film + developer combo for Scanmate 5000 drum scanner recommendation

[sperera]

I'm coming back to film after disenchantment with the digital DSLR market...I have a Nikon D300 which I use for commercial work. It's a great camera but Nikon now are simply making fun of its customers with its crazy prices plus I'm just not getting any real art from it.....

Decision made....shoot film again!

I've just bought a used Sinar F2 with a 150mm Schneider to shoot 5 x 4 black n white people portraits for a project I've always wanted to undertake.....so film for the art of photography!

....back when i was at art school i spent a lot of time in the darkroom and T-Max 100 was my fave film.

I'd like to shoot T-Max 100 again....it was a film that was particularly flattering to people I felt....sharp yet smooth with skin.....I cant explain why technically....although I know it acts a bit like a red filter over the lens.....

....as you know I also have a Scanmate 5000 scanner and I've recently breathed life into it again....I'm posting questions on hoe to get it connected to newer Macs rather than the Powerbook G3 I have it connected to via SCSI at the moment with an ADB dongle key.....any thoughts on what to do about all that appreciated.....so this in effect is my first question.....

My workflow will thus be shoot, develop the negative and scan it....I wont be hand printing at the moment....

...so THE question is which developer + film combination to use. I'd like firm product recommendation as opposed to this type or that type of developer....I've been told PYRO by a few people but as I said I'd like a product to get hold of.....

....also, what kit do I need to develop 5 x 4 sheets with the minimum of fuss and maximum ease.....

 

[rternbach]

I asked similar questions on APUG and, although a few folks responded directly, I was politely told this forum was more appropriate for a discussion of b/w film and developing as they relate to scanning. Longstoryshort, people there suggested D-76 and T-Max 100 as a good combination. As I am new to developing my own film this combination is a reasonable place to start learning about developing b/w films for scanning.

cheers!

 

[jd callow]

I've used the bessler drum with a table top roller for 4x5 which was cheap and easy (ebay cost ~15.00) and now I use the HP Combi plan tank (ebay cost ~45.00), but it is really only good for stand or semi stand development.

I can't address dev/film combo for scanning as I've never had a problem with any that I've tried (although scanners tend to like thinner negs). I tend not to do much B&W and tend to print traditionally most of what I do.

 

[Bruce Watson]

...so THE question is which developer + film combination to use. I'd like firm product recommendation as opposed to this type or that type of developer....I've been told PYRO by a few people but as I said I'd like a product to get hold of.....

....also, what kit do I need to develop 5 x 4 sheets with the minimum of fuss and maximum ease.....

I'm not exactly a clutz, but I'm certainly not the most athletically gifted person around. I never could get tray development to work well for me. A few scratches, but mostly uneven development. Agitation is important, especially that first minute. So I tried BTZS tubes. A big improvement, but still the odd uneveness in open skies. Then I found a good deal on a CPP-2, and bought a 3010 tank for it. All problems solved. This is the easiest, most trouble free development method I've used, and it gives consistently beautiful even development. I've run close to 1000 sheets through the 3010 tank without a single uneven sky.

As to film / developer, I really like TMY-2 in XTOL 1:3. I get about 1/3 stop faster than box speed, it's sharp, it's very small grained, it's got great reciprocity characteristics, and I like the short toe and the linear nature -- it seems to put the tones closer to where they "should be" relative to, say, Tri-X which I used for decades.

I've had some email discussions with some other LFers. The question was: with TMY-2 available, was there any reason to continue to use TMX in 5x4? Most of us made TMY-2 our only film; it really is that good.

Oh, yes. TMY-2 drum scans beautifully too. But so does TMX.

 

[lenny]

Been running a lot of tests on this lately. We are processing in a Jobo. Contrary to previous results, we have gotten excellent results from TMax, Efke25 and Delta and good results from FP4 and TMY - all in Xtol, 1:1. We tried D-76 and weren't impressed, too much solvent action. We did Xtol in 1:1 so that there would be enough stock developer to do the 8x10's and that developer exhaustion wouldn't be a factor at all. We haven't tested 1:3 as yet....

The shot was in morning daylight, with everything still, and well-lit. N light... It appears that film is designed for daylight, N light, and that all films tested did reasonably well.

The Delta seemed to blow itself apart when overdeveloped - get very grainy. It may be more finicky, but I stress that we are in the middle of the tests and not at the end... these results are not definitive.

The next test is the sensitivity test, shooting at much softer light. Starting today...

Lenny
EigerStudios

 

[sanking]

In my opinion developing in a Jobo with Xtol 1:1 will give good results, but not the best results, and certainly not if one plans to scan with a drum scanner.

