Jobo vs Tray with pyrocat hd

Jorge · Jul 24, 2005

sanking said:
I would not recommend increasing the amount of bromide in the Pyrocat-HD solution as this will result in a loss of film speed. A much better solution in my opinion, based on your description of the problem, would be to add a small amount of ascorbic acid to the working dilution. Ascorbic acid, if added in the right amount, will cut B+F without a loss of film speed. But the amount needs to be just right because if you add too much you will kill the stain.

For amount of ascorbic acid to add, I would suggest about 10 ml of a 1% ascorbic acid solution per liter of working Pyrocat-HD solution.

Sandy

Ah, I read you had done this. I thought the ascorbic acid was used to increase speed, so it also lowers b+f? I might just try that. Thanks!

noseoil · Jul 24, 2005

This is the first time I've heard that development in trays will give good results with minimal agitation for edge effects (no problems with uneven staining as well, right). I had thought that tube development with a vertical orientation was necessary for proper development. Ah well, live and learn. Perhaps I shouldn't have made all of those 4x5 tubes and bought the 8x10 tubes from Mike, but I do enjoy working with the lights on as opposed to playing blind man's bluff in my blacked out bathroom...

Using pyrocat in my normal dilution with trays is fine for minimal agitation, same times and temps? This would certainly save on both developer and distilled water. 8x10 tube development can get a bit spendy with distilled water and single sheets. With the water quality we have here (very hard) and the recharge of our aquifer with Colorado River water, I'm still reluctant to change what is working well.

Minimal agitation with pyrocat and Efke 100 is the cat's a$$ for sharpness and tonality. Please don't tell me there's a better film for this next! tim

Jorge · Jul 24, 2005

WHo said anything about minimal agitation? As I understand it, the question is what would give better and more even results, Jobo or Tray with Pyrocat? For minimal agitation there is only one way, tubes standing.

noseoil · Jul 24, 2005

"Yes, I used to think that the negative had to be in vertical orientation with stand and semi-stand development, but the cradle concept with the negatives on the horizontal works great with this kind of development as I saw with Steve's negatives. Sandy"

Jorge, this is what I was reacting to. tim

P.S. Did you get a bit wet from Emily this week?

Jorge · Jul 24, 2005

noseoil said:
"Yes, I used to think that the negative had to be in vertical orientation with stand and semi-stand development, but the cradle concept with the negatives on the horizontal works great with this kind of development as I saw with Steve's negatives. Sandy"

Jorge, this is what I was reacting to. tim

P.S. Did you get a bit wet from Emily this week?

Ah.....Nope, I live in the central part of Mexico, got a few rains but that is it...

sanking · Jul 24, 2005

sanking said:
I can not speak to the experiences of others, but my own B+F levels with TMY and Pyrocat-HD in rotary processing are quite low. For example, when developing for a DR of 1.75 for straight palladium printing, using the 2:2:100 dilution at 72ºF, I get a B+F value of 0.15 with 7 minutes of development, with slow rotation.

Using the 1:1:100 dilution, for the same DR I need 13 minutes of development, which gives a B+F value of 0.35.

I need to clarify the first part of this message. The actual B+F that I get with TMY with the 2:2:100 dilution for a DR of 1.75 is 0.27. The value of 0.15 that I mentioned earlier is the value that results from processing, which has be added to the absolute base of the film itself (assuming you just fix it out with no developing), which is around 0.12 with the film I have. By contrast, developing to the same DR in D76 1:1 gives a B+F of 0.22, which I presume would be very close to what one should expectd from Xtol. In this case the D76 negative would print about 1/3 of a stop faster than the Pyrocat-HD negative.

This will hopefully clarify that the actual differnce in B+F is not nearly so great with the 1:1:100 dilution as the original message suggested.

I will also add that for some time now I have recommended the use of a larger amount of Solution A relative to Solution B when using rotary processing, say 1.5:1:100 or 3:2:100. This helps to combat oxidation from rotation that can increase general stain.

Sandy

George Collier · Jul 24, 2005

Thanks for the info on the cradle, actually, I think it was there, but I didn't "recognize" it. What's great is, Sandy's new entry today on tubes alternative is just what I think I'm looking for.

sanking · Jul 24, 2005

Jorge said:
Ah, I read you had done this. I thought the ascorbic acid was used to increase speed, so it also lowers b+f? I might just try that. Thanks!

I was very interested in this topic for my own work so today I did some BTZS testing and plotting to verify that my speculation was correct. I exposed the TMY film as I normally do for ASA 400 film, and then developed the films for 6, 9, 12, 15 and 20 minutes at 72º F in a 2:1:100 dilution of Pyrocat-HD, to which I added 10ml per liter of a 10% ascorbic acid solution. I simulated Jobo processing at 15-20 RPM by rolling the tubes fairly fast.

As I suspected, the combination of an increase of A to B solution in the working solution, and the use of the ascorbic acid, resulted in a very significant reduction in general stain in comparision to the regular 1:1:100 dilution, and also much faster develoment times. Here is what I found from the plots. I would add that this batch of TMY film was opened about 1.5 years ago so it already has some B+F built in over fresh film.

CI B+F Time of Development
.5 .21 6 minutes
.6 .21 7 minutes
.7 .22 9 minutes
.8 .23 12 minutes
.9 .26 14 minutes
1.1 .32 20 minutes

This combination also gives a 1/2 stop in effective film speed, up to EI 600.

Based on these results I would strongly recommend the 2:1:100 dilution plus the ascorbic acid with rotary processing of TMY for alternative printing, and probably also of films such as TRI-X, BPF, HP5+ and JandC 200 and 400 that tend to build up a lot of general stain.

This combination is probably too energetic for silver printing, however, and in anyt event general stain is not as much an issue with silver as it is with UV sensitive processes.

Sandy

Jorge · Jul 25, 2005

sanking said:
I was very interested in this topic for my own work so today I did some BTZS testing and plotting to verify that my speculation was correct. I exposed the TMY film as I normally do for ASA 400 film, and then developed the films for 6, 9, 12, 15 and 20 minutes at 72º F in a 2:1:100 dilution of Pyrocat-HD, to which I added 10ml per liter of a 10% ascorbic acid solution. I simulated Jobo processing at 15-20 RPM by rolling the tubes fairly fast.

As I suspected, the combination of an increase of A to B solution in the working solution, and the use of the ascorbic acid, resulted in a very significant reduction in general stain in comparision to the regular 1:1:100 dilution, and also much faster develoment times. Here is what I found from the plots.

CI B+F Time of Development
.5 .21 6 minutes
.6 .21 7 minutes
.7 .22 9 minutes
.8 .23 12 minutes
.9 .26 14 minutes
1.1 .32 20 minutes

This combination also gives about a 1/2 stop in effective film speed, up to EI 600.

Based on these results I would strongly recommend the 2:1:100 dilution plus the ascorbic acid with rotary processing of TMY for alternative printing, and probably also of films such as TRI-X, BPF, HP5+ and JandC 200 and 400 that tend to build up a lot of general stain.

This combination is probably too energetic for silver printing, however, and in anyt event general stain is not as much an issue with silver as it is with UV sensitive processes.

Sandy

THank you, after plotting all the curves and comparing Xtol and Pyrocat I am sticking with Pyrocat. The Xtol curves show a very strange behavior. For some reason times below 4 minutes result in blank or almost blank films, it is as if the developer needs some oxidation to start working. I did not like that, I am not confident on using a developer that behaves this way,everything after that works fine, but the graph progression of SBR vs Dev/time is very skewed, even more than the normal calculation rounding Phil talks about in his "fiddling with the toe" article. This is important to me because I need development for high SBRs as opposed to low SBRs which rarely happen where I live, as I am sure you found out when you went to Oaxaca.

I see that for a target Gbar of 0.5 you use 5 minutes at 72º F this might work for me as well, I am looking for Gbars of 0.28 and 0.36. The regular Pyrocat formula did great in this range, so I decided I am sticking with it. Nevertheless I will try your ascorbic acid formulation. Although you and I have our differences I have to admit you made a great developer. So 2:1:100 plus 10 ml of 1% ascorbic acid solution/lt of developer, right?

sanking · Jul 25, 2005

Jorge said:
I see that for a target Gbar of 0.5 you use 5 minutes at 72º F this might work for me as well, I am looking for Gbars of 0.28 and 0.36. The regular Pyrocat formula did great in this range, so I decided I am sticking with it. Nevertheless I will try your ascorbic acid formulation. Although you and I have our differences I have to admit you made a great developer. So 2:1:100 plus 10 ml of 1% ascorbic acid solution/lt of developer, right?

Yes, for rotary processing of TMY I figure that the 2:1:100 dilution with the addition of 10ml (per liter of working) of a 1% ascorbic acid solution is about optimum for Pyrocat-HD. However, anything beyond 10ml of ascorbic 1% cuts into the stain, which drops overall contrast, so it is important to not add more than 1ml.

BTW, I store the 1% ascorbic acid in a propylene glycol solution. I think it will go bad rather quickly if stored in water.

In case you are interested here are my SBR figures versus time of develoment for the test.

SBR 11-----6:00 minutes
SBR 10-----7:00 minutes
SBR 9------8:00 minutes
SBR 8------9:30 minutes
SBR 7------12:30 minutes
SBR 6-----15:00 minutes
SBR 7-----22:00 minutes

These times are based on the assumption that you want a negative with a DR of about 1.7 for kallitype or pure palladium printing.

If you want shorter development times for the lower SBR numbers I would suggest a 4:2:100 dilution (with the same amount of ascorbic) and calculate times at about .65 of the above.

Sandy

sanking · Jul 25, 2005

Jorge said:
This is why I said he should do his own testing. My tests show that for my water etc, etc. TMY developed in Pyrocat (2:2:100) in Jobo expert drums at 20º C for an Average gradient of 0.83 had a b+f of 0.44. A target average gradient of 0.68 had a whoping 0.33 b+f. (all UV readings)

BTW, regarding the water, my work with both pyrogallol and pyrocatechin has shown that the quality of water is very important as even slight contamination can result in some additional general stain over what one would get with distilled water. The use of distilled water for mixing Stock A is pretty much essential, but I also highly recommend the use of distilled water for the working solution if the water supply is suspect, and/or if one experiences unusually high general stain. I personally use tap water for mixing the working solution and have noticed that at certain times of the year I get a slightly higher general stain than at other times. When doing critical kinds of testing I always use distilled water.

Sandy

Jorge · Jul 25, 2005

sanking said:
BTW, regarding the water, my work with both pyrogallol and pyrocatechin has shown that the quality of water is very important as even slight contamination can result in some additional general stain over what one would get with distilled water. The use of distilled water for mixing Stock A is pretty much essential, but I also highly recommend the use of distilled water for the working solution if the water supply is suspect, and/or if one experiences unusually high general stain. I personally use tap water for mixing the working solution and have noticed that at certain times of the year I get a slightly higher general stain than at other times. When doing critical kinds of testing I always use distilled water.

Sandy

I thought water had some effect on the developer however minimal. WHere I live we have well water which is "medium" hard, and although it free of silt the calcium carbonate has some effect on the activity of pyrocat. I am now using bottled drinking water, I see no need to go to destilled water when drinking water has very low TSD. It works for me. ALthough I have to say I have mixed Solution A with my tap water and have not seen any problems. I figure the thing is to keep it consistent so drinking water is good enough for me.

Changeling1 · Aug 22, 2005

Pyrocat is extremely toxic- can be absorbed through the skin etc. Seems like the CPP-2 would be the way to go insofar as the Jobo is far less messy and can be done in daylight. The Photographers Formulary has Jobo processing suggestions with pyrocat.

