FX1 divided

[schyter]

hello guys,

is the second film (Rollei RPX100 and Efke IR820 expired) that development with FX1 divided ; 4 min. sol.A and 4 min. sol.B. (24 °C)
I have no scientific evidence to submit, but the feeling that results are very encouraging. I just wanted to ask you if any user has ever tried this.
Many thanks. ;/)

 

[Rudeofus]

The big deal about Crawley's FX-1 is, or one should rather say: was, the Iodide added in very low concentration. This is what turned FX-1 into a high acutance developer, and there are credible voices here on APUG who claim that this won't work with modern emulsions anyway, so you may as well leave out the Iodide.

Looking at the formula for your divided version of Crawley's FX-1, especially if you leave out the Iodide, there are strong similarities to D-23 diluted 1+1 followed by an alkaline bath. Stoeckler's and Thornton's two bath formulas use different alkalis but are otherwise very similar. It would be interesting to find out whether these two formulas yield substantially different results from yours.

 

[schyter]

I often use the double bath DD23 Stoeckler, but I was without metol, so I wanted to try FX1. The result, especially with Efke IR820 infrared (expired) has left me stunned. I've always had problems with this film and the best results I had obtained with D23 (not divided). I have no means to validate the goodness in the FX1 double bathroom, but my feeling is that it is better. I read a technique on the double bath in an old Italian book where it could be improved by dilution of solution A and B to refine accurately contrast, grain, deep in the shadows and veil. I hadn't met anyone who applies this technique in the development of the dilutions in double bathroom. Thanks... ;/)

 

[Rudeofus]

I often use the double bath DD23 Stoeckler, but I was without metol, so I wanted to try FX1.

IIRC there is Metol in FX-1, so whatever you mixed without Metol was something entirely different. Care to provide details?

 

[schyter]

IIRC there is Metol in FX-1, so whatever you mixed without Metol was something entirely different. Care to provide details?

I try to explain better...
I had exhausted the DD23 Stoeckler and I no longer had the metol to do it again. I possessed, however, the developer FX,1already prepared, in the two stock solutions (A and B); so... I tried to use the technique of the two bath !!
Sorry if I was not clear earlier and for my english ! ;/)

 

[schyter]

All the people I've asked in various forums, using concentrated solutions.
But a careful reading on the use of development in double bath, I was struck by this indication.

quote>
... This system enables a development almost automated irrespective of the duration and temperature (*). The duration is unimportant because in the first bath, it simply requires that the gelatine to soak in development; this requires a few of minutes and after any added time does not change anything. Is however necessary to be within reasonable limits to avoid the formation of veil: the duration of 3 or 4 minutes is optimal in each case. the duration of the second bath is of no importance to the fact that during this exhausting goes by itself the energy development; also it takes a few minutes, and then, as the limit of safety, it may take as long as 3 or 4 minutes. A perfect adjustment of contrast, density and penetration of the shadows derives from the merger of the two bath (!!!).
The first bath, containing the developer agent, in concentrated solution and the second bath containing the alkali, in a diluted solution produces a lower penetration in the shadows and more veil, but also a finer grain; the first bath diluted and the second bath concentrate, returns the maximum richness of detail in the shadows, the total absence of the veil, but a coarser grain. By varying the relative concentrations adroitly you have a precise system to adjust with accuracy the results according to the wishes and needs, without take into account the duration of development or the degree of agitation of the bath.

(*) Needs to be done except with the agents detectors that also exert an alkali development (metol,); in this case the duration of the first cycle affects the results. To prevent the metol develop its action in the first bath, it will be sufficient to keep the solution at a temperature not exceeding 10 °C.

Here in APUG anyone knows this technique? Personally, often using double bath and so this technique intrigues me! ! !

 

[Rudeofus]

One more thing: what's so exciting about having a developer that doesn't care about proper timing and temperature? Measuring time accurately down to seconds has become trivial these days, and if you can't reach 20°C there are charts that let you calculate correct dev times for temperatures between 18 and 24°C.

Two bath developers do have their place, and plenty of people are happy with the results these devs create, and that's what they should be used for: for subject matter that requires a concave characteristic curve for whatever reason.