Home made devs essential ??(and D23!)

Tom Stanworth · Apr 19, 2006

Hi,

I dont know if I am cursed or typical. I settle on APX100 in all formats and it is withdrawn in 5x4 with other formats looking shaky (now gone)...then settle on FP4+ and Hp5+ in all formats and then Ilford has its wobble (just as getting to know DDX...) and products are absent from shelves. I flirt with Efke and then go back to Ilford once products are back and available again. I settle on Pyrocat HD and the paterson devs (as they performed so well and seemed good value as well as ubiquitous) and now paterson has folded and supply is uncertain and for now, largely unavailable.

This is very tiring not least because I had only a very small stock of Aculux 2 and more film yet to develop than it can manage! Therefore I have to find a new developer yet again. This combined with my travels and the lack of choice in Spain has meant I am in a right pickle. As much as I love pyrocat HD it is not for every occassion and water quality sensitivity of such devs mean that they are perhaps not the best to travel with (without sourcing distilled water etc)

I am now wondering whether the time has come to switch all developing to home mixed devs as the availability of devs (and film, but that is unavoidable) has become so unpredictable? Anyone asking the same question?

As I am still between homes I am pondering swithing back to ID11/D76 (which I have not used for ages) because if I then have to go to their home brewed variants I should be able to hit the ground running and should expect the same look?

I have seen a number of home made 'regular devs' such as d76/ID11 variants, Xtol clones and of course the venerable D23, but am a bit lost. How close are these home made versions to the Ilford/Kodak packaged versions? If I mix my own D76 will it give the same speed, the same dev time and grain as the branded ones (or so close as not to matter), ditto 'Xtol clones' and Xtol?

D23 looks incredibly simple to make up, but very few people seem to use it. I gather that used 1+1 it offers d76 like speed and fair acutance along with fine grain? It sounds rather like perceptol, but obviously is not as the formulae are different - with what effect?

Anyone got a tip for a common commercial product which can be reproduced exactly at home? This would be the ideal as while I dont have a darkroom or even a home......weighing out chems is not an option! I just want to start using something that I KNOW cannot be taken away from me as long as I am prepared to then make it myself.
Rgds,

Tom

Nick Zentena · Apr 19, 2006

I thought everybody used D-23? Do heretics remain outside the fold?

Kodak needs to make sure that the products they make can be packaged and put on the shelf. You don't have that worry when you mix yourself. So you don't need to add things that Kodak needs. You mix D-23 you disolve the metol first. That avoids the worry about metol and sodium sulfite not disolving together.

Keith Tapscott. · Apr 19, 2006

Tom Stanworth said:
Hi,

I dont know if I am cursed or typical. I settle on APX100 in all formats and it is withdrawn in 5x4 with other formats looking shaky (now gone)...then settle on FP4+ and Hp5+ in all formats and then Ilford has its wobble (just as getting to know DDX...) and products are absent from shelves. I flirt with Efke and then go back to Ilford once products are back and available again. I settle on Pyrocat HD and the paterson devs (as they performed so well and seemed good value as well as ubiquitous) and now paterson has folded and supply is uncertain and for now, largely unavailable.

This is very tiring not least because I had only a very small stock of Aculux 2 and more film yet to develop than it can manage! Therefore I have to find a new developer yet again. This combined with my travels and the lack of choice in Spain has meant I am in a right pickle. As much as I love pyrocat HD it is not for every occassion and water quality sensitivity of such devs mean that they are perhaps not the best to travel with (without sourcing distilled water etc)

I am now wondering whether the time has come to switch all developing to home mixed devs as the availability of devs (and film, but that is unavoidable) has become so unpredictable? Anyone asking the same question?

As I am still between homes I am pondering swithing back to ID11/D76 (which I have not used for ages) because if I then have to go to their home brewed variants I should be able to hit the ground running and should expect the same look?

I have seen a number of home made 'regular devs' such as d76/ID11 variants, Xtol clones and of course the venerable D23, but am a bit lost. How close are these home made versions to the Ilford/Kodak packaged versions? If I mix my own D76 will it give the same speed, the same dev time and grain as the branded ones (or so close as not to matter), ditto 'Xtol clones' and Xtol?