For one thing, continuos agitation minimizes acutance which is obtained by micro-contrast from local developer exhaustion when you allow the negative to rest in the developer for relatively long periods of time. The fine line adjacency effects are too narrow to be capture on most scanners but scanners operating at effective resolution of more than 4000 spi can capture them.

Second, I have done several tests which show conclusively that pyro staining developers like PMK and Pyrocat-HD give about a 10-15% increase in real resolution, all else being equal.

I am personally quite surprised to see someone like Lenny, who is always interested in the very best results, use methods which give less than that. The only advantage of constant agitation with a developer like Xtol used 1:1 is that the results will be very even. For acutance and resolution I would advise other methods for someone trying to get the most of film.

Sandy King

 

[sperera]

sorry to be so dumb but which film is TMY-2?? is it T-Max 400???

 

[sanking]

It is the new version of TMAX-400, introduced in late 2007. The old version was TMY.

TMY-2 has finer grain and higher resolution than TMY.

Sandy King

sorry to be so dumb but which film is TMY-2?? is it T-Max 400???

 

[lenny]

Second, I have done several tests which show conclusively that pyro staining developers like PMK and Pyrocat-HD give about a 10-15% increase in real resolution, all else being equal.

I am personally quite surprised to see someone like Lenny, who is always interested in the very best results, use methods which give less than that. The only advantage of constant agitation with a developer like Xtol used 1:1 is that the results will be very even. For acutance and resolution I would advise other methods for someone trying to get the most of film.

Sandy King

Well, I am all ears. Truth is, something happened. Something that really threw me. I got a series of very bad results. Especially with film that you like. I am sure it was an error of mine, but it's beyond me... could have been developer exhaustion issues. At the moment I am getting some good results from the JOBO and as soon as I get that the way I want I will try and improve to whatever method you want to suggest. A 10-15% increase sounds like a very valuable way to go. I'll add the Jobo has been fun as I don't have to be in the dark the entire time... but you're right - I'll do anything to get the results... and the consistency.

Lenny

 

[sanking]

Well, for starters even with the Jobo agitation you can get more resolution with the pyro staining developers than with D76 or Xtol. This is due primarily to the fact that the pyro staining developers tan the gelatin very early in development and this results in a more specific development that does not spread. The difference is not great, 10-15% as I note, and would not be of any consequence for most people. However, for people with drum scanners and printing very large I am sure that you will see some difference in resolution if you set up a proper test and drum scan at 8000 spi.

The second issue is agitation. You can develop film in open-ended PVC tubes which you then plop into a film drum, say an old Beseler or Unicolor film drum. I can develop 8-10 sheets of 4X5 film, or 5 sheets of 5X7 film, at at time with this type of development. Once the film is in the film drum you put the top on and the rest of the development can be done in room light until it is time for the stop bath. I then just plop the tubes into a large tray containing the stop bath, at which point you can turn the lights on and fix in room light.
The advantage of this system over Jobo is that it allows one to let the film rest for local exhaustion to enhance adjacency effects and micro-contrast. I generally agitate four or five times during development, at about equal period in between.

Sandy

Well, I am all ears. Truth is, something happened. Something that really threw me. I got a series of very bad results. Especially with film that you like. I am sure it was an error of mine, but it's beyond me... could have been developer exhaustion issues. At the moment I am getting some good results from the JOBO and as soon as I get that the way I want I will try and improve to whatever method you want to suggest. A 10-15% increase sounds like a very valuable way to go. I'll add the Jobo has been fun as I don't have to be in the dark the entire time... but you're right - I'll do anything to get the results... and the consistency.

Lenny

 

[lenny]

The second issue is agitation. You can develop film in open-ended PVC tubes which you then plop into a film drum, say an old Beseler or Unicolor film drum. I can develop 8-10 sheets of 4X5 film, or 5 sheets of 5X7 film, at at time with this type of development. Once the film is in the film drum you put the top on and the rest of the development can be done in room light until it is time for the stop bath. I then just plop the tubes into a large tray containing the stop bath, at which point you can turn the lights on and fix in room light.
The advantage of this system over Jobo is that it allows one to let the film rest for local exhaustion to enhance adjacency effects and micro-contrast. I generally agitate four or five times during development, at about equal period in between.

Sandy

I'm not much interested in anything but 8x10 these days. I have gotten some great results lately and don't want to go back. I am using a 3005 drum, which holds 5 8x10's. I would imagine I could load it up, then open the top in the dark and pour in chemicals, as if it were tubes, then close the top... (I could put it on the motor for stop and fix..) do you think this would work?

2) Are you saying you only agitate every two mins or so? How long are your dev times..

Might be easier to go over this offline...

