inconsistent pyro hd staining - user error?

[Scott Peters]

Why is it that sometimes I get more of a 'brown' stain vs. a neutral (very little brown stain, if any) stain effect when using pyro hd? I try really hard to keep the dilution and temperature and timing consistent - tray developed ULF negs. The film is the same (jandc 400 - same batch). Do others expereince this? Also, I occassionally get streaking - and I tray develop, with fairly constant agitation. It's always the sky that tends to streak too - .

I pre-soak (5 minutes) then pyro hd for 9-11 minutes...water stop, then fix.

I do between 4 - 6 sheets at a time (7 x 17) shuffle through the stack then let sit for 30 seconds, then shuffle again through the stack.

Any thoughts on potential 'user-error'? Any tips on reducing streaks, or more consistent with stain?

BTW, I use the pre-mix from PF - non glycol.

Thanks!

 

[c6h6o3]

Try keeping them moving. The one you're moving from the bottom of the stack to the top is the only one that's really getting any agitation, so I should think that the 30 second time out is what's producing the streaking.

 

[noseoil]

Initial agitation (or wetting) is usually the problem with uneven skies. tim

 

[Scott Peters]

Thanks for the replies. So, should I let the negs stand for a while before I begin agitation in the pyro? Or, not agiatate them in the pre-soak?

 

[George Collier]

When doing sheet film in trays, I presoak just long enough to get them wet-to keep them from sticking together in the developer. I go into the developer one at a time e-up and rotate from top to bottom continuously throughout the developer time. I even clip the corner of the first one, so I know which one it is - first in, first out. Never uneven development, not once in many years. This with most Kodak films and ID11, HC110, and TMax developer.
I have never done this with Pyrocat HD, though.

 

[c6h6o3]

Thanks for the replies. So, should I let the negs stand for a while before I begin agitation in the pyro? Or, not agiatate them in the pre-soak?

No. Keep them moving, both in the presoak (the 5 minutes is good) and in the developer. It's the still time that's causing the streaking.

 

[Scott Peters]

Thanks, for the responses. Why do I get some negs with heavy stain and some less apparent stain? And, the negs with less stain, seem to print better, the ones with more apparent stain tend to be flat when I print. Am I overexposing?

 

[sanking]

Thanks, for the responses. Why do I get some negs with heavy stain and some less apparent stain? And, the negs with less stain, seem to print better, the ones with more apparent stain tend to be flat when I print. Am I overexposing?

Soctt,

I assume we are talking about the same film, right?

If you develop using the same agitation type and some negatives have a lot more stain than others, then yes, you are most likely overexposing. Overexposing will indeed reduce contrast. It should be avoided like the plague with any staining developer, especially with negatives meant for alternative printing. In most cases I use an EFS much greater than box speed with negatives that are exposed for alternative printing. EFS is increased by the fact that you need to develop these type of negatives to a higher contrast. If you reduce the EFS by half, as do many silver printers, you will get negatives that are much over-exposed for alt processes.


Sandy

 

[Scott Peters]

Ah,haaa. I have been struggling with this for awhile, with folks telling me to rate the film speed LOWER, resulting in some overexposure....I didn't think I was doing anything wrong with the development. And you are absolutely right, it is the plague as the negatives are basically worthless. Actually, the negatives that 'appear' thin print up much better with AZO, compared to the 'heavier' stained images which are basically unprintable (print is very muddy). By alt processes, would you put AZO in that category, even if it is silver?

 

[sanking]

Ah,haaa. I have been struggling with this for awhile, with folks telling me to rate the film speed LOWER, resulting in some overexposure....I didn't think I was doing anything wrong with the development. And you are absolutely right, it is the plague as the negatives are basically worthless. Actually, the negatives that 'appear' thin print up much better with AZO, compared to the 'heavier' stained images which are basically unprintable (print is very muddy). By alt processes, would you put AZO in that category, even if it is silver?

AZO 2 requires negatives of very high contrast so we do indeed need to expose and develop for this paper as we would for alternative processes. As a general rule I recommend using an EFS of about 50% over box speed for negatives that are to be used for AZO 2 and alteranative processes. Course, I assume people know how to meter, which is another story.

Folks should not confuse dense with high contrast. A negative can be very dense from overexposure, but low in contrast. And vice-versa, a negative that looks thin can have high contrast. The key is to expose for proper shadow density, and no more.

Sandy

 

[Scott Peters]

Sandy this is great info. Only wished I had it sooner . You can imagine the confusion as the 'staining' experience can obviously be different than non-stain usage, which is what I grew up with!

 

[sanking]

Sandy this is great info. Only wished I had it sooner . You can imagine the confusion as the 'staining' experience can obviously be different than non-stain usage, which is what I grew up with!

When I first started developing negatives for alternative processes I made a lot of mistakes, and the most grievious one was confusing the concepts of density and contrast. And many of my problems happened because I followed bad advice. Somewhere along the line I said to myself, if I want to go anywhere with this I better learn to test my materials rather then depend on uncertain advice.

However, there is hope for negatives that are badly overexposed, in the form of reducers. There are many formulas, depending on whether you just need to reduce density, contrast, or both.

Sandy