D23 looks incredibly simple to make up, but very few people seem to use it. I gather that used 1+1 it offers d76 like speed and fair acutance along with fine grain? It sounds rather like perceptol, but obviously is not as the formulae are different - with what effect?

Anyone got a tip for a common commercial product which can be reproduced exactly at home? This would be the ideal as while I dont have a darkroom or even a home......weighing out chems is not an option! I just want to start using something that I KNOW cannot be taken away from me as long as I am prepared to then make it myself.
Rgds,

Tom

Ilford FP4 Plus and HP5 Plus are very popular films and you should be able to buy these at your local dealer. D-76 and ID11 is also very popular along with DD-X and you shouldn`t find them difficult to buy. I`m not sure if it`s worth making your own D-76/ID11. Perceptol and Microdol-X can be considered as related to D-23 but formulated to yield extra fine grain at a small loss of speed.
There was an article in the `Amateur Photographer` magazine last year by Geoffrey Crawley about home brewed film developers including D-23 along with suggested starting point times for Agfa, Fuji, Ilford and Kodak films for stock solution, 1+1 and 1+3 dilutions. Let me know if you`re interested.

abeku · Apr 19, 2006

Keith Tapscott. said:
There was an article in the `Amateur Photographer` magazine last year by Geoffrey Crawley about home brewed film developers including D-23 along with suggested starting point times for Agfa, Fuji, Ilford and Kodak films for stock solution, 1+1 and 1+3 dilutions. Let me know if you`re interested.

I would be interrested, please.

gainer · Apr 19, 2006

D-23 is about as simple as it gets, and almost as effective as it gets. It can be reliably made without weighing. 2 teaspoons of metol and 4 tablespoons of sodium sulfite in a quart of water does the trick. It can be used as a 2-bath developer with a borax or carbonate solution as the second bath. If you have carbonate, metol and ascorbic acid, you can mix 1 teaspoon of carbonate, 1/2 teaspoon of ascorbic acid crystals and 1/8 teaspoon of metol in a quart of water. No sulfite required.

titrisol · Apr 19, 2006

Tom, check also the recipe sections of APUG
Lots of good infor there.... including D23, D76, etc.

Keith Tapscott. · Apr 19, 2006

gainer said:
D-23 is about as simple as it gets, and almost as effective as it gets. It can be reliably made without weighing. 2 teaspoons of metol and 4 tablespoons of sodium sulfite in a quart of water does the trick. It can be used as a 2-bath developer with a borax or carbonate solution as the second bath. If you have carbonate, metol and ascorbic acid, you can mix 1 teaspoon of carbonate, 1/2 teaspoon of ascorbic acid crystals and 1/8 teaspoon of metol in a quart of water. No sulfite required.

Hello Gainer,
Is the Ascorbic acid, L-Acorbic acid or Sodium isoascorbate?

gainer · Apr 19, 2006

Keith Tapscott. said:
Hello Gainer,
Is the Ascorbic acid, L-Acorbic acid or Sodium isoascorbate?

You can use Vitamin C which is the L-ascorbic acid, erythorbic acid, which is the D-ascorbic acid (AKA isoascorbic acid). You can use the sodium or potassium salts of these if you back off on the carbonate a little and use a little more of the ascorbate. Part of the function of the carbonate is to form the ascorbate. Do not use the calcium salt, sometimes called Ester C. It will react with sodium carbonate to make limestone. Even when I have rocks in my head, I don't want them in my developer. Stomach acid will dissolve limestone, but I don't want that in my developer either.

The recipe I gave is what I call an 8 minute developer. 8 minutes at 70 F is a good starting point for most films, with agitation every minute. I just tested the recipe on strips of HP5+ and Arista II 100, and 8 minutes gave about normal contrast.