Lenny
EigerStudios

 

[sanking]

I would recommend just continuing the tests with the staining developers in your Jobo as you are already familar with it. Try Pyro Max and Pyrocat-MC instead of PMK and Pyrocat-HD.

If you find that you like one or the other more than Xtol we can then talk about methods of reduced agitation to enhance micro-contrast But you should see an increase in resolution even with Jobo processing.

Sandy

I'm not much interested in anything but 8x10 these days. I have gotten some great results lately and don't want to go back. I am using a 3005 drum, which holds 5 8x10's. I would imagine I could load it up, then open the top in the dark and pour in chemicals, as if it were tubes, then close the top... (I could put it on the motor for stop and fix..) do you think this would work?

2) Are you saying you only agitate every two mins or so? How long are your dev times..

Might be easier to go over this offline...

Lenny
EigerStudios

 

[lenny]

I would recommend just continuing the tests with the staining developers in your Jobo as you are already familar with it. Try Pyro Max and Pyrocat-MC instead of PMK and Pyrocat-HD.

If you find that you like one or the other more than Xtol we can then talk about methods of reduced agitation to enhance micro-contrast But you should see an increase in resolution even with Jobo processing.

Sandy

I need to get this stable. As soon as I do I will add the Pyro variants back in... As I said, something very weird happened with PMK in the Jobo with 4x5 that made it look like it didn't have the power to develop a TGrained film. (Note: I caution folks here - this is a problem that occurred, you are not to take what happened as any kind of fact. It could have been something else entirely. It's just a result, not a conclusion. I like PMK...)

As you know I've been doing this for a while so I am good at mixing things, being accurate with volumes, temperature, etc. I eventually went back to D23 and got my first excellent results with that and Efke 25. I could feel the warmth of the afternoon sunlight on the rocks. Then I branched out to Xtol. I didn't think it would work, as Phenidone coats the edges of the grains with black and I didn't think it would be very good - a sort of chemical unsharp masking. Rodinal seems to do little for drum scanning, to be kind. However, Xtol surprised me... at least at 1:1.

I need to finish the choice of film I am going to use. If the Delta will stabilize and get predictable, that would be good. I would rather not pay $5 a sheet for TMax. (It's obscene how Kodak's army of bean-counters treats us.) If the Tmax is really the best, then I'll use it. The Efke 25 has held its own in every test so far. Of course, very low ISO is not the most fun thing, especially when it isn't bright out...

Another couple of weeks and I'll be back to trying some Max or MC... I might even do a little standing...

Thanks.

Lenny

 

[sanking]

Are you testing Fuji Acros? If not, you might want to consider it. It has grain and resolution about like Tmax-100, but even less reciprocity failure.

In low light conditions you will find that Across at ASA 100 needs a lot less exposure ASA 400 films, including TMY -2. And it is vastly superior to TRI-X 320 and HP5+ in this regard.

Sandy

I need to get this stable. As soon as I do I will add the Pyro variants back in... As I said, something very weird happened with PMK in the Jobo with 4x5 that made it look like it didn't have the power to develop a TGrained film. (Note: I caution folks here - this is a problem that occurred, you are not to take what happened as any kind of fact. It could have been something else entirely. It's just a result, not a conclusion. I like PMK...)

As you know I've been doing this for a while so I am good at mixing things, being accurate with volumes, temperature, etc. I eventually went back to D23 and got my first excellent results with that and Efke 25. I could feel the warmth of the afternoon sunlight on the rocks. Then I branched out to Xtol. I didn't think it would work, as Phenidone coats the edges of the grains with black and I didn't think it would be very good - a sort of chemical unsharp masking. Rodinal seems to do little for drum scanning, to be kind. However, Xtol surprised me... at least at 1:1.

I need to finish the choice of film I am going to use. If the Delta will stabilize and get predictable, that would be good. I would rather not pay $5 a sheet for TMax. (It's obscene how Kodak's army of bean-counters treats us.) If the Tmax is really the best, then I'll use it. The Efke 25 has held its own in every test so far. Of course, very low ISO is not the most fun thing, especially when it isn't bright out...

Another couple of weeks and I'll be back to trying some Max or MC... I might even do a little standing...

Thanks.

Lenny

 

[lenny]

Are you testing Fuji Acros? If not, you might want to consider it. It has grain and resolution about like Tmax-100, but even less reciprocity failure.
Sandy

I have. We have some other criteria in our choice. We try and imagine how long it will be around. This is one of the reasons we are trying to get Delta to work, we think it will be around longer than the rest... then perhaps Krapdak, then Fuji. Efke - who knows... as for the rest, I'd rather work with a film made by a company that actually has a film manufacture line, rather than one that just buys it elsewhere...

Of course, it's mostly conjecture at this point...

