process.

So in practice I have prints in exhibition sets shot on APX100 or Tmax 100 processed in either Xtol or Rodinal, and Delta 100 or HP5 processed in Pyrocat HD, it would be impossible for anyone to say which film & developer combinations were used.

Ian

 

[gone]

Thank you Ian. Yes, that was what I was talking about. My wording wasn't very clear in the original post because I was confused, since it appears I misunderstood what I read. What I read was that it didn't really make any difference which developer you used. But they were referring to which PAPER developer, not which film developer. I thought that they meant film developers, and couldn't understand why one developer that was drastically different different than the other, and D76 vs Rodinal is a good example, wouldn't result in prints that were different from each other. Even after assuming that the printing process sorta equalizes things.

It's possibly a given that if you're printing on RC papers then your developer choices are not so important, but of course w/ fiber it might be, especially if you were toning the papers.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Am I crazy, or seeing things that aren't there (wouldn't be the first time)? I mainly use D76/TD16 for a developer, occasionally Acufine, and have been playing around lately w/ Rodinal. I've been reading on the internet that today's photographic papers are basically resistant to developers, and no matter what developer you use, you're going to get essentially the same print. And yet I can see a difference, especially between prints made from D76 negatives and prints made from Rodinal negatives. My film is Tri-X and I always print on glossy fiber papers. The tonality and grain look different on the prints.

I bet you see a difference;If you wouldn't,You would have to have your eyes checked.D76 creates visibly finer grain and smoother tones than Rodinal;right?Is that what you see?

 

[markbarendt]

Momus I believe Ian is right about not being able to tell what was used to make the print after-the-fact, I'd say that is true of paper developer too.

I will though say that the choice of developer for your paper does affect the outcome of the print, it is not irrelevant.

For example the Ethol LPD that I use for paper produces different finished colors (cool tone vs warm) depending on dilution without affecting the overall contrast.

Other developers have characteristics that set them apart too. Whether those characters are relevant or not with VC papers, IDK.

 

[Bob Carnie]

I agree that the average user would not be able to tell the difference, prints up to 11 x14 would be very difficult to determine which film and developer is being used.

Larger prints will start telling you which format one is using due to the physical size of film and magnification factor, also at large size if one was to show a tmax film with tmax developer, beside a trix film with a rodinal developer then the average user would be able to tell they are different and the constant worker would be able to tell you which one is which.

But up to 11 x14 print size I would agree with Ian .

When I first started Silver Shack printing, I had film developers and paper donated by the manufactures to do this test. I booked a lecture with the PPOC at my shop and to my horror as I thought I was going to be showing the distinct differences, found out that it was very difficult if not impossible to distinguish the different films and developers at 11 x14 size. Same photographer, same model and lighting for about 20 different film dev combos.

 

[Bill Burk]

I agree that I cannot tell the developer film combination combinations on other people's prints... But I can appreciate the differences.

If I tell you what combination I used to make a particular print... and I was mistaken... there is a chance you would be able to point out the discrepancy.