Fine grain developers

[PBrooks]

Hello I was just wondering what one developer you would use to develope Rollei pan 25, Ilford pan f, fuji acros with a hardening fix. The finest grain with tack sharpness.

 

[Ian Grant]

Perceptol, but with no hardener in the fixer- it's totally unnecessary.

But I get superb results with Pyrocat HD, my preferred developer, as and also with Xtol & Rodinal.

Ian

 

[Rich Ullsmith]

I don't know about the Rollei or the Fuji, but Pan F+ in PMK is money.

The "finest grain" and "tack sharpness" really are on opposite sides of the spectrum. Sulfite developers will give fine grain, but grain migration softens the edges. Rodinal will give you the accutance, but there's the grain. PMK is a staining developer, which has no grain, and this helps mask the grain that is there. Also, it has long long shelf life, is cheap, and works with almost anything. I'm a fan!

 

[Markok765]

Hello I was just wondering what one developer you would use to develope Rollei pan 25, Ilford pan f, fuji acros with a hardening fix. The finest grain with tack sharpness.

You don't need fine grain developer with a slow film [I once developed T-max 100 in D76 and it was not very sharp] I would recommend rodinal for the sharpness. I need to buy a new bottle.

 

[dpurdy]

Unless the OP is wanting to make very large prints from 35mm. I personally use Rodinal or Beutlers with 120 ACROS for sharpness and making prints to 9x9 inches there isn't much grain. However if you were to process the Acros in XTOL straight undiluted you will get grain that is very fine and sharpness that is very good.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

I don't think you can have both the finest grain and ultimate sharpness. You have to pick one or the other. Wanting both will give you a compromise.
For a film like Rollei Pan 25, I would recommend Pyrocat or Rodinal for the sharpness. Once it's sharp, the grain matters little, especially on an ISO25 fine grained film.

- Thomas

Hello I was just wondering what one developer you would use to develope Rollei pan 25, Ilford pan f, fuji acros with a hardening fix. The finest grain with tack sharpness.

 

[Kevin Kehler]

I develop PanF in Perceptol which works really well, giving almost no grain. However, (Ilford's own literature will back this up) there is a loss of accutance or edge sharpness when doing so. Thomas is also right, you can't have both finest grain and tack sharp. That is not to say my negatives are unsharp, but there is a significant difference to developing in Perceptol and ID-11 (my other developer). Your other option is some form of staining developer but I am unsure as to how sharp/fine those negatives are in comparison.

 

[PBrooks]

Ian I have been using pyrocat hd for a long time for lf and ulf, but since I've started shooting mf (69 and 67) again esspecially with a film like acros I get scratches. These scratches are coming from those darn plastic sleeves. I need to find some kinda envelops or something.

I am going to try Rodinal but has anyone ever tried ethol ufg?

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Sounds like you're having a lot of frustrating problems.

Are you using the 'Print File' plastic sleeves? Pyrocat should be good to you in that regard, since it has a hardening effect on the emulsion. Perhaps you should use a hardening fixer?

There are glassene sleeves, much like the clear plastic ones, but I believe they are just as prone to scratch negs as their plastic counterparts.

I haven't even heard of the Ethol developer you're mentioning. Both Pyrocat and Rodinal are great developers that should work very well with the film you're using.

- Thomas

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

Hello I was just wondering what one developer you would use to develope Rollei pan 25, Ilford pan f, fuji acros with a hardening fix. The finest grain with tack sharpness.

Microdol-X. These films have enough resolving power that your lens is the limiting factor in a quest for 'tack sharpness'. A tripod and shooting at f/8 or wider (for 35mm) are requirements if you are serious about sharp.

Large sharp grain is often confused for image sharpness. Use a resolution target and make pictures under controlled conditions if you really want to polish your technique for high resolution photography.

 

[nworth]

You have run into one of the semantic traps of the film processing language. In general, you do not use a "fine-grain" developer with a fine-grain film like Rollei-25. D-76 (1+1 or 1+3) (but _not_ undiluted D-76) will work fine. You probably want some control of contrast with this film, so a semi-compensating developer is called for. In many cases, that is just an ordinary developer with somewhat more dilution. There are some good suggestions given above - Pyrocat-HD at 1+1+100, Rodinal (not sure about dilution), PMK at 1+2+100. D-23 at 1+3 may work well, especially if contrast is an issue. The experienced users seem to say treat it a lot like Pan-F, and I would respect their comments. Look at the Massive Developing Chart and also at the recommendations from the manufacturer. For a first try, the manufacturer's recommendations must be given heavy weight, but you can often find a standard developer that is quite similar to any proprietary developer he recommends.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

You have run into one of the semantic traps of the film processing language. In general, you do not use a "fine-grain" developer with a fine-grain film like Rollei-25.

I don't know who you were addressing here ... in case it was me ...