Lenny

 

[sanking]

I can not imagine that the science for figuring out which film will be around the longest is very good. If that is one of your main criteria you might want to test some Chinese made films. Right now I could buy 500 sheets of ASA 20X24" film from China for less than 1/5 of the price I can get it anywhere else.

Sandy

I have. We have some other criteria in our choice. We try and imagine how long it will be around. This is one of the reasons we are trying to get Delta to work, we think it will be around longer than the rest... then perhaps Krapdak, then Fuji. Efke - who knows... as for the rest, I'd rather work with a film made by a company that actually has a film manufacture line, rather than one that just buys it elsewhere...

Of course, it's mostly conjecture at this point...

Lenny

 

[lenny]

I can not imagine that the science for figuring out which film will be around the longest is very good.

It's just a little calculus.... where's your math skills...

I am kidding, of course...

Ilford seems to have made a commitment to b&w. I think a lot of folks are trying to see if they can use their products...

<nonsensical rant>
Krapdak appears to have nothing but disdain for its customers. Limiting 8x10 film to 10 sheet boxes? Hmmm, very ungreen, not to mention incovenient. Then let's make it really pricey. Ridiculous. How about packages of XTol that mix up to 5 liters, when no container in the US can hold that much? What idiot thought of that? Did they have a problem multiplying the formula by 4/5? If you look at it one way, they are trying to convince us, begging us, not to use their products... they are making some sales of film and whatnot, but they wish they weren't.
</nonsensical rant>

I guess there's a lot of factors...

Lenny

 

[NathDB]

I'm not much interested in anything but 8x10 these days. I have gotten some great results lately and don't want to go back. I am using a 3005 drum, which holds 5 8x10's.

Hi i'm looking into this quite a lot lately and have been looking around and just wanted to know if you would recommend this way and how you found it using the 3005 drum??

Thanks in Advance

 

[lenny]

Hi i'm looking into this quite a lot lately and have been looking around and just wanted to know if you would recommend this way and how you found it using the 3005 drum??
Thanks in Advance

I happen to like the drum very much. It's very consistent. Since moving into this house I have not built my usual full darkroom with 10 foot long sink, etc. It's quite convenient to use a large size Harrison changing tent and the Jobo. There are a couple of factors to keep in mind.

The first is that when I am done with developing I put the film on the drum scanner. I have a lot more latitude than when I was printing in a wet darkroom and needed to match a paper grade. I can blow out the highlights and the scanner will bring them right back - within some limits, of course. I can't have a lack of shadow detail and resurrect it any way but I can deal with rather dense negatives if I have to.

The other thing to consider is the benefits of stand development. Sandy King is a proponent of this technique and can speak to it much better than I can. I am pretty sure there are some benefits there. I am not sure I need this benefits, but I am going to try it one of these days...

Finally, there are developers that won't Jobo very well. I haven't mapped this out fully, but I had some pretty poor results with Pyro PMK. Why I didn't try Rollo Pyro I don't know but I was getting some good results some bad and I got thrown off... There are also other Pyro's these days that ought to work fine. I think that some developers exhaust themselves more than others and that's what was happening to my initial tests. I am using Xtol 1:1 at the moment and having a blast...

Hope this helps,

Lenny

 

[pellicle]

Hi

I certainly haven't done exhaustive testing, but pyro stains may be scanner dependent (I normally use the green channel if the software doesn't pick that). I quite liked what it did when I was printing on an enlarger.

When I run out of (or perhaps just before I run out of) my current batch of D-76 I'll do a side by side of XTOL. I scan ADOX and like the look of D-76 on my ADOX sheets neat in the BTZS. Perhaps because I use ADOX I also like the BTZS tubes. Unlike other experiences I've had annoying issues in the Jobo drums (mine is 2500 series with 2609n frames so perhaps the expert drums are better) and liked the BTZS better.

anyway ... test test test ... see which you like better ;-)

 

[lenny]

Hi
I certainly haven't done exhaustive testing, but pyro stains may be scanner dependent (I normally use the green channel if the software doesn't pick that). I quite liked what it did when I was printing on an enlarger.

Pyro is great for enlarger based processes. My scanner doesn't care about Pyro staining, it isn't blue sensitive in the same way that darkroom paper is. The biggest problem I came up with was very flat midtones. There are many versions of Pyro and while PMK is one of the best, IMO, for developing in a tray (I didn't test BTZS tubes), it doesn't work well, or let's just say I didn't get it to work well in a drum - especially with TGrained films.

When I run out of (or perhaps just before I run out of) my current batch of D-76.

D-76 came out a bit grainier than Xtol in my most recent testing... enough for use to dismiss it.

Lenny