Harvey's Panthermic 777 developer made again

[removed account4]

ho jerry
its tricky to find
you go to articles first then do the search under
" remembering 777 "

http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/Harvey/harvey.html

 

[Gerald C Koch]

ho jerry
its tricky to find
you go to articles first then do the search under
" remembering 777 "

http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/Harvey/harvey.html

Thanks for the link. Suddenly the article seemed to disappear. I am sure that anyone reading this thread would also interested in reading this article.

A word of caution about this developer and similar ones mentioned in the article. The developer uses p-phenylenediamine. Nitrile rubber gloves should always be used when working with this chemical as it can cause a severe contact dermatitis in sensitive individuals. It can also cause cross sensitization to other developing agents such as Metol and the color developing agents. Any spills should also be thoroughly cleaned up.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

I always found the mixing instructions for this hyped up stuff odd. The recommendation was to mix the "developing agent" part of the dry mix in boiling or near-boiling water.

Quoting from the unblinkingeye article, "It was hard to mix, and once mixed it was a borderline suspension that if you had never seen it before seemed like it was not properly mixed." This indicates to me the presence of the developing agent Glycin which is only sparing soluble in water at the pH of this developer. Glycin consists of fine scale like crystals which would given a silvery sheen to the mixed developer.

 

[c6h6o3]

This indicates to me the presence of the developing agent Glycin which is only sparing soluble in water at the pH of this developer.

Bluegrass swears up and down that there is no glycin in 777, but it certainly behaves like there is. The closest developer to it that I've ever used is FX-2, which we know to contain glycin. Same smoothness, compensating behavior, long development times. When I run out of 777, if Bluegrass hasn't made any more I'll switch to FX-2.

 

[c6h6o3]

While it might not be Germain's or Edwal 12, it is almost certainly some sort of PPD-Glycin-sulfite thing based on the Sease formulas, perhaps with an additional developing agent and/or alkali.

Based on everything people say it is reputed to be a fine grain developer. In that respect I wouldn't suggest FX-2 as a replacement. Glycin would be the only similarity as FX-2 is a low- sulfite "acutance" formula.

It would be interesting to do some objective sensitometry on this "777" stuff. Whether or not it is speed-losing could tell us something.

Thanks for the tip. When I want fine grained smoothness and glowing skin tones I use Harvey's. For maximum accutance I use ABC pyro.

I rate all films at half box speed when developing in 777. My standard development time for TMY is 16 minutes at 72°F.

 

[JLP]

As Jim, I also rate my film at half box speed when I use 777. It just about the most speed loosing developer I have tried.

16 minutes for TMY is a long time, are you developing for alternative printing?

 

[Gerald C Koch]

If anyone is interested Glafkides has a chapter dedicated to identifying the common developing agents.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

Bluegrass swears up and down that there is no glycin in 777

Methinks Bluegrass doth protest too much. Remember they keep saying that they are about to start producing again.

 

[c6h6o3]

16 minutes for TMY is a long time, are you developing for alternative printing?

Azo

 

[JLP]

Thanks Jim..

 

[Roger Pellegrini]

Harvey's Panthermic 777

Harvey's Panthermic 777 developer is a favorite of mine for certain films that i use, it is a developer that is a little difficult to get and rumors of lately have been that it is no longer made.
The good news is that it is close to being available again. I just got off the phone with Lori from Bluegrass Packaging who confirmed that they are close.

If you have used the 777 in the past and want to get more or, if you are curious and want to try for the first time, email lori@bluegrasspackaging.com and let her know how much you are interested in buying.
If enough is showing an interest it might speed up the availability.

I currently have enough for years to come but will buy more to help make it available again.

If unfamiliar with this replenishment type developer make a google search and there will be a few hits.
Panthermic 777 is a long lasting developer, my current 1 gallon jug was mixed two and a half year ago and still going strong.

Any word on whether they will be making 777. I too will buy a lot just to make it happen.

 

[Nokton48]

I called last week and it was out of stock. The guy told me to call back at the end of January, they may have some more then.

 

[Roger Pellegrini]

Oh geesh. I really want to buy this stuff. I sure hope they make another batch.

 

[StephenT]

So how did Bluegrass Packaging get the formula? I seem to recall that Harvey's estate was auctioned off. Kind of a shame what happens to peoples "stuff" when they "twinkle up." I think disrespecting their "stuff" disrespects the person. But, it is what it is. Sadly. Well, that's off topic. Probably should be moved to the metaphysical forum.

