Good old D76 and HP5+

Sonatas XII-56 (Life)

A
Sonatas XII-56 (Life)

  • 1
  • 1
  • 1K
Mother and child

A
Mother and child

  • 4
  • 2
  • 2K
Sonatas XII-55 (Life)

A
Sonatas XII-55 (Life)

  • 1
  • 1
  • 3K
Rain supreme

D
Rain supreme

  • 5
  • 0
  • 3K

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
199,828
Messages
2,797,322
Members
100,048
Latest member
Praktica_enjoyer
Recent bookmarks
0
Joined
Jan 21, 2003
Messages
15,708
Location
Switzerland
Format
Multi Format
This is just a post in praise of Kodak D76 and Ilford HP5+.

For as long as I can remember, I have avoided D76 because I naively thought that it was a developer that wasn't 'good enough' for me, for the lack of better words. I have used lots of film developers over the course of the last two decades, including Rodinal, Ilfotec DD-X, HC-110, Edwal 12, Xtol, Perceptol, Pyrocat-HD, Pyrocat-MC, PMK Pyro, FA-1027 (Formulary), Paterson FX-39, Crawley FX-37 (thanks, Clay), Ansco 130 (yes, you read it right), and a host of others I'm neglecting to recall. They were all interesting and had wonderful qualities, and I don't regret using them. But in the last five years or so, I have increasingly seeking simplicity, so I have worked with one developer almost exclusively, replenished Xtol, and that has been a fine companion. But I wanted an even simpler photography life, so I thought that I should use what I have always thought of as 'sub par' to prove to myself that I didn't need anything fancy in order to make good negatives.

And, here I am, after about three gallon packs of D76, having used it in two different ways, both as a 2-bath using stock solution for about 70% of normal developing time + 3 minutes sodium metaborate solution, and otherwise (mostly) 1+1, the latter I have now standardized on.
Lo and behold, I am getting negatives that are just as easy to print, with print quality that is as good as any other developer I have used.

It does almost nothing wrong. Nice grain that looks good when enlarged, good enough shadow detail (film speed), especially at 1+1, wonderful tonality, and a nice classic look. I've been using it with Tri-X, TMax 400, and Fomapan 100 in order to use up my remaining film stock. I've since used it also with HP5+, which is the single emulsion I've settled on.

Yesterday I took a long walk in our snow filled Minnesota, Hasselblad on my new monopod, three rolls of HP5+, and some beautiful winter light to back me up. I had a great time shooting familiar objects around my neighborhood, and when I developed the film today it struck me again just how good this developer is, in combination with all of the films I've used it with.

As mentioned earlier, I don't regret using all of the other developers, but I also have to question why I ever thought it was necessary. Looking at the results with a critical eye, it's brutally obvious that I just wasn't a good enough craftsman to get the most out of my materials, and today I might be good enough to eke at least most of the quality out of my materials, and that is very pleasing.

For the foreseeable future, I'll be using D76 as my only b&w film developer, and HP5+ as my only film, and focus on the light, the composition, the expression if I'm shooting portraits, gesture, ideas, projects, and making beautiful prints.

Here's a cheer for using proven materials, and not messing around too much with materials that in the end mean very little to the end result.
 

Attachments

  • HP5+ Test 003.jpg
    HP5+ Test 003.jpg
    508.4 KB · Views: 491
  • HP5+ Test 008.jpg
    HP5+ Test 008.jpg
    458.6 KB · Views: 492
  • HP5+ Test 009.jpg
    HP5+ Test 009.jpg
    430.6 KB · Views: 437
Joined
Mar 18, 2005
Messages
4,942
Location
Monroe, WA, USA
Format
Multi Format
:smile:
 

markbarendt

Member
Joined
May 18, 2008
Messages
9,422
Location
Beaverton, OR
Format
Multi Format
A distinct part of my photographic exploration has been driven by me not really understanding what I could do or what I really wanted. Bouncing around a bit can be a worthwhile thing.
 
OP
OP
Thomas Bertilsson
Joined
Jan 21, 2003
Messages
15,708
Location
Switzerland
Format
Multi Format
A distinct part of my photographic exploration has been driven by me not really understanding what I could do or what I really wanted. Bouncing around a bit can be a worthwhile thing.