Tom Stanworth · Apr 19, 2006

I know I can get a fair varierty of film and devs, with ease. However the issue for me has been that whenever I get really settled on something it is the one that gets pulled, if only temporarily, but for long enough to throw a spanner in the works - Before I started with pyrocat I had settled on Exactol Lux for everything but sadly Barry T passed away shortly afterwards and supply dried up. I have been unlucky I know. This is why I have tried to get to know a reasonable spread of films from a number of manufacturers (TriX,HP5+,Neopan 400 for the fast films and FP4+ along with a little acros and Delta 100 for the slow). This way I can have a reserve film in each speed if you like. I have also settled on pyrocat HD but need something non-staining too which I can make myself should I have to. The Xtol clones sound interesting as Xtol is a reasonably high speed all round developer and it looks from the research I have done on the net that times and film speeds are interchangeable-or very close. This way I can get to know Xtol and play about with the DIY when I have the darkroom back and if and when Xtol disappears, I will be able to seamlessly move to something I can make at home....or buy Fomadon or other carbon copy variants of it. This is of course another major benefot if D76 and ID11. They are from different manufacturers but to all intents and purposes identical. I cannot think of any other two devs from different manufacturers which are so identical and also can be made at home without great fuss. I think I am answering my own question here....

Tom

gainer · Apr 19, 2006

Before you dismiss the very simple metol-ascorbic acid-carbonate developer, give it a try. It's better than you might think, and can be mixed in a few minutes. A quart or liter of it will easily do 4 standard rolls of film. Triple the strength and use it for paper. The only ingredient that you would have to get from a photo chemical supplier is the metol, and a pound will last for years.

Allen Friday · Apr 20, 2006

Right now you can buy D76 and Id-11 just about everywhere. They are the standards by which all other developers are measured and all films that come out are tested to work well in these developers. You have two different companies making basically the same brew. If you want to hedge your bets, they seem the best choice. What is the likelyhood that both companies will pull them? Since they are the most popular developers worldwide, they should be the last to go. Once you have your darkroom up and running, you can mix them yourself. Although given their popularity, 3rd party vendors will likely step in to replace them in pre-mixed form. For example, Photographer's Formulary carries a d-76 mix.

Donald Miller · Apr 20, 2006

Tom, I am a little confused. I took it from your post that you have settled on your film developer (pyrocat) and that you were looking for a paper developer. Yet some of the posts indicate developing film. I gather that you are mixing Pyrocat so I wonder why you would hesitate mixing your own paper developer.

Regardless, I have started mixing D72 as an alternative to Zone VI which I liked a lot and Dektol which D72 is supposed to emulate. In my experience it seems to do that with no problem.

Allen Friday · Apr 20, 2006

Donald,

I think you need to re-read the post. He clearly states, "I am pondering swithing back to ID11/D76." In the next paragraph he talks of xtol and d23 home brews. Where do you get he is talking about paper developers from that?

Tom Stanworth · Apr 20, 2006

Donald,

Truth is I am not that fussy with paper devs and think most standard devs produce great results, esp as a dip in selenium tend to pull results together somewhat. As little testing is required (you get no second chance developing negs) I have no need to make my own paper devs other than for fun or a specific look. As for Pyrocat, I cannot make it right now as I am between homes so am looking for a ready made branded non-staining dev that is easy to get hold of, which is unlikely to diappear and if it does, is easy to make at home in identical form. This way, I should never get messed about again and left with tonnes of film to dev and no familiar developer available to use! I fully intend to rely heavily upon pyrocat HD, but also want a non-staining dev that is more suitable for the varied and unpredicatable water qualities one encounters on the hoof. Also, pyrocat is in my experience a little short on speed and can be quite grainy with\ some films in smaller formats, but of course produces great acutance. It is certainly not a good choice for 35mm HP5 or so as grain is not small (thoa cutance with 645 HP5 is incredible) and and it can be tough to generate good contrast. It is superb on FP4+ even in 645 producing fine grain and excellent acutance, but I have yet to try it on 35mm FP4+/TriX. I suspect ID11/Xtol to be the better bet here.

Packets of power dev also make more sense when travelling....believe it or not I could not get ID11 or D76 in Spain and had to run trials on Tmax dev 1+7 with FP4+ and APX100.

As soon as I have a house again I will make a huge batch of pyrocat HD and then start experimenting with ID11/D76 and Xtol Dev and their clones.

Tom

nworth · Apr 20, 2006

D-23 is very simple, very reliable, and very good. It produces quite different results than D-76/ID-11, however. It has more of a compensating effect, and this combined with the longer developing times produce a more pronounced Mackie line and acutance effect. You may or may not like it better, depending on your style and on the subject. Grain is about the same as D-76 straight. Shaprness (aside from the Mackie line) may be a bit less. For greater sharpness and more compensating effect, you can dilute it 1+3 and double (more or less) the developing time. Be aware, however, that D-23 is very sensitive to changes in pH. Mix it carefully, and use distilled water if you have any doubts about your water supply.

titrisol · Apr 20, 2006

Feeling deja-vu when asking this question
phenidone-carbonate-ascorbic can also be used right?
how to replace the methol with phenidone (1% solution)?

gainer said:
Before you dismiss the very simple metol-ascorbic acid-carbonate developer, give it a try. It's better than you might think, and can be mixed in a few minutes. A quart or liter of it will easily do 4 standard rolls of film. Triple the strength and use it for paper. The only ingredient that you would have to get from a photo chemical supplier is the metol, and a pound will last for years.

gainer · Apr 20, 2006

titrisol said:
Feeling deja-vu when asking this question
phenidone-carbonate-ascorbic can also be used right?
how to replace the methol with phenidone (1% solution)?

I tend to forget such things. However, it is recorded at www.unblinkingeye.com in the article "Non-chromogenic Antiscorbutic Developers for Black and White." in greater detail than you probably need.

srs5694 · Apr 20, 2006

titrisol said:
Feeling deja-vu when asking this question
phenidone-carbonate-ascorbic can also be used right?
how to replace the methol with phenidone (1% solution)?

I've never used it, but I've heard of a simple phenidone/carbonate/ascorbic acid formula:

phenidone: 0.04g
ascorbic acid: 4g
sodium carbonate: 6g
water to make: 1l

Use this undiluted, and immediately -- this stuff probably won't last long, since it's got no preservative. Substitute an appropriate amount of phenidone solution if you've got it in that form. If you change the ratios a bit and mix the phenidone and ascorbic acid together in propylene glycol (you'll need to heat the glycol to ~80C to dissolve the ingredients in reasonable time), you end up with Pat Gainer's PC-Glycol:

Stock A:
ascorbic acid: 10g
phenidone: 0.25g
propylene glycol to make: 100ml

Stock B:
sodium carbonate, anhydrous: 15g
water to make: 100ml

I've used this with great success. I mix it 1+1+48 (A+B+water) and develop at 5-15% over XTOL times, depending on the film. You can also experiment with different Stock B solutions if you like. The stuff keeps very well; I mixed my first batch almost a year ago and it's still going strong.

As a general rule of thumb, the substitution ratio for phenidone/metol is 1:10 -- 1g of phenidone for 10g of metol. (Of course, in batches of this size, you're likely to be using smaller quantities than this, but the ratio still holds.)

BradS · Apr 20, 2006

gainer said:
D-23 is about as simple as it gets, and almost as effective as it gets. It can be reliably made without weighing. 2 teaspoons of metol and 4 tablespoons of sodium sulfite in a quart of water does the trick. It can be used as a 2-bath developer with a borax or carbonate solution as the second bath. If you have carbonate, metol and ascorbic acid, you can mix 1 teaspoon of carbonate, 1/2 teaspoon of ascorbic acid crystals and 1/8 teaspoon of metol in a quart of water. No sulfite required.

WOW! No scales...and, a compensating dev that tames TMAX-100.

I think you just made a convert of me. Thanks.

waynecrider · Apr 20, 2006

BradS said:
WOW! No scales...and, a compensating dev that tames TMAX-100.

