That looks pretty darn good to me. Was it a bright, overcast day? If so, it has good shadow detail and highlights held very good. Of course, like you say, this is a scan and not a wet print.
It was later in the afternoon on a slightly hazy/hot day with fairly bright highlights.
I metered for the shadows to be nominally on Zone III, trusting the developer to compensate the highlights.
This may be the first film/dev combo I have ever found that demonstrates a true ASA of box speed with conventional development. Most of them are 1 stop slower than box unless you semistand or EMA develop.
A little more speed is never a bad thing. The surprising thing is that you hit box speed with a Foma B&W film. I don't honestly think I ever have.
Some sources do have it as 1:1:10 ...If I remember correctly the working solution was originally 50ml A + 50ml B + 500ml water. The working concentration was (rounded):
Metol 0.8g/l
NaSulf. 4g/l
NaCarb. (mono) 5g/l
If I remember correctly the working solution was originally 50ml A + 50ml B + 500ml water. The working concentration was (rounded):
Metol 0.8g/l
NaSulf. 4g/l
NaCarb. (mono) 5g/l
In case anyone is interested, this is how I make 300ml of working strength Beutler's:
metol 1/4 tsp
sodium sulfite 1/4 tsp
sodium carbonate 1/2; tsp
water 300ml
stir until dissolved
It's a very quick mix, probably as fast as using premixed solutions.
I do a fair amount of open tank processing and that involves 2 liters of working solution. For Beutler's, that would be 200ml each of A & B added to 1600ml of water. So, I premixed a liter each part so as to have plenty on hand.
My next excursion here will be to further dilute it perhaps 100:100:1800 and do semistand for an hour. That should be interesting...
Way back in the day - the 1950s - my Father and I mixed up Beutler developer. We shot with Plus X, rated a bit higher than the box ASA of 125, if I recall correctly. The negatives were a little thin, but with good shadow detail. We printed primarily on Luminos fiber paper, grade 3. We could easily make good 8 x 10s, and with a little luck good 11 x 14s.
Kodak, if you're listening, please bring back Plus X!
You could also try a low alkalinity variation to see what differences there might be - Beutler published another acutance developer with a working solution of simply 2g/l metol and 10g/l sodium sulfite anhyd. (the stock solution is 10g/l metol and 50g/l sulfite).
That's in the direction of the highly dilute D-23 we've been discussing in the parent topic to this one.
D-23 is 7.5g metol and 100G/l sodium sulfite.
But at 1+9 dilution, that turns in 0.75g/l metol and 10g/l sodium sulfite.
I use that combo to do hour long standing development with only an initial agitation and a midpoint agitation.
If you do nothing else, that developer will give you very low contrast negatives albeit with high acutance.
If you ad 0.5 g/l of sodium hydroxide to restore some of the alkalinity to it and do stand, you get a high acutance developer of medium contrast and good compensation of the highlights.
This is not unlike Beuhler that adds sodium carbonate to the mix to kick up developer alkalinity.
So all of these metol/sulfite variants start with the idea of D-23, but then more or less do the same thing - they optimize for acutance at the expense of grain, and fiddle with the ratios of other components to regulate the degree of compensation.
D-23, and it's variations are the most versatile film developers I've ever used, among which include .... Dektol, HC-110, D-76, DK-50, Pyro 510, PMK, Pyrocat-HD, Microdol-X, and now, Buheler.
I have done the same thing with DK-50. Gerald Koch (miss him) recommended I try DK-50 diluted Beutler-style when I was playing with DK-50. I think DK-50 Buetler-style is mentioned in the Film DeveloperCcookbook also. It worked great for medium format, but 35mm might be different. I didn't really see any gain to using DK-50 diluted Buetler-style so I went back to using Xtol-R.
Understood. What I meant was to try and "bookend" the alkalinity for a given gradient and see if this has an impact on image structure. Given enough development time the 2g metol/10g sulfite developer without an additional alkali should be able to produce the desired density - although it would likely require some agitation.
Haist includes a few other potentially fun acutance developers to try (high emulsion speed-low gradient) along the spiked D-23 lines. One by Bogdanov is very similar except instead of 0.75g metol it uses 0.25g metol and 0.25g HQ.
One concern I haven't seen addressed in these threads, which would impact image structure, is fog. Have you measured this with your spiked D-23 variant (especially given the long development times)? It has a very high pH for a developer without any KBr. Based on most published formulas of this general type there is almost always a decent amount of restrainer. Just something to think about in terms of "optimization".
I have done the same thing with DK-50. Gerald Koch (miss him) recommended I try DK-50 diluted Beutler-style when I was playing with DK-50. I think DK-50 Buetler-style is mentioned in the Film DeveloperCcookbook also. It worked great for medium format, but 35mm might be different. I didn't really see any gain to using DK-50 diluted Buetler-style so I went back to using Xtol-R.
DK-50 diluted Beutler-style
Geoffrey Crawley recommended using dilute DK-50 in the BJP Almanac in 1960, and it was included through into the BJP Annuals until the 1990s.
Ian
Ian,
Yes, if I remember correctly, it even mentions that in the Film Developer Cookbook. Might be where Gerald got it from, since I don't remember Gerald actually saying he used it himself. I could be wrong on that part.
Perplexity can be helpful here, perhaps:
what is dk-50 diluted beutler style
DK-50 diluted in a Beutler style refers to a specific way of diluting and using Kodak's DK-50 developer for film processing. Here are the key points about...www.perplexity.ai
I have gotten very sharp, very contrasty results from DK-50 at 1:3 in semistand application. See my example in #18 above.
As noted, however, at least in extended development scenarios, MQ developers develop way too much contrast for my taste. This is even worse with films like Fomapan 200 that like to get contrasty in their own right
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?