Fine grain developers are indeed meant for use with fine grain films:

• The solvent action in fine grain developers turns the grain of fast large grain films to something looking like oatmeal which in turn makes the image appear less sharp;
• With fine grain films the grain is, ideally, nearly invisible in the print and so the solvent action has a noticeable smoothing effect in getting the last bit of grain out of the image but the eye doesn't see the resulting softened grain as 'mush'.

Developing a slow fine-grain film in coarse-grained developer like Rodinal makes, to my mind, little sense - why not just shoot a decent old-technology (PX, FP) 100 speed film and use normal development: the result will be much the same.

The finest grain that I know of in a standard film is obtained from TMax-100 and Microdol-X. The grain is as fine as the old Technical Pan / Technidol combination, however the microcontrast is not in the same 'Gee, that looks like 4x5' league as TP. If you want to try this combination I find 1:3 gives as fine a grain result as full strength, others claim FS produces finer grain.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

"Developing a slow fine-grain film in coarse-grained developer like Rodinal makes, to my mind, little sense - why not just shoot a decent old-technology (PX, FP) 100 speed film and use normal development: the result will be much the same."

I disagree. To me it makes total sense to use a fine grained film with a developer like Rodinal because it will look really sharp. And if you don't think you see the results of a solvent developer compared to the surface acting Rodinal - wait until you enlarge it large enough. I remember seeing a mural enlargement from an Agfa APX25 negative from 35mm roll film. It was developed in Rodinal 1+300 stand development, and it was a profile of a woman's torso and face. The enlargement was about life size. I could go up to the print and start counting the hairs on the eyebrows and eye lashes. It was absolutely surreal and incredible. It was so sharp, so full of life and impact.
I'm not saying that you can't do this with Xtol, but chances are slimmer of obtaining that level of sharpness. This is an extreme case, but using TMax 100 film for my own purposes (admittedly a very fine grained film) I much prefer Rodinal or Pyrocat as developing agent over Xtol, mainly because the prints look sharper to me, even at 8x10 or 11x14 (from 6x6 medium format negs).
I don't have any lab tests measuring resolution to prove this. It's subjective. I did try the TMX side by side with half the roll developed in Rodinal and the other in Xtol, and I did print both negs to 11x14 and found myself preferring the look of the Rodinal negative. Grain wasn't visible in either. Sharpness was better with Rodinal.

- Thomas

 

[PBrooks]

This is really getting good. In years past when I shot med format I was primarily in the studio so I used tech pan developed in ethol TEC. I really liked the look and got the feel for the film and developer. Now I shoot outside landscapes. Those have all been developed in pyrocat-hd or PMK.
The reason I started this thread is I am moving to Taiwan with my wife and the availabity of certain developers like pyrocat-hd might be alot harder to get. That and I have returned to 67, 69,and 4x5 as my normal shooters. The 14x17 will have to stay over here in storage. I was looking for a developer that would allow me to print large prints at or above 2024 from any of the formats. The 67 I have is the mamiya 7 and the 69 is fuji gw690 then various 4x5 lenses. I could just shoot with the 45 but would like to have all this nailed down by the start of this next year. I guess I'll just start experimenting more.

I will also be adding Rollei ATP in 120 to the mix when it comes out......if it ever does.
You didn't happen to get the info on the APX 25 in rodinal 1:300 temp ? shot at ??

There seems to be a thread on here where people are trying to use as little as possible of rodinal. Massive dilutions.

 

[fschifano]

Semantics. What a great way to get an argument going. FWIW, I process my PanF+ in D-76 1+3 and use the Ilford times for ID-11 at 1+3 as a starting point. Looks sharp as all get out, and I can't see the grain unless the enlargement ratios are better than 10x. Even at that it's hard to spot unless you have your nose in the print. That combo is also pretty good at controlling contrast; it seems to have a compensating effect. It's almost pointless to compare PanF+ with TMX. They each have very different looks.

 

[Curt]

I have used Rodinal with Panatomic X, Orwo, Agfa, Pan F etc.. I currently use Rollei Pan 25 with Rodinal 1:50 with great success. I have over 30 years of experience with Rodinal and recommend it with these films. I don't store my 120 negatives in the hard plastic page sleeves but in softer poly sleeves, scratching is not a problem.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Temperature for the 1+300 dilution was standard 68*F, shot normal box speed. The reason the image wasn't printed larger was that there was no more room to make it larger. Enlarger hit the ceiling and the enlarger paper was on the floor.
Don't get me wrong, there was grain. There had better be, or the image wouldn't have formed. I think the title on this page says it all really. Escaping grain can be a painful adventure. No matter what you do, you will inevitably realize that with medium format negatives, you will always show grain at 20x24 or larger. Significant grain, even. Pan-F+, TMax-100, Fuji Acros, the three finest grained 'normal' films out there today all show grain at that magnification. I reason that if the negative has good impact and the photograph moves you one way or another, and it has interesting subject matter - grain becomes a very secondary thing. This is just my personal opinion - but I never understood people's obsession with hiding it. It's supposed to be there. You will never get the same look from 6x7 MF as ULF. But I admire you for trying. I sincerely wish you good luck with your endeavor. Both moving to Thailand and photography. Sounds like an interesting move!