I think you just made a convert of me. Thanks.

Let me know how you make out Brad. I've 3x4 Tmax coming in and would love a traveling developer that I could mix as needed.

lowellh · Apr 20, 2006

In my opinion, the fun of photography is supposed to be in the ART! not the stress of looking for fresh raw materials, keeping them on the shelf, properly measuring and mixing them and then trying to deal with the "rocks and fines" that don't go into solution. I think those things are better left to the "professionals;" OBW, we make chemistry with the best science and raw materials available. I will provide samples.Contact me at askus@claytonchem.com

Paddy · Apr 20, 2006

gainer said:
D-23 is about as simple as it gets, and almost as effective as it gets.

Besides Patrick's support for D-23, I was also intrigued by the D-23 "Total Development" comments of Jim Noel found on the current "Stand & Semi-stand" thread. I'm wondering if the "ripe vat" approach is viable and/or practicable for a home user, and if so what kind of minimum liquid volume would be needed.

gainer · Apr 20, 2006

srs5694 said:
I've never used it, but I've heard of a simple phenidone/carbonate/ascorbic acid formula:

phenidone: 0.04g
ascorbic acid: 4g
sodium carbonate: 6g
water to make: 1l

Use this undiluted, and immediately -- this stuff probably won't last long, since it's got no preservative.

It's not all that bad. I just tested some that was at least 4 hours old. I have in past tested stuff that stood overnight. The above formula is about twice as strong as it needs to be, as you will find out when you use it.

I do recommend the use of the glycol stock solution, but you can make it a single solution stock if you use triethanolamine (TEA) as the solvent. you can use 100 grams of ascorbic or erythorbic acid and 2.5 grams of phenidone powder to make a liter of stock. This is called PC-TEA and you can find a number of references to its use. When mixing it, I have found that making a paste with the ascorbic acid and a small amount of TEA, then adding just a small amount of water and heating to about drinking temperature will make it much easier to dissolve when you add the TEA to make a liter. Don't test it with the tongue. It's not particularly poisonous, but you wouldn't like the taste.

gainer · Apr 20, 2006

lowellh said:
In my opinion, the fun of photography is supposed to be in the ART! not the stress of looking for fresh raw materials, keeping them on the shelf, properly measuring and mixing them and then trying to deal with the "rocks and fines" that don't go into solution. I think those things are better left to the "professionals;" OBW, we make chemistry with the best science and raw materials available. I will provide samples.Contact me at askus@claytonchem.com

Well, you have to admit that one who is doing it for the fun might have even more fun if the developer could be mixed in about as much time as it takes to dilute a concentrate for about 50 cents a gallon, and give reliably good results. Now, if you have customers who are going to pay for your fun as well as your materials, then you can advertise "Nothing but the best processes and materials are used in our product" and charge extra.

Tom Stanworth · Apr 20, 2006

gainer said:
Well, you have to admit that one who is doing it for the fun might have even more fun if the developer could be mixed in about as much time as it takes to dilute a concentrate for about 50 cents a gallon, and give reliably good results. Now, if you have customers who are going to pay for your fun as well as your materials, then you can advertise "Nothing but the best processes and materials are used in our product" and charge extra.

Lowellh,

The most fun of all comes from not completely screwing up images of a lifetime ( such as my unrepeatable experiences here in Afgghanistan). The screwing up bit is all to easily achieved if chopping and changing all the time becos you dont have a constant exposure and developent plan which is what I am trying to nail here. Products being removed left right an centre make things very tough if, as I have, you get familiar with something, go away, wait 6-12 months and then shoot 6 months of film and find your devs are not available any more!!!!!! Art need not be a product of random chance. If it is random, whose art is it? Exposure and devlopement needs to be understood whatever your view on the subect otherwise it aint your art but the product of chance. I dont remember any of the master painters randomly mixing paints by blindfold and applying them without any knowledge of which colour or shade was what! I painter can look at his palette. A photographer has bit more work to do technically othersise what he wants is not what he gets!

Tom

Home made devs essential ??(and D23!)

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency