Flic Film has made a B&W developer that advertises the same dev time for any B&W film. What's the catch?

[dcy]

A few months ago Flic Film released the "Elementary B&W Developing Kit". It is a two-part developer whose defining feature is that the dev time is the same regardless of film --- but the fix time is longer for T-grain film.


Part A: Fill the tank with Part A. Agitate for 3 min and return to storage container. Do not rinse between dev steps.
Part B: Fill the tank with Part B. Agitate for 3 min and return to storage container.
Rinse: Rinse with water for 15 sec
Fixer: Fill the tank. Agitate for 4 min and return to storage container.(6.5 minutes for T-Grain films)
Rinse: Rinse with water for 5 min
Wetting Agent: Apply wetting agent directly on the film (Do not reuse) Hang film to dry in a dust free location.

Here are the links to the website, instructions, and developer MSDS.

Part A is Sodium sulfite + Hydroquinone + Metol.
Part B is Sodium sulfite + Borax.

What do y'all think? The sample photos I've seen look good to me, but what do I know?

Flic Film doesn't exactly have a large chemistry R&D team. It is likely that this recipe is a known recipe from the internet (e.g. their Black, White, and Green developer is PC-TEA).

Not gonna lie. I love the idea of a developer that's the same for all films. That's especially useful when I want to experiment with uncommon film stocks like Wolfen NP100, that might not have listed times for your favorite developer in the Massive Dev Chart.

 

[revdoc]

Standard Diafine-type two bath developer, so not really a new thing, but an interesting choice for a small manufacturer. Such developers are convenient and usually consistent, but you get what you get from them, so you sacrifice some control over the result.

 

[dcy]

Standard Diafine-type two bath developer, so not really a new thing, but an interesting choice for a small manufacturer. Such developers are convenient and usually consistent, but you get what you get from them, so you sacrifice some control over the result.

Thanks!

 

[mshchem]

Doesn't interest me. Too easy. I like to live on the jagged edge

 

[koraks]

What do y'all think?

I think there will be gross variability in the development of different types and brands of film when processed in the same way in this developer. The reason is that there's no way to get the exact same gamma from very different films with a single developer and the same parameters. All films will produce an image alright, but some will be on the thin side, while others will be more dense. This may be satisfactory especially for those who only scan their film, as digital editing can fairly easily compensate the variability in the negatives.

Personally, I don't really see the benefit in a developer like this. All it seems to accomplish is to remove the need to look up the proper development time for the film used. Since this is a 1-minute job, the benefit is very marginal indeed.

Of course, it's quite difficult to make money with photochemistry, so I guess we should primarily see this in the light of attempts to keep pushing out new products, regardless of their utility, just to keep the revenues rolling.

 

[dcy]

Personally, I don't really see the benefit in a developer like this. All it seems to accomplish is to remove the need to look up the proper development time for the film used. Since this is a 1-minute job, the benefit is very marginal indeed.

As a beginner, I can see how it's less intimidating. Though in my case, I've already developed B&W film with a normal developer and I already discovered the Massive Dev Chart.

But even now, I think I can see utility in something that could work on a new unfamiliar stock that isn't listed in the Massive Dev Chart for your developer of choice. I can also see utility in being able to develop different films in the same batch.

I'm not planning on buying this. I already have all the B&W developer I'll need for a long time. I was just curious.

 

[koraks]

a new unfamiliar stock that isn't listed in the Massive Dev Chart

Manufacturers generally give at least a few development times for common developers as a starting point. Those can be used, and they can also be used to infer development times for less common developers.
If you're talking about new stocks in the sense of random, anonymous stuff that pops up on eBay and that's not associated with a known manufacturer, then yeah - but then this 'magic' developer will do nothing more or nothing better than just dunking the magic film for 8 minutes in D76.

 

[IMoL]

Very much a Diafine or Bellini Duostep kind of two-bath developer.

I find they have their uses but nothing is ever universal in B&W development. I sometimes use this type of developer for two main reasons:

1. They often give a "speed boost" to films - in my case I shoot HP5+ at 800 and develop in Bellini Duostep and get a relatively normal level of contrast.