 

[Patrick Robert James]

I used Defender 777 from Bluegrass quite a bit a few years ago. I stopped using it because it was a pain to mix and keep being that availability was at the whim of Bluegrass' decision whether or not they wanted to go through the trouble of making it. In the time since the closest thing I have used to it was Edwal 10 but the grain was a little larger. Edwal 12 is similar too, but much more active. Edwal 12 tends to cook the highlights a little more than 777. Glycin is definitely the critical agent in 777 as far as the "look" goes even though Bluegrass says not. If you like 777 you should give Edwal 10 a go. I replenished it and it worked well. I don't have any direct comparisons, but it is pretty close tonality wise. I guess you would just have to take my word for it or try it yourself. Edwal 10 is easy to make. My guess is that Defender 777 uses one of the older, rather obscure developing agents that isn't readily available which is why it isn't made too often, though that is just conjecture on my part. It is impossible to tell though since Bluegrass isn't sayin".... There is definitely some kind of glycin-ish/ppd-ish thing going on though.

One thing to note is PPD does not seem to be available at Photographer's Formulary right now. About a month ago I went to their site to order chems and it was absent. It still is unless I am missing something. It would be quite a loss if they aren't going to make it anymore. Edwal 12 is one of my favorite developers. I have been meaning to email them but haven't. If they aren't making it anymore it would be a loss.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

Paraphenylenediamine is a developing agent but a rather slow acting one. It's use in developers is mainly as a silver halide solvent to achieve fine grain. It can also cause severe allergic reactions and is a suspected carcinogen. Several manufactures of fine grain developers now substitute one of the color developing agents related to PPD for example CD-1. The color developing agents are more stable than the parent PPD.

 

[Roger Pellegrini]

Harvey's Panthermic 777

Just spoke to Blue Grass Packaging. They seemed eager to take new orders and asked that I email them with my request. Lori is no longer at the company. The new contact is

ellen@bluegrasspackaging.com
3651 Collins Lane
Louisville, KY 40245
T: (502) 425-6442

 

[Roger Pellegrini]

Oh... wow, that was quite a string of derails there.
This is very exciting news, and I'll have to write Lori later today.

It seems every so often there's an argument over whether it really lived up to the hype, and some accusations of silver bullet hunting, but I think it's usually better to have more options than less. Maybe now someone will be able to produce some good, objective examples of its behavior.

JLP, how much do you think is a "good supply"? What kind of volume are you running through that batch? I think I remember reading somewhere that BPI had a 5-gallon minimum the last time it was available.

I use three gallon tanks so I would probably buy at least 12 gallons in order to ensure future supply. As mentioned earlier, the new contact at BlueGrass (I spoke to them today is Ellen.

ellen@bluegrasspackaging.com
3651 Collins Lane
Louisville, KY 40245
T: (502) 425-6442

 

[Roger Pellegrini]

I have never use the products from Bluegrass, yet I have read that they do have a good product. The problem that I am having with them is all the drama that surrounds them.

If they are close, why would they start up a batch of Harvey's 777, just because there are enough buyers. Because from what I have seen from surfing the net, is that there are a lot of buyers, but they are tired of this on again, off again affair with Bluegrass. They either make it or they do not.

Well that's all I have to say.

#1 Son

I agree. I have been told by Bluegrass that they made a batch but still need to package it up. That was two months ago.

 

[Richard Man]

After restarting shooting B&W in 2017 (100+ rolls of 35mm and 120!), I have now gotten another batch of Bluegrass Harvey 777 going. Love that stuff.

Anyone happens to have starting timing for Delta 3200 @Iso 1600 in Harvey 777?

Here's Acros 100 in Harvey 777. 3 second exposure fisheye portrait, breaking all the rules ;-) (Arsat 30mm on the Hasselblad 203FE)

 

[Nokton48]

I've been told it's in stock, and now available in liquid or granular.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

The headline in my first post is inacurate stating that it is made again admitted but, it got the attention from a few readers.

I don't see any inacuracies in the rest of the post.

More than just the initial post. Bluegrass Packaging has a history of being a reluctant source. Can't really blame them as the demand for the developer is very small. After four years I think all hope is gone.

 

[Pixophrenic]

the manufacturers have told me the recipe on that website is ' waaayyy off "

Have you asked if the component names were at least the same as on the web site. i.e. is it a variant of Edwal 12 or still way off?

 

[removed account4]

they would not reveal the ingredients and said their guess was completely wrong
its been a long time but from what i remember from the conversation i think she even laughed.

 

[Patrick Robert James]

I'd imagine that they would have to produce a MSDS if someone asked who bought it. Isn't that the law?