How to use autophen in lab setting

[MingMingPhoto]

hi guys. the wonderful people of this forum recently introduced me to the wonderful developer that is autophen.

2 questions

question 1

I still plan on using id68 on my personal work however I'd like to use autophen for lab developing since it looks to be a good general fine grain developer and apparently all development with this developer is 10 min at 20 degrees celsius.

I haven't made time to see if there is math behind it, but on the massive developing chart digital truth processing phone application there is a feature where you can put the temperature of your developer and it will show you an adjusted time to develop your film to get the same results as if you developed at the intended 20 degrees celsius.


since autophen is not in that app I'm wonderign if anyone can tell me if there is a mathematical application to figuring out these time adjustments? this way I can develop using autophen and I don't have to wait for things to heat up or cool down.

question 2

http://www.lostlabours.co.uk/photography/formulae/developers/devPQ-ID11.htm

on his website he shows two methods of repleishment. what is the differnce between both methods?

bonus question, 100 points extra credit

I'm using a filmomat rotational machine to develop out black and white film. any relevant thoughts when it comes to replenishment or developing with autophen in general?

thnk you!

 

[Doremus Scudder]

https://www.ilfordphoto.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Temperature-compensation-chart.pdf

Works generally for all developers.

Doremus

 

[MingMingPhoto]

https://www.ilfordphoto.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Temperature-compensation-chart.pdf

Works generally for all developers.

Doremus

thank you!

 

[Keith Tapscott.]

hi guys. the wonderful people of this forum recently introduced me to the wonderful developer that is autophen.



question

http://www.lostlabours.co.uk/photography/formulae/developers/devPQ-ID11.htm

on his website he shows two methods of repleishment. what is the differnce between both methods?

One is for flood/bleed replenishment and the more concentrated replenisher is for topping up.

 

[Lachlan Young]

I still plan on using id68 on my personal work however I'd like to use autophen for lab developing

Why?

You seem to have not quite caught on to why Ilford might have shifted from Autophen to Microphen/ ID-68 and thence to DD. Once you have done so, you might be ready to begin to make decisions about running replenished development systems. Otherwise, all you're doing is insisting on remaking a whole lot of pointless problems & work for yourself for nil - or less than nil - qualitative gain. If Autophen was genuinely 'better' Ilford would not have stopped making it.

and apparently all development with this developer is 10 min at 20 degrees celsius.

Maybe within the qualitative contexts and emulsions that went through industrial photofinishing in the early 1950s.

But if you knew what you were doing process-control-wise, you would know that with modern mainstream developers many films can be developed together for the same time and deliver more than adequately close (often closer than many home-developer-tasters will ever manage) results to the aim contrast - just respect what the margins of error are.

In all seriousness, just do the work rather than asking people to be unpaid consultants for your metaphysical doubts that are grounded in a lack of knowledge about the basic mechanics of replenished developer formulae. Don't treat the cookbooks as reliable resources.

 

[john_s]

I suppose one reason for Autophen's disappearance is the disappearance of the photofinishers of the 1950s. I still have negatives and contact prints from the 1950s, taken with cameras that were little more than boxcameras, in envelopes from the photofinisher. The negatives are dense and rather low in contrast, and the prints are rather low in contrast. They don't look like what the OP will be seeking in the 21st century I'm sure.

Having said that, Autophen is likely to be an ok developer, one of the hundreds from which we can choose.

 

[Lachlan Young]

I suppose one reason for Autophen's disappearance is the disappearance of the photofinishers of the 1950s. I still have negatives and contact prints from the 1950s, taken with cameras that were little more than boxcameras, in envelopes from the photofinisher. The negatives are dense and rather low in contrast, and the prints are rather low in contrast. They don't look like what the OP will be seeking in the 21st century I'm sure.

Having said that, Autophen is likely to be an ok developer, one of the hundreds from which we can choose.

Autophen was effectively one of the first workable and commercialised PQ developers that were able to slot in for ID-11/ D-76 and the like.

ID-68/ Microphen are geared towards maximising Phenidone's benefits - especially any potential speed boost (and what turned out to be higher sharpness - but with a granularity cost vis-a-vis ID-11 - the industry as a whole became rather interested in properties that PQ developers have/ retain that MQ loses upon the addition of HQ to metol only developers) - while DD attempts to better square the speed/ granularity/ sharpness relationship - and is replenisher + starter rather than tank solution + replenisher.