2. Developing two different films in the same tank if in a rush to get them developed.

Pros:
* They can give a "speed boost"
* Mix films in same tank
* Sometimes you can get a compensating effect

Cons:
* You give up control - you get what you get.
* You really need to decide that you're going to use this developer before shooting as it affects the EI you shoot the film at. You can't really change your mind later.

 

[dcy]

Manufacturers generally give at least a few development times for common developers as a starting point. Those can be used, and they can also be used to infer development times for less common developers.
If you're talking about new stocks in the sense of random, anonymous stuff that pops up on eBay and that's not associated with a known manufacturer, then yeah - but then this 'magic' developer will do nothing more or nothing better than just dunking the magic film for 8 minutes in D76.

I'm not thinking of random, anonymous stuff. I'm thinking of new (Kentmere 200) or uncommon (Wolfen, Orwo, Lomo) stocks. I have 3 rolls of Kentmere 200 in my fridge and Harman only provides instructions for Ilford developers and I think also D-76.

In any event, I'm discovering now that Diafine, as cool as it is, has an interesting downside: You have to change the ISO that you shoot your film at. These instructions say that, for example, HP5 should be shot at ISO 800 instead of 400.

 

[Yezishu]

Commercial film developers once favored Diafine, they didn't have to spend time on determining the specific development times for different film models and they can satisfy most customers.
If you need to process 100~200 rolls of different film from manufacturer all over the world, and it was before the internet era, oh no...

 

[Yezishu]

I'm not thinking of random, anonymous stuff. I'm thinking of new (Kentmere 200) or uncommon (Wolfen, Orwo, Lomo) stocks. I have 3 rolls of Kentmere 200 in my fridge and Harman only provides instructions for Ilford developers and I think also D-76.

In any event, I'm discovering now that Diafine, as cool as it is, has an interesting downside: You have to change the ISO that you shoot your film at. These instructions say that, for example, HP5 should be shot at ISO 800 instead of 400.

Back in time, developers knew that ID-11 was equivalent of Kodak's D-76 (Ilford was keen to ensure everyone knew this! they send a "kodak-ilford-equivalent.pdf") So, you already know the answer...

 

[Agulliver]

What @koraks said. Users are not going to get identical results for all films from this...but may well get *acceptable* results. We've previously discussed how a lot of the younger people coming to film photography do not process their own films, even B&W. This might be seen as less intimidating than charts with different times, concentrations and so on. "One size fits all" is perhaps a good starting place. Additionally these newbies will mostly be scanning negatives and not printing in a darkroom which might mean that variations in properties different films are less worrisome.

It also perhaps makes it possible to process a larger tank with multiple brands of film.

Not something I am interested in but I can see it has a place.

 

[koraks]

Harman only provides instructions for Ilford developers and I think also D-76.

That's enough to infer a good starting point for any given developer.

You have to change the ISO that you shoot your film at. These instructions say that, for example, HP5 should be shot at ISO 800 instead of 400.

Nonsense. You don't have to change anything; if you want to shoot your HP5 at 100 or 200, you're entirely free to do so. And the notion that it will magically hit 800 is ludicrous. It'll give OK results, but at the loss of shadow density/detail - as always in push processing! There's no silver bullet.

 

[loccdor]

I found out that you can actually change the film speed in developers like Diafine quite a bit by changing the length of bath B. There is a guy who was doing extreme pull processing with Diafine by using a 30 second B time.

I used Diafine recently for its more popular purpose - pushed Tri-X. It did okay, but I was not thrilled about the acutance.

It looks like Flic Film is selling that for $20 where the other stuff goes for over $30 so it's a decent deal if it's just as good.

 

[koraks]

I found out that you can actually change the film speed in developers like Diafine quite a bit by changing the length of bath B

Maybe 2/3 of a stop gain, if that. I'd be surprised it you could achieve as much as that, though. Of course, you'll get an image alright, and you can get a gamma that is close to what you'd get on box speed and less development. But less exposure just means less separation in the deep shadows. Your tri-x example illustrates it quite aptly.

 

[loccdor]

@koraks, I was more talking about in the direction of pull processing, you're correct, you're not going to push them more by extending the time.

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

What do y'all think?

Treat the manufacturer's prescribed time of 3 minutes in both baths as the starting point for all films and increase/decrease time in the two baths based on the results you get.