I find that it is more rewarding to 'bounce around' with subject matter, different projects, working with lighting, and so on. A film developer is a film developer is a film developer, which nobody but 'we' are going to care about if we ever manage to get our prints into venues where other people see them.
 

RattyMouse

Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2011
Messages
6,045
Location
Ann Arbor, Mi
Format
Multi Format
I find that it is more rewarding to 'bounce around' with subject matter, different projects, working with lighting, and so on. A film developer is a film developer is a film developer, which nobody but 'we' are going to care about if we ever manage to get our prints into venues where other people see them.

Do you find D-76 good for ultra high ISO developing like Delta 3200 at 3200 and 6400?
 

gone

Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2009
Messages
5,504
Location
gone
Format
Medium Format
I'm lucky, as I started w/ D76 and Tri-X. It's where most people end up. Have no complaints, other than its stability. Are you finding yours goes a little weird after 3 weeks? I use it full strength, and recently switched to TD-16 to get better shelf life and consistency. The tones from both developers are to die for.

Myself, I see a LOT of difference in prints that are made from different film developers.
 
OP
OP
Thomas Bertilsson
Joined
Jan 21, 2003
Messages
15,708
Location
Switzerland
Format
Multi Format
Do you find D-76 good for ultra high ISO developing like Delta 3200 at 3200 and 6400?

I haven't personally used it with Delta 3200, but am inclined to believe it will work really well for that situation as well. I would probably use it 1+3 and develop for a really long time, agitating often to get enough contrast.

Do you have reason to believe it would not work well?
 
OP
OP
Thomas Bertilsson
Joined
Jan 21, 2003
Messages
15,708
Location
Switzerland
Format
Multi Format
I'm lucky, as I started w/ D76 and Tri-X. It's where most people end up. Have no complaints, other than its stability. Are you finding yours goes a little weird after 3 weeks? I use it full strength, and recently switched to TD-16 to get better shelf life and consistency. The tones from both developers are to die for.

Myself, I see a LOT of difference in prints that are made from different film developers.

I bet you can see differences between developers quite readily. The real question is: does it really matter? My take on it is that it doesn't matter even a bit. I get way more variability based on altering my technique than I get from switching materials.

I don't find that D76 goes weird after a couple or so weeks. Not at all. But I store it meticulously, if that helps at all.
 
OP
OP
Thomas Bertilsson
Joined
Jan 21, 2003
Messages
15,708
Location
Switzerland
Format
Multi Format
Even if one has no scientific interest per se, it is normal to be curious about our materials, and particularly when you're meticulous about craft, it is normal to explore to some extent, because you want to know you haven't "left anything on the table" (to varying degrees depending on personality). We also tend to be influenced by the craftsmen we admire, which can lead to the same kind of exploration. But often in the end we come full circle. Speaking for myself only, as much as I enjoy the science of it all, I'm grounded by the fact my favourite photographers/printers all happen to use fairly "boring" chemicals. Formulas such as D-76 are hard to beat when it comes to balancing the various characteristics, and overall improvements are usually very small or insignificant. You can "optimize" for some characteristic, but you inevitably have to give something up in exchange (no free lunch). The other thing about D-76 is you know it's going to work well with any general purpose film, because virtually no film is produced which hasn't been tested in it.

And it's precisely that curiosity that drove me to probe and test all those developers and films over the years. Perhaps it's even necessary to do those things to satisfy our curiosity with them? I don't know, but I think you're absolutely right that we try different things in hope to gain something.

It may be that FX-37 is sharper, or that DD-X yields more shadow detail, but it's nice to work with a developer that does basically nothing wrong. And, there are many great developers like that out there, D76 is just one of them. For me, though, it was important to validate that I don't need any particular developer in order to get results that I'm very happy with, basically to prove my own theories in years past that certain developers somehow carried magic with them. As it seems, however, magic comes from within, and I believe true magic happens when talented photographers and printers work hard with some arbitrary film/developer they chose, aren't afraid of taking a critical look at what they create, and keep trying until good things happen, both from a pure quality standpoint, but of course more importantly on an artistic level. (Not saying I'm a great artist, just to make that absolutely clear).
 
