Getting to know Harvey's 777

24mm

H
24mm

  • 0
  • 0
  • 28
Argust 25th - Ticket Window

A
Argust 25th - Ticket Window

  • 3
  • 1
  • 37
Go / back

H
Go / back

  • 3
  • 0
  • 93

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
199,421
Messages
2,791,340
Members
99,904
Latest member
mg50
Recent bookmarks
0

Gerald Koch

Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2004
Messages
1,662
Format
Multi Format
Sease #1 contains

Sodium sulfite ............ 90 g
Phenylenediamine ....... 10 g
Water to make 1 l

To make formulas 2 thru 4 add respectively 1, 6 or 12 grams of Glycin to formula 1.
 

Lachlan Young

Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2005
Messages
4,965
Location
Glasgow
Format
Multi Format
df cardwell said:
Lachlan

It's a witch's brew. It has never been published. It has, like so many enthusiast developers of the time, a lot of stuff in it: 156 grams of stuff per liter.

That probably tallies with 100g/l of sulphite.

I wonder if 777 has ever been reformulated? More to the point, when was it first marketed and WHEN did it first become a cult developer among top pros?
The reason I ask this is because I wonder if they replaced the metol in the original formula with phenidone - that would certainly boost the speed alright.

In terms of 'look' what disclosed developer that you have experience with does 777 look like?

Thanks,

Lachlan

P.S. the Germans seem to have a thing about ppd derivatives - Emofin seems to use some variant or other too. Troop and Anchell also make mention of the Europeans and and their use of ppd etc. I believe phenidone came out during WW2 and is the pricipal ingerdient in the majority of Ilford developers - Microphen is the most obvious and almost certainly was formulated to show off the new developing agent. Gadget Gainer has also made mention of the insensitivity of Phenidone to bromide build up elsewhere on this site and it is not impossible that phenidone may have been chosen for use in 777 thanks to this useful property in replenished solutions.

P.P.S. Andy Kershaw played a track from Ali Farka Toure's yet to be released posthumous album on his program on Sunday night - you can listen again HERE (the track is about 20 or so minutes in)
 

Lachlan Young

Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2005
Messages
4,965
Location
Glasgow
Format
Multi Format
Gerald Koch said:
Sease #1 contains

Sodium sulfite ............ 90 g
Phenylenediamine ....... 10 g
Water to make 1 l

To make formulas 2 thru 4 add respectively 1, 6 or 12 grams of Glycin to formula 1.

Thanks for the formula,

Lachlan
 

c6h6o3

Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2002
Messages
3,215
Format
Large Format
Lachlan Young said:
In terms of 'look' what disclosed developer that you have experience with does 777 look like?

The developer it resembles most in my experience is Crawley's FX-2. That's why I've always believed that it does contain glycin. You don't get those buttery midtones with anything else.
 
OP
OP
df cardwell

df cardwell

Subscriber
Joined
Jul 16, 2005
Messages
3,357
Location
Dearborn,Mic
Format
Multi Format

Lachlan Young

Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2005
Messages
4,965
Location
Glasgow
Format
Multi Format
Possible Ingredients for 777:
In 1 litre
Sodium Sulphite - 100g
Hydroquinone - 6g(?)
ppd - 10g
Metol 6-7g(?)
Borax - 4g(?)
Boric acid - 4g(?)
Carbonate of some form either potassium or sodium

These are extrapolated guesses based on similar formulae and on the weight of the dry powder used to make 1 litre of stock solution. I am pretty certain that the quantity of ppd and sulphite are correct as most similar developers use about this quantity of both. The rest I am puzzled about. There must be at least some water softener in the proprietary formulation. I suppose the trick would be to start with Sease No.1 and add a chemical at a time and test until you get something close to 777.
From what I have heard and read 777 seems to be like FX-2 with finer grain, without the glycin and with ppd.

Hope this helps,

Lachlan

P.S. see if you can guess the film/developer combination used in the attached picture - no prizes unfortunately :smile:
 

Attachments

  • Copy of sixth year show 01.JPG
    Copy of sixth year show 01.JPG
    149.9 KB · Views: 180

Tom Hoskinson

Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2004
Messages
3,867
Location
Southern Cal
Format
Multi Format
Lachlan, why not start with FX-2 and then add some PPD (or some variant form of PPD) - (maybe equimolar amounts of PPD and Pyrocatechcol)?
 

MMfoto

Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2004
Messages
447
Format
Super8
c6h6o3 said:
The developer it resembles most in my experience is Crawley's FX-2. That's why I've always believed that it does contain glycin. You don't get those buttery midtones with anything else.

I have NEVER used FX-2... That being said, with my 35mm negs I have a very hard time believing FX-2 would look anything like 777. I suppose gradation could be similar to that of an "acutance" classed developer like FX-2, but my 777 negs and prints don't look a thing like those made with developers like Acutol, FX-39, and others that I would consider in the same class as FX-2. I would sure be interested in anyone opinion to the contrary though. I have always wanted to try FX-2.