- Thomas

This is really getting good. In years past when I shot med format I was primarily in the studio so I used tech pan developed in ethol TEC. I really liked the look and got the feel for the film and developer. Now I shoot outside landscapes. Those have all been developed in pyrocat-hd or PMK.
The reason I started this thread is I am moving to Taiwan with my wife and the availabity of certain developers like pyrocat-hd might be alot harder to get. That and I have returned to 67, 69,and 4x5 as my normal shooters. The 14x17 will have to stay over here in storage. I was looking for a developer that would allow me to print large prints at or above 2024 from any of the formats. The 67 I have is the mamiya 7 and the 69 is fuji gw690 then various 4x5 lenses. I could just shoot with the 45 but would like to have all this nailed down by the start of this next year. I guess I'll just start experimenting more.

I will also be adding Rollei ATP in 120 to the mix when it comes out......if it ever does.
You didn't happen to get the info on the APX 25 in rodinal 1:300 temp ? shot at ??

There seems to be a thread on here where people are trying to use as little as possible of rodinal. Massive dilutions.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

And if you don't think you see the results of a solvent developer compared to the surface acting Rodinal - wait until you enlarge it large enough.

I think that's what I said. You can certainly see the results of using Rodinal developer with fine-grain film => the grain is bigger, for one.

The coarser grain of Rodinal & Co., if sharp, gives the eye something to latch on to and thus gives the illusion that the image is also sharp - when it isn't, detail is lost to the coarser grain. Some like this effect, I don't - I want to see what is really there, all of it.

My point is that the decrease in resolution caused by using a Rodinal-class developer negates the resolving ability of the fine-grain film, so why not just use a coarser grained film and be done with it?

If resolution isn't a key point to the image, or if I want an impressionistic effect, then I am not going to use an ultra fine-grain film with all its other limitations and foibles. Better to use a regular film.

'I once saw a picture' anecdotes don't mean much to me. A few hours in the backyard with a resolution target, taking pictures under controlled conditions, so that the _only_ difference is the developer, will show what is really happening. Pictures taken under different conditions of different subjects, made with different equipment, made my different photographers, on different films, enlarged differently -- there are too many variables to say - "Aha! It was developed in Exoticol - that's what makes the difference!"

But controlled tests are tedious and nerdy and nobody seems to do them. Because, after all is said and done, they just prove what has been said time and again by Meese, Haist and Henry, and what fun is that? More fun to conjure up the 'illusion of sharpness'.

Though the whole argument is a bit moot, as most ultra-fine grain films aren't made any more, and those few that still are have coarser grain than the new crop of regular films as TMX.

It's all aesthetics and perceptions and finding the 'look you like', so agreement isn't possible, or desirable. For me, when I want 'sharp', I don't want grain getting in the way and I am no fan of 'actuance'.

 

[msdemanche]

I agree with Thomas about sharpness and grain. I also use Microdol - X when I need less grain. But I sill use my Rodinal as a stand sometimes to incress density and that reads as sharpness. I am just a big fan of Rodinal for most of my problems.

 

[nworth]

I don't know who you were addressing here ... in case it was me ...

Fine grain developers are indeed meant for use with fine grain films:

• The solvent action in fine grain developers turns the grain of fast large grain films to something looking like oatmeal which in turn makes the image appear less sharp;
• With fine grain films the grain is, ideally, nearly invisible in the print and so the solvent action has a noticeable smoothing effect in getting the last bit of grain out of the image but the eye doesn't see the resulting softened grain as 'mush'.

...

This is exactly the point. Fine-grain films do not, in general, require development which hides the grain but reduces sharpness. This is particularly true with the smaller formats. Some fine-grain developers do a pretty good job and don't have too adverse an effect on sharpness. D-76 is probably the best example, and it works well with these films - especially when diluted, which seems to moderate the solvent action. Others do more poorly - especially those designed to mask the grain on high speed films. I'll agree that Rodinal tends to celebrate the grain of almost all films and will probably make it more obvious. For that reason, it may not be to everyone's taste. But with fine grain film the grain will still be very fine, and it will probably not even be visible unless you look for it.

Rollei-25 appears to be similar to the old KB-14 in many respects. The issue with that film (aside from slow speed) was contrast, not grain. Compensating developers were designed to handle those problems, and many outstanding negatives resulted. A similar approach is probably warranted here.