OP
OP
Thomas Bertilsson
Joined
Jan 21, 2003
Messages
15,708
Location
Switzerland
Format
Multi Format
No, but I never see D-76 recommended for high ISO developing. Instead others are mentioned, leading me to think that it is not suitable.

You never know until you try it. It's as simple as that. In years past I have debunked many 'ideas' surrounding certain films and developers being bad combinations, simply by trying it and working with it.

Delta 3200 is an amazing film, and a long time ago I started a project with it in 35mm, which I hope to finish some day. I used Rodinal to process, and that worked brilliantly. The prints are 15x19" size and I personally love how it looks. If I ever work with D3200 again, I will try it with D76, and I am 100% certain I can make that work too.
 

Tom1956

Member
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
1,989
Location
US
Format
Large Format
D-76 is the Kelloggs Corn Flakes of photography. A darkroom staple. If that's all you had available and needed some film developed dependably well, and without getting totally killed on grain, D-76 is the stuff.
 
OP
OP
Thomas Bertilsson
Joined
Jan 21, 2003
Messages
15,708
Location
Switzerland
Format
Multi Format
D-76 is the Kelloggs Corn Flakes of photography. A darkroom staple. If that's all you had available and needed some film developed dependably well, and without getting totally killed on grain, D-76 is the stuff.

Tom, I don't disagree, but think that D76 is even more wonderful than Kellogg's Corn Flakes... :smile: To me I look at my amber jars full of D76 and just see possibility. Used as stock developer you get this creamy smooth negative with very fine grain and sweet tonality, at 1+1 it gets a little sharper and allows for a little bit of compensating development, and at 1+3 it gets very sharp and allows for tons of shadow detail and highly compensating action. I can basically get anything I want with this highly versatile product, and they all yield beautiful prints.

So, to me D76 is more than average.
 

Tom1956

Member
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
1,989
Location
US
Format
Large Format
There's D-76, and then there's Microdol. Microdol is the elite D76, though without the versatility of 76. I'm a Microdol man, when possible. But not always so. Unquestionably D-76 is king. Carry on.:smile:
 

Pioneer

Member
Joined
May 29, 2010
Messages
3,886
Location
Elko, Nevada
Format
Multi Format
I use D-76 for just about all my developing any more. It started when I was heavily using TMX100 but I found that it was easy to use, easy to mix, and gave really predictable results, so I have stayed with it. I have used Rodinal as well as HC110, and still do use them once in awhile, but both have really taken a back seat for most of my developing. The only other developer I use at all regularly is DDX whenever I have D3200 to develop. I have used D76 for D3200 but DDX just seems to do what I need with the higher ISO film.

As you say Tom, it is really hard to argue with a developer that is as useful as D76. The other thing I have noticed is that D76 is so popular that almost every film I have used provides developing times for D76.
 
Joined
Mar 30, 2011
Messages
2,147
Location
NYC
Format
Multi Format
D76 1:1 and tri-x (arista branded) is what I have my students use when they start in my photography class. You can't go wrong with that. I did hp5+ a while ago in my classes when they ran their promotion with the buy one get one free 2 packs, it also performed well.
 
OP
OP
Thomas Bertilsson
Joined
Jan 21, 2003
Messages
15,708
Location
Switzerland
Format
Multi Format
There's D-76, and then there's Microdol. Microdol is the elite D76, though without the versatility of 76. I'm a Microdol man, when possible. But not always so. Unquestionably D-76 is king. Carry on.:smile:

Haha, I actually got some Microdol-X (the clone Freestyle sells), and tried it for a while, just to see what it was about. I ended up not liking the excessively long developing times for 1+3, which is the only dilution I thought gave me a sharp enough negative. The long developing times gave me negatives of somewhat weird tonality, and very muted highlights. I also used it stock, followed by a sodium metaborate solution, for very high contrast scenes, and that was probably the best negs I got from that developer (using Tri-X and Tmax 400).
How do you use it, and why do you like it, except for the grain thing?
 