Anyways, can't wait to hear the next instalment in DF's test of 777!
 

fatboy22

Subscriber
Joined
Oct 15, 2005
Messages
397
Location
Iowa City, I
Format
Multi Format
Good to hear all the interest in Harveys 777 developer! I recently started using this stuff and so far the negs are looking really good. I am testing in 120 Fomapan 400 right now. I develope in 1 gallon dip and dunk tanks. So far my times have been 12 min, 72 degrees. I don't believe my tank is seasoned yet, needs a few more rolls but working on that. I plan to develope Kodak HIE in the stuff sometime this month and see how it responds. My normal developer is D76 with replenishment.
 
OP
OP
df cardwell

df cardwell

Subscriber
Joined
Jul 16, 2005
Messages
3,357
Location
Dearborn,Mic
Format
Multi Format
MMfoto said:
... edit...

Anyways, can't wait to hear the next instalment in DF's test of 777!

Well, we're back. First, the spoiler. It's good. I like it.

Today, I worked out a replenishment scheme,
estimated a film curve, and can suggest a way to get started with Panthermic 777.

Harvey compounded a replenisher for 777, but it hasn’t been made for a while. I’m curious how the replenishment scheme bears out. BPI suggests 45ml of fresh developer for a 36exp roll of 35mm film. It seems to work well, but I haven’t done enough film to tell for sure. Time will tell.

With an EI of 400; 20 minutes development @ 68 degrees; and agitation every 5th minute; TMY and 777 produce a classic S curve.

Here are the midtone densities: Zone IV, .52; Zone V, .75; Zone VI, 1.02

( I don’t want to publish a full range of densities. I think it will be more interesting to see what other folks come up with on their own. The Dmax will be higher than 1.85 )

There is rich shadow detail, but the shadows are gently compressed like TXP in D76. It makes a very handsome negative, with a highlight density that gently rolls off without flattening out. Just what you’d expect from TMY. You can capture a LOT of useable information with this stuff, but it clearly like to focus attention on the midtones and highlights.

The grain is smooth, fine, and regular, the classic model of ‘very fine grain’. There is an attractive balance of acutance and fine grain. The grain is slightly more apparent than XTOL. It is much sharper. It is finer grain than Aculux 2. There are not the high acutance characteristics of Pyrocat or FX-2, but it is VERY clear and defined. I think 777 will be equally good for portraiture and landscape, but not for hyper-reality.

With its S-curve, I think accurate exposure will be important with 777. Not as forgiving as a purely long scale developer like XTOL.

A good 35mm shooter could make 16x20s all day long with TMY and 777.

A quick way to get started with 777 would be to draw off a liter from the gallon of stock. Divide the liter into 500ml bottles. Label one ‘work’ and the other, ‘replenisher’. Assume this to be for a steel tank, and steel reels. For plastic tanks with larger capacity, just use your common sense.

In a 2 roll tank, soak 2 rolls of 35mm film for 30 minutes in 500 ml of solution. When the soak is completed, drain the reels into the developer.

Meanwhile, pour 3 oz / 90 ml of ‘replenisher’ into a graduate.

Next, add the 'ripened' developer to the 'replenisher' in the graduate:
- Pour the used developer up to the 500ml mark of the graduate, minding the meniscus. Developer remaining in the tank is poured into a fourth bottle. You want to accumulate the ‘used’ developer.

This is the replenishment scheme you’ll follow with 777.

When you accumulate 200 ml of used developer, add it to 800ml of replenisher, and you’ve made 1 liter of ripened developer. This is the process I’m following, testing the developer out with 35mm film, and when I’ve got a couple liters of ripened developer, I’ll start playing with some sheet film.

Of course, you can scale this process up in order to ripen a larger quantity.

I don’t mean this to be the final word on the subject. This is just my experience.

We don’t learn everything about a film and developer combination with a step wedge and densitometer; I like to learn what the combination WANTS to do, and see how I can learn to work with it. It will be interesting to see what others come up with, or if my short experience is similar to yours.
There is a lot to learn about 777.

I hope this encourages some investigation. Good luck !

df

.
 

MMfoto

Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2004
Messages
447
Format
Super8
Good stuff. Thanks for the update DF. Makes me want to go mix up that new batch I've been meaning to make.
 
OP
OP
df cardwell

df cardwell

Subscriber
Joined
Jul 16, 2005
Messages
3,357
Location
Dearborn,Mic
Format
Multi Format
Friday morning.

I'm chipping away at the 777 work while doing other things. Multi-tasking ?
No. Sort of.

Anyway, ran a proper curve test.

BEWARE: my darkroom seems to have it's own strange rules.
Your results may be different.

Here's how it looks:
 

MMfoto

Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2004
Messages
447
Format
Super8
This recent interest in 777 got me into the darkroom to print some old 777/TX negs last night. I've been interested in restarting my replenishment batch and working with this developer again. I think that this is a very special developer and that great work can be done with it by photographers that make it theirs. But I remember now why I stopped using it. It doesn't suit my work, and in my hands the prints seem lifeless. Resolution is very good, midtones and highlights are beautiful. Just not for me. Back to Rodinal, Acutol, Pyrocat HD.

I do however have two or three packages of dry chems left that make a gallon each that I would give to an apug member for the cost of shipping. I'll give first dibs to anyone outside of North America that has been unable to get there hands on 777, otherwise it's up for grabs to anyone.
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom