Film developer with(out) hydroquinone

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
53,182
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
markbau said:
Correct, after I posted it and then tried to edit it I found I could edit my message but not the title.
Click to expand...
I'll fix that for you.
 

BobD

Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2006
Messages
1,113
Location
California,
Format
Analog
D23 can be used as a 2-bath. Instructions are in the cookbook.

There is also D25 if you have sodium bisulfite.
 

Raghu Kuvempunagar

Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2016
Messages
2,770
Location
India
Format
Multi Format
This Metol-Sulphite developer could be of interest to you if you can get acetone:

https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/acetone-developer.119157/

@Merg Ross' book has a few of his works from negatives made using this developer.


An insightful post from the past on Metol-Sulphite developers.

 
Last edited:

Philippe-Georges

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 11, 2005
Messages
2,680
Location
Flanders Fields
Format
Medium Format
E-76, originally formulated by Chris Patton (from the Stanford Hopkins Marine Biology Institute).
The processing times I give here are according to my personal findings, yours can deviate ofcourse...
 

Attachments

  • E-76 FILMDEVELOPER (07-07-'20).pdf
    40.8 KB · Views: 152

tokam

Subscriber
Joined
Nov 7, 2008
Messages
586
Location
Sydney, Aust
Format
Multi Format
Re The E-76 formula provided above.

Can the phenidone be provided via a solution in propylene glycol? (I've seen that this is the best way to preserve phenidone.)

Per the usual advice for making D-76 with metol, should a small amount of sodium sulphite be dissolved in the water before the phenidone to scavenge any free oxygen?

Any advice on the keeping qualities of the stock solution?

The presoak time of 10 minutes seems very generous. Is there any disadvantage to shortening or skipping the presoak?
 

Nikola Dulgiarov

Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2008
Messages
181
Location
Europe
Format
Multi Format

Yes, there's no problem using a propylene glycol stock solution of phenidone.
The full amount of sulfite can be dissolved before adding the other ingredients.

As with any unprotected ascorbate developer, the storage life of the developer is unpredictable and will depend on the trace metal impurities in the water and reagents used. I would use it the same day or store in full glass or PET bottles for a week or two, but always do a clip test to determine if the solution hasn't spontaneously oxidized. For a more stable developer, see Ryuji Suzuki's DS-10.

I keep my presoak times in the 1-3 min range. I presoak before short development times (under 10 min).
 

Philippe-Georges

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 11, 2005
Messages
2,680
Location
Flanders Fields
Format
Medium Format

I never tried the propylene glycol solution, the isopropanol is much easier to find anyway, and this solution keeps just long enough for me.
To reduce the risk on impurities, I prepare this formula in demineralised water.

I have tried to shorten the presoak, but the cyan tint of the backside emulsion stayed, even faintly, in all likelihood because I use an almost non acid chain of processing (buffered stop bath and neutral-to-alkaline fixer).
So, by trial and error, I came out on 10 min (on a motorised roller base), and it did no harm at all, on the contrary, it results in a very even developing...

I would advise against skipping the presoak, but ofcourse that's my personal opinion.

I never encountered the need for dissolving a small amount of sodium sulphite before the Phenidone.

The stock solution keeps for about two months in a well closed brown bottle with some Dust Off sprayed in it to chase the oxygen. But when the colour starts changing towards a slight amber looking tint, then I discard it.

But, again, these are personal findings, yours can be totally different...

BTW, a variation on this formula gives a very interesting human friendly substitute for DEKTOL (= D-72), Chris Patton cals it E-72. I posted this formula some time ago on this forum.
 

ruilourosa

Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2003
Messages
797
Location
Portugal
Format
Multi Format
Skip the pre soak... Damn photo myth...

I have a new one... Milk stop bath... Smooooths the midtones...

Everyone that have a few years of this shayt will tell that any pre, warming, soaking water bath with regular emulsions does not have any photographic relevance...
Just test...
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
53,182
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
After years of experience, we at APUG/Photrio have determined that discussions about pre-rinse or pre-bath become religious in character.
And discussions on religious topics are prohibited here!
So please return to the thread topic.
 

Philippe-Georges

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 11, 2005
Messages
2,680
Location
Flanders Fields
Format
Medium Format
I hardly see the relation between religion and pre-rinse, pre-soak or pre-wet, but who am I...
If I offended somebody, then please do accept my sincere apologies, but do believe me if I say that I never, ever had the intention to mention anything related to excrements!
As I stated more than once, that what I write is based on my very own experiences and my (humble-) personal insights.
Also, I was convinced that as a (paying-) member this photographic related forum, I was allowed to speak/write about the photographic process, what, to my personal opinion (again), I did.
Everybody is absolutely free to wether accept or to reject what I write, even consider it as complete nonsense ("bullocks") if you want!

All I wanted is, that after all these 48 years of stumbling around in the darkroom, I burned my fingers more than once, and I thought, before the end coms, and it will, I might take the liberty to share what I learned...

But as things are evolving here and now, I would like to conclude by quoting Rhett Butler: "Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn"...

So, as of now, I rest my case, SCHLUSS DAMIT!
 
OP
OP

markbau

Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2009
Messages
867
Location
Australia
Format
Analog
My D 23 developed negs look quite nice. After drifting into the "minimum exposure camp" over the last decade I'm going the Bruce Barnbaum way and giving my film lots of exposure. The negs look like they could deflect bullets but we shall see how they print tonight.
 

ruilourosa

Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2003
Messages
797
Location
Portugal
Format
Multi Format

I have seen a lot of "experienced" folks perpetuating myths...
A forum is about opinion value!!! And yours is certainly valued!
But pre wet is nonsense
 

Nige

Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2002
Messages
2,317
Format
Multi Format
markbau said:
The negs look like they could deflect bullets but we shall see how they print tonight.
Click to expand...

I recently did a test using FP4+ and my first batch of D-23 (teaspoon measured) and developed for 8mins using 1:1 dilution at a fraction over 20C (started lower, finished higher so quoting the average). I thought my negs looked ok but I haven't printed them yet to really decide. 5th neg from the left was the metered exposure (@ 100iso/asa/etc), so the sequence is +4, +3, +2, +1, 0, -1 scanned in one section based on the 0 exposure (I actually took them in +2, +1, 0, -1, +3, +4 sequence but have rearranged them into exposure order)

 
OP
OP

markbau

Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2009
Messages
867
Location
Australia
Format
Analog
Just printed my first D-23 negs. The 120 roll of FP4+ had images exposed at EI 100 and EI 50 (using the Barnbaum mantra of then placing shadows on zone 4). Under the grain focuser the edges of the grain didn't have the sharp edges that HP5+ or TX would have when developed in D-76 1:1.
When printed the shadows on the EI 100 negs were better than I was expecting. The mid tones were fine but the big surprise were the highlights, they printed beautifully. I developed in PMK for many years and I have not had highlights like I got with D-23 since my PMK days. I'll try and scan when the prints are dry, the subject was a white horse and my daughter wearing a white top against a dark forest and all the highlights was there, nothing like what D 76 would do to the highlights so I guess Anchell is correct when he says about D-23 "without D-76's tendency to block highlights"
The negs rated at EI 50 exhibited very lively shadow detail and again, the highlights were superb. This subject was dark bluestone bridges on a flat/overcast day.
I developed in full strength D-23 for 11 minutes at 21C, 30 second inversions. I used a water stop bath and Ilford rapid fix.
If I had known about D-23 and how it handles highlights years ago I probably wouldn't have gone down the PMK path.
 
OP
OP

markbau

Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2009
Messages
867
Location
Australia
Format
Analog
BobD said:
D23 can be used as a 2-bath. Instructions are in the cookbook.

There is also D25 if you have sodium bisulfite.
Click to expand...
After tonights success with D-23 I am keen to try his recommendation for two bath for my nighttime, long exposures.
 

Donald Qualls

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 19, 2005
Messages
12,314
Location
North Carolina
Format
Multi Format
The "mushy" grain was the main reason I abandoned D-23 after running it replenished for most of a year back in 2005-2006. At that time, I was very much "embracing the grain" and wound up processing a lot of Fomapan in Parodinal instead.

The nice thing with D-23 is that, with just two ingredients, I can mix some whenever I decide I want it. Once it cools back to room temperature (an hour or so, maybe less with a cold water bath) it's ready to go.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…