fotospeed fd10

aligndont · Apr 26, 2006

I recently have used fotospeed fd10 to process Delta 100 in 135. My impression is that this deverloper offers excellent sharpness, ease of use, and terrific tonality. However it is hardly spoken of on the forums. I won't say that it is as good as perhaps the catechol developers, but for a non-staining developer it certainly holds its own against the likes of Xtol, accutol, D23 or I guess any other non-staining developer commercially available. The fotospeed website claims it is second to none. It puzzles me that there is so little discussion of this developer. I would love to hear another person's o
opinion.

Tom Kershaw · Apr 26, 2006

I also have a bottle of FD10 but haven't used it yet. Good to know that it works well.
What are your impressions about film speed?

aligndont · Apr 26, 2006

I"ve been using box speed or ie 80 for Delta 100. The bottle I believe does not give directions as to agitation. I have been using 30 sec initial inversions then three inversions per minute. Since I am not sure of its keeping qualities I divided the developer into smaller amber bottles. I think you'll find it has amazing resolution with finess of grain. At the higher dilution ( I believe 1:9 ) it seems to offer some compensation which is certainly a boon when using roll film. I am certainly interested in your experience with this developer.

Michael

Geoff Stevens · Apr 27, 2006

I've also had good experience with fd10. I've used it with 35mm film - mainly Delta 400 and HP5. The results have been very good in both cases.

I decant the original bottle into 30ml (aromatherapy!) brown glass bottles and then use one of these for each film (1+9 gives 300ml). I'm not a user of great quantities of film so this method suits me and the developer keeps well.

Recommended.

Regards,
Geoff

Earl Dunbar · Apr 27, 2006

There's a short thread on Tech Pan in Rodinal here

Earl

richo · May 5, 2006

I just realize that my favorite Paterson Aculux is discontinued. As a replacement fotospeed fd10 was suggested. I normally use Fuji Neopan 400 and either Fuji Across 100 or Foma 200 exposed at 100.

Can somebody who has experience with aculux and FD10 compare? I know I need to try it myself and I will, but would like to hear from somebody who used both.

And one more question, how fotospeed is stable in business? Wouldn't they disappear as soon as I start using regularly FD10?

Thank you!

aligndont · May 6, 2006

aculux versus fd10

Having used both aculux and fd10 for delta 100 my observation is that fd10 has the qualities of aculux plus higher sharpness and maybe even finer grain. I have no experience weth Delta 400 however I remember microdol X 1:3 does a great job with this film if you are not looking for a staining developer.

richo · May 7, 2006

aligndont said:
Having used both aculux and fd10 for delta 100 my observation is that fd10 has the qualities of aculux plus higher sharpness and maybe even finer grain.

Thank you very much. It seems like I will try it. I have order directly from fotospeed web site half liter and will test it with my favorite films.

And if the results are as good as it seems, I only need to hope that they will stay in business long ;-)

Schlapp · Jan 22, 2007

I too have been using fd10 but with tmax 400/100 but seems to be getting very contrasty and grainy negs. Could this be too long in the developer? I went with the times suggested on the bottle.

Roger Hicks · Jan 22, 2007

Schlapp said:
I too have been using fd10 but with tmax 400/100 but seems to be getting very contrasty and grainy negs. Could this be too long in the developer? I went with the times suggested on the bottle.

Or overexposure... A classic problem with T-grains.

Cheers,

R.

fotospeed fd10

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency