Very good subject and print. I understand that P. Formulary
is our only source for Glycin and that they only ship it freshly
compounded. How often they manufacture I couldn't say but
expect back-orders must meet a minimum. Dan
Equal results but no contrast reducing
waterbath effect with the 130...Shawn
Does Ansco 130 respond to a water bath?
What kind of times in the developer at 1:1 and 1:2??.EvanI got it to work in a water bath at 1:1 and 1:2. Its not quite as strong as amidol but I could see it continue to develop in the water for a good 30-45 seconds.
In standard development procedure, with Ansco 130, 1:1, I give 3 minutes.
What kind of times in the developer at 1:1 and 1:2??.Evan
Thanks Alex, I agree but this is a good starting point. I have many negatives made in an old grove of oak trees on a wonderful foggy day, some of the best I made last year. The recipe I posted above gives a very nice rendition of the fog and nice tones on the Warmtone but one is always looking for better...ECAbout 40-45 seconds in the developer Evan. Then another 45 seconds in the water bath, for 90 seconds total. I think one has to work these times out based upon the paper being used. I left the paper in the developer long enough to start showing strong low values.
Don't laugh at me but I substitute 30cc 1% benzotriazole for the bromide (I make 2L of stock) dilute 1+1 and print on Ilford Warmtone FB. It produces a lovely steely color in the print. This mix seems to turn less brown with time..Evan Clarke
I imagine it was you who had mentioned this some time ago. I tried it at the following: (a paste from my spreadsheet, hopefully the formatting won't scramble too badly).
Water at 125°F 750 ml
Metol 2.2 g
Sodium Sulfite 50 g
Hydroquinone 11 g
Sodium Carbonate 80 g
Benzotriazole 1% 15 ml
Glycin 11 g
Water to make 1000 ml
I had a very large supply of WT FB Ilford that had been uninspiring to use. This version of 130 really brought it to life with bold, velvety blacks that still conveyed shadow detail well. It's become my favorite combination. Skin tones seem especially well depicted, too. It just seems to pull everything out of the paper so well.
Yes, It is a good combination and the best thing is that it doesn't go brown in KRST...Evan Clarke
P.S. I like it best a 1+3...EC
Ansco 130 is on the list of cold tone developers that I have and it is considerably colder than say 135. I ran pretty extensive tests with 130 under a very well known darkroom master and concluded 130 does not produce a better black than your regular developers. I was looking for it to becasue of all the myths about it but I could not back it up with results. As far as the other attributes you'de have to look at my book of test prints in hand there are way too many to scan.
Coincidentally, just last night I was poking around the internet on Ansco 130 and glycin. Silvergrain says that glycine is just an old fashioned precursor molecule on the road to Metol!
http://silvergrain.org/wiki/Glycin
"Glycin once was a popular developing agent, and for this reason, it's described with very favorable words in old literature. They are also blindly cut and pasted in some darkroom cookbook literatures. However, the reality is that glycin disappeared from mainstream because Metol was superior developing agent. Glycin is "chemically weakened Metol." At least in early age of Metol production, Metol was manufactured from glycin by decarboxylation (removal of -COOH at the right end of the picture above). That is, they used to make Metol out of glycin because of Metol's superiority. (In that sense, it is probably better to call Metol a "chemically disinhibited glycin.") That is, the photographic characteristics of glycin and Metol can be matched rather easily by adjusting the quantity, pH and other usual variables of developer formulation. MQ developers with different M-to-Q ratios and different pH could cover a very wide range of developer needs.
Therefore, using glycin is literally reinventing inferior wheels."
Note: I've never used glycin. I'm only reporting this interesting chemistry point of view.
Coincidentally, just last night I was poking around the internet on Ansco 130 and glycin. Silvergrain says that glycine is just an old fashioned precursor molecule on the road to Metol!
http://silvergrain.org/wiki/Glycin
"Glycin once was a popular developing agent, and for this reason, it's described with very favorable words in old literature. They are also blindly cut and pasted in some darkroom cookbook literatures. However, the reality is that glycin disappeared from mainstream because Metol was superior developing agent. Glycin is "chemically weakened Metol." At least in early age of Metol production, Metol was manufactured from glycin by decarboxylation (removal of -COOH at the right end of the picture above). That is, they used to make Metol out of glycin because of Metol's superiority. (In that sense, it is probably better to call Metol a "chemically disinhibited glycin.") That is, the photographic characteristics of glycin and Metol can be matched rather easily by adjusting the quantity, pH and other usual variables of developer formulation. MQ developers with different M-to-Q ratios and different pH could cover a very wide range of developer needs.
Therefore, using glycin is literally reinventing inferior wheels."
Note: I've never used glycin. I'm only reporting this interesting chemistry point of view.
More like a Suzuki opinion.
My hands-on experience with Agfa 8, Crawley's FX-2 and Ansco 130 disagrees with Suzuki's Glycin opinion.
That was written by Suzuki and I challenged him on it a couple years ago. The article on Wikipedia is written to promote his products, so its far more subjective than it is objective. His definition of "obsolete" was tailored to his agenda.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?