Any hints about mixing this stuff? It appears that one of the components is quite toxic, so I will use rubber gloves.
How about replenishing? I've only ever used one-shot developers, so any information would be appreciated.
I shoot Tri-X@400 in 135 (and some 120) 90% of the time. Does anyone have any experience with this combination?
Can you push process Tri-X to 800 or 1600 in 777?
Is 777 closer to XTOL or D76? Someone told me it's similar to Pyro...
This may be a difficult question to answer, since the formula is secret, but perhaps someone can speak from experience.
Considering the advances that have been made in the past decades (XTOL etc.), is 777 still worth the effort? I know there is no such thing as a magic bullet in photography, but 777 sure sounds intriguing.
How about development temperature? I read somewhere that it works best at 75F. How about room temperature (68F)?
777 is supposed to be very sensitive to agitation. Anyone care to share?
How about the ripening process? How does this work?
Oxygen in high concentration is toxic, 777 in normal use is not. It will stain, which is to be expected from the formulation.
About there being no MSDS, 777 prcededs those by about 40 years and most of the heavy users of the stuff are still around without ill effect. A few have succombed to the real perils of political assination, falling off mountains, High Fructose corn syrup, an irate spouse or two, and one to an overdose of lunatic postings of utter nonsense on public websites. But hundreds of heavy bare handed 777 users are still with us. Rubber gloves can keep your fingernails from discoloration if you are prone to immersing your hands in deep tanks for a protracted length of time, so do use them.
(there was a url link here which no longer exists) has it right in every respect, his description of how it works is perfect.
777 contains paraphenylenediamine, True, and also true of every C 41/EP 2 type color process, and every mini lab at you local wal*mart. (I think the levels are about the same if not higher in the color developer) The danger with the color chems is that they are shipped as a concentrated liquid and are heavily diluted for use. Not the case with 777.
Published photographs made with this developer look very, very nice and do seem to have a certain glow. But I'm not sure that this couldn't be done with another developer.
One can search for what we don't know or use that which we do know.
And, we do already know that Edwal-12 and some others do produce a similar look.
The formula which Ed published at unblinking eye was at the time admitted to be at best, a guess, and at the time none of use knew what was the fate of BPI nor that they would still be around 7 hours not to mention, 7 years, later. Since it is easily obtainable, stick with the BPI compound. Getting PPD is not only not that easy, in small quantities it can be relatively expensive.
777 does contain Glycin, the use of an alternative naming convention may provide BPI with plausible deny-ability, but what they make contains what we call Glycin. A good thing.
Is 777 closer to XTOL
That question is inverted, both in time and logic.
There are so many remarkable developers easily available each with very special capabilities, I have yet to find a reason for Xtol or even HC-110. Neither are a compelling improvement on ID-11, Rodinal or a host of others. There have been few, very few, advances in film developers over the 1930-1970 halcyon days just marketing opportunities. Not just developers. I find little use for t-grain films either. They contradict the strengths of B&W. Grain can be a creative element. I am equally comfortable with a 6x6 or 4x5 as I am with 35mm. I don't shoot weddings nor use direct on camera flash and burning out big white dresses is of no concern. I purely do not want a B&W film which replicates the response of a color negative film. I rarely use those either. When I do a project in B&W I usually have between 10 and 50 rolls (120 or 35mm) to process at a time. A one shot developer makes no sense in that case. It is either a test session and/or very rare that I have less than 5 rolls of 120 to develop and a big deep tank is easier and better understood than even my Jobo ATL. The JOBO is for E-6.
The biggest selling point for 777 in the old days was to produce the same negative on Monday morning when NY loft buildings were unheated at night and as you did on Thursday when the developer may be 15F warmer. 777 works just fine at 65F as it does at 85F and it will produce identical results. You just cannot be at all timid about agitation regardless the temperture.
777 is not the best choice for more than a mild push of film speed. It can be done, that's for sure, but there are more specialized developers better suited for that use. It works great if you wish to pull the speed or intentionally overexpose and develop normally. The highlights resist blocking up.
Why store the replenisher in a tank instead of a bottle? Keep the air to a minimum, it lasts a very long time and you use very little.
Give it a try with or without the rubber gloves.
Fred
