Ilfosol S is too fast!

[arigram]

I use Ilford PanF+ in 120 in combination with Ilfosol-S and I really, really like the results. I haven't used another film or developer for months. The trouble is that Ilford suggest at the dillution of 1-9 a developing time of just 4 minutes in 20C and in combination with a Jobo rotary processor and higher temps in the summer, it makes developing a risky business.
There is a second dillution of 1-14 which raises the time to the safe 6 minutes, but there is a mention about quallity and that scared me.
I thought of doing a test, but even if I can't spot the quallity difference, I don't know, something inside me would whisper "inferior, inferior..."

Any suggestions?
(argh, when is the new Ilfosol coming out?)

 

[Lee L]

Ari,

I've done Ilfosol-S at 1:14 with HP5+, Delta 100, Tri-X, and TMX in the last year. I did semi-stand rather than rotary, but the results looked very good. I actually haven't done 1:9 though, so can't offer a direct comparison.

Lee

 

[Steve Roberts]

Any suggestions?

I've used Ilfosol a fair bit and been concerned, as you have, about the short developing times and hence repeatability. I've opted for greater dilutions coupled with longer times (with other developers as well) on the basis that firstly, I couldn't perceive any loss of quality and, secondly, if there was one, it was a price worth paying for the extra control of a more leisurely development time.

Perhaps those with different techniques, greater enlargements or different subject matter might detect a deterioration in quality, but my feeling was that if it was that hard to see it wasn't (in my case at least) worth worrying about.

Steve

 

[Ed Sukach]

Just a comment - or more properly a reflection...

I suspect that the "Devleoping time MUST BE greater than five minutes" commandment is another of those widley accepted ... how can I put this ... MYTHS. I've read this in many "How-to" guides without any really substantial evidence for its existance. ... So ... like ... WHY?

I know that Irving Penn in his "Worlds in a Small Room" states that he regularly developed his film ... quoting: "Most of the photographs in this book were taken on Kodak Tri-X film. The only exposures for which I have an accurate record, the pictures in New Guinea and Morocco, show that Tri-X was exposed at 160 ASA (now ISO - ES) or at 80 to 125 ASA for very dark skins. Development was usually in UFG, 3 to 5 minutes at 68 degrees F."

Note the three (3) to five (5) minutes developing time. Also note the exceptionally FINE quality of the images in this book.

Additionally, C-41 Processing requires 3 minutes, 15 seconds in the color developer - nearly universally. Color processing is (at least, supposedly) more sensitive than black and white ... so again, WHY the five minute minimum time limit?

 

[PHOTOTONE]

Developing times shorter than 5 minutes run the risk of uneven development unless your technique is very good. That is the only "issue" I can think of.

 

[arigram]

The problem with so short of developing time is that is nearly impossible to be exact. Especially with the use of PanF+ which is easy to overdevelop as it tends to be contrasty and so is better to underdevelop a bit and coupled with the Jobo which because of the constant rotation needs about 15% off the time. Now, at about 3:30 minutes, every split second counts and there is no way to be consistant as you need to pour out the developer , which takes some time for 1000ml, then pour in the stop bath. Its hard to time and execute that sequence perfectly.

I will try the 1-14 for about 5:30 minutes and trust that there is no visible loss of quallity like you guys assure me.

 

[Petzi]

It is less important to be exact, it is more important to be consistent. So if your procedure is roughly the same each time, you should be OK. You can read everywhere that you should take the prescribed times as a suggestion for a first try, then adjust developing times to your own needs and procedures.