Interestingly, instructions for this two bath developer don't say anything about the developing temperature. Maybe it's not a critical factor for this developer, but keeping it fixed would be prudent.

 

[koraks]

I was more talking about in the direction of pull processing

Sorry about that; gotcha. Yes, pulling is always a possibility. This will work great if contraction is needed of very high contrast scenes.

 

[loccdor]

Interestingly, instructions for this two bath developer don't say anything about the developing temperature. Maybe it's not a critical factor for this developer, but keeping it fixed would be prudent.

Just needs to be between 20-30C if I recall correctly. I settled on a happy medium of 25C.

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

Just needs to be between 20-30C if I recall correctly. I settled on a happy medium of 25C.

Maybe Diafine can give consistent results in that temperature range, I don't know, but two bath developers are temperature sensitive in general.Three minutes at 30 C isn't quite the same as three minutes at 20 C if some development takes place in the first bath as it does in Thornton's two bath developer. Looking at MSDS of Flick Elementary developer, it seems to me that it's not a Diafine-like formulation and is more close to divided D76. Unless pH is low because of some unmentioned ingredient, you can expect some development to take place in the first bath.

 

[Alan Johnson]

Part A is an MQ developer like D-76. Why that should suddenly become temperature independent beats me.

 

[loccdor]

it seems to me that it's not a Diafine-like formulation and is more close to divided D76

My mistake, didn't read that. My comments are only specific to Diafine then.

 

[darkroommike]

A few months ago Flic Film released the "Elementary B&W Developing Kit". It is a two-part developer whose defining feature is that the dev time is the same regardless of film --- but the fix time is longer for T-grain film.


Part A: Fill the tank with Part A. Agitate for 3 min and return to storage container. Do not rinse between dev steps.
Part B: Fill the tank with Part B. Agitate for 3 min and return to storage container.
Rinse: Rinse with water for 15 sec
Fixer: Fill the tank. Agitate for 4 min and return to storage container.(6.5 minutes for T-Grain films)
Rinse: Rinse with water for 5 min
Wetting Agent: Apply wetting agent directly on the film (Do not reuse) Hang film to dry in a dust free location.

Here are the links to the website, instructions, and developer MSDS.

Part A is Sodium sulfite + Hydroquinone + Metol.
Part B is Sodium sulfite + Borax.

What do y'all think? The sample photos I've seen look good to me, but what do I know?

Flic Film doesn't exactly have a large chemistry R&D team. It is likely that this recipe is a known recipe from the internet (e.g. their Black, White, and Green developer is PC-TEA).

Not gonna lie. I love the idea of a developer that's the same for all films. That's especially useful when I want to experiment with uncommon film stocks like Wolfen NP100, that might not have listed times for your favorite developer in the Massive Dev Chart.

Since it purports to be full speed, NOT pushed speed I suspect it is much like any divided developer, for example the Thornton Divided MQ developer, or any number of other divided D-76 or D-23 concoctions. I suspect that the "one time for all films" statement might be a bit inaccurate, when I use the Thornton brew, I give slow films 3 minutes in each bath, medium speed (100-125) films 4 minutes, and 400 speed films 5 minutes, per bath and am perfectly happy with the results. Try it and see, then report back. Something new is always good and supporting newer companies also good.

 

[Donald Qualls]

IMO, a monobath like Df96 does this job better than a divided D-76. The only time adjustment is for tabular grain films that need longer fixing (or if you need to push or pull). Film accommodation is via temperature and agitation, but for beginners, apartment dwellers, or nomads, the beauty is you only need one storage bottle, reuse the solution with time added, and all you have to do after pouring out the monobath is wash the film (optionally finish with a wetting agent like Photo-Flo) and hang it to dry.

 

[dcy]

That's enough to infer a good starting point for any given developer.

For those of us who are new.... How would I do that? Let's take Kentmere 200 as a concrete example that I care about. How would I use the posted times for Ilford developers and D-76 to infer a good developing time for Rodinal or PC-TEA? (the developers I have on hand).

I don't want to lose a roll. Photography is a hobby for me, but that doesn't mean that I'm ok losing a week's worth of pictures because a roll was over or under developed.