OP
OP
Thomas Bertilsson
Joined
Jan 21, 2003
Messages
15,708
Location
Switzerland
Format
Multi Format
I use D-76 for just about all my developing any more. It started when I was heavily using TMX100 but I found that it was easy to use, easy to mix, and gave really predictable results, so I have stayed with it. I have used Rodinal as well as HC110, and still do use them once in awhile, but both have really taken a back seat for most of my developing. The only other developer I use at all regularly is DDX whenever I have D3200 to develop. I have used D76 for D3200 but DDX just seems to do what I need with the higher ISO film.

As you say Tom, it is really hard to argue with a developer that is as useful as D76. The other thing I have noticed is that D76 is so popular that almost every film I have used provides developing times for D76.

I'd be interested to see how D76 looks with Delta 3200. You're the second person mentioning it. I think I'm going to buy a couple of rolls tomorrow and try it out.

The available data for D76 is great, but not only that, the accumulated experience with it out there is massive, so when one runs into trouble with it, there are many people that can help out. That sure is an added benefit of using any readily available materials.
 

Pioneer

Member
Joined
May 29, 2010
Messages
3,886
Location
Elko, Nevada
Format
Multi Format
I developed 5 rolls of D3200 yesterday but I used DDX as I normally do. I just finished putting 4 rolls of HP5+ through the D76 soup this evening. I'll see what it looks like on the light table tomorrow.
 
Joined
Jun 11, 2005
Messages
1,833
Location
Plymouth. UK
Format
Multi Format
I have been using HP5 Plus developed in Kodak's excellent D-76 1+1 for many years and I love it.
The other film I really like is T-Max 400 also developed in D-76 1+1 for studio portraiture, but I mostly use HP5 Plus for regular photography.
 
Joined
Jun 11, 2005
Messages
1,833
Location
Plymouth. UK
Format
Multi Format
Delta 3200 rated at E.I. 1000 and developed in stock D-76 for 10 minutes at 20*C gave me a very good set of negatives with the few rolls that I have used.
 

micwag2

Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2010
Messages
173
Location
Eastern Penn
Format
35mm
I have been developing my own B&W for a little over a year now. I've used D-76 full strength and 1:1. I'm intrigued by the statements that you'll get sharper development at 1:3. Where are there development times for 1:3? I only have seen times for full strength and 1:1. Or is this a matter of trial and error? Also, I noticed that it has been mentioned about storage and keeping as much air out and shelf life being only a couple months. I must say that i have mine stored in a partially filled 1 gallon jug, no air squeezed out and its close to a year old and it still seems to work ok. Am i missing something here? Did i just get lucky and it hasn't oxidized to the point of undesirable results?
 

Jaf-Photo

Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2014
Messages
495
Format
Medium Format
Really nice photos, Thomas.

I started out using D76 (and some Rodinal) but eventually settled for XTOL. To me, XTOL is even better than D76 and I see a huge benefit in the fact that it is less toxic.

I do occasionally feel guilty for using chemicals that can harm life on this planet, just to indulge my interest in photos, when I could use a totally clean digital process. But with XTOL I get great results and feel slightly less guilty.
 

erikg

Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2003
Messages
1,444
Location
pawtucket rh
Format
Multi Format
Really nice photos, Thomas.

I started out using D76 (and some Rodinal) but eventually settled for XTOL. To me, XTOL is even better than D76 and I see a huge benefit in the fact that it is less toxic.

I do occasionally feel guilty for using chemicals that can harm life on this planet, just to indulge my interest in photos, when I could use a totally clean digital process. But with XTOL I get great results and feel slightly less guilty.

If you are disposing of your chemistry properly you should have little to feel guilty about. Home cleaning products are often much worse. When you consider the whole chain of e-waste the digital process is far from "totally clean". It is possible to use D-76/ ID-11 and be completely safe for yourself and others.
 

effae

Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2012
Messages
17
Format
35mm
I've been on D76 exclusively since I started my journey with analog photography a couple of years back, and I haven't had the need to try anything else so far. I almost went for a bottle of DD-X for my latest roll of D3200, but I decided to try stock D76 instead and it worked great! I've shot a mixed amount of all the "standard" rolls of BW film (T-max, Tri-X, HP5+, FP4+ etc.), but lately I've settled on HP5+; I want to explore this film+dev combo more thoroughly!
 
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