Tom Hoskinson · Aug 22, 2005

Changeling1 said:
Pyrocat is extremely toxic- can be absorbed through the skin etc...

Catechol is toxic as are most of the benzene ring compounds. I would place it in the same toxicity category as Hydroquinone. In solution and at the use dilutions, I would not categorize either of them as highly toxic. Still, I wouldn't drink developers incorporating either of them - nor would I allow them to contact my skin.

I recommend (and I personally use) skin protection in the form of nitrile gloves (Safeskins) any time I am mixing chemistry or developing film and paper.

I use skin protection with both tray and tank processing. BTW, with a Slosher Tray (or Cradle) it is not necessary to get your hands into the developer - even so, I still wear nitrile gloves.

When mixing dry chemicals, I also use protection against inhaling chemical dust (filter mask or vented chemical hood).

lee · Aug 22, 2005

I agree with the above statements from Mr. Hoskinson. Nitrile gloves is the way to go.

lee\c

Jorge · Aug 22, 2005

jdef said:
Jorge,

I know you don't like to waste a lot of time testing developers, and I don't blame you, but in case you're interested, I thought I'd mention my Rapid Universal developer for your negs, as it produces virtually no fog. It is not a staining developer like Pyrocat, so general stain is not an issue. I've recommended it to another Platinum printer who wanted to try it, but I don't know if he ever did. DRU can be used several ways, including as a divided developer. I won't waste a lot of space here describing the many ways it can be used, but suffice it to say that DRU will develop TMY to the contrast required for platinum printing without fogging. If you're interested, PM me, and I'll give you the formula and more details.

Rotary processing, tray processing and edge effects

Although I don't use Pyrocat HD, except for testing, I do use Hypercat, which is a catechol/ascorbic acid developer, which shares some characteristics with Pyrocat HD. In my experience, it's much easier to increase sharpness with these developers, than to reduce it. In other words, no matther how you process your film in these developers, it's going to be very sharp, and using semi-stand development to enhance edge effects could easily lead to harsh prints, especially for portraits. I was surprised to see recommendations for semi-stand development for portrait negs above. Most of my work is porraiture, for which I use continuous agitation for the smooth, creamy midtones I love. I have no problem getting enough sharpness, even with continuous agitation, and I'm assured of perfectly even development, with much shorter development times, and all of the benefits that brings. A friend has lent me a scanner, and I'm going to try to attach a scan of a print made from a HP5+ neg developed in Hypercat 1:1:100 for 6min./70F with continuous agitation. Please excuse any scanner-user defects.

Jay

Is this an ascorbic acid developer? I was not very happy with Xtol and decided to stick with Pyrocat, but if you have something better I might give it a try. I am looking for a developer capable of doing G bars from 0.28 to 0.9. If your developer can do this without an actinic stain post the formula and I will give it a shot.

Jorge · Aug 22, 2005

jdef said:
Hi Jorge.

DRU

water 750ml

Sodium sulfite 36g

Hydroquinone 3.6g

Sodium carbonate 20g

Borax 10g

Phenidone .5g

Sodium ascorbate 4.5g

BZT 1% 10ml

water to 1 liter

To make a working solution for rotary processing, dilute 1:5 for times in the 5 minute range, or 1:10 for times in the 10 min. range, etc., up to 1:20.

You might be interested in using this developer as a two-bath, for very economical/repeatable tray use. To use as a two-bath, simply leave the carbonate and borax out of the A solution, and make up a 10% sodium metaborate bath for the B solution, or for a softer working developer, you can try a 1% borax bath for the B bath. For the metaborate version, try 3min A/ 2min B. Contrast can be controlled over a wide range by varying the time in the A solution. Normal, continuous agitation in the tray is fine for the A bath, but for the B bath, lift one corner of the tray every 15 seconds.

If you have any questions or suggestions, feel free to contact me directly. If you decide to try this, I hope you'll let me know how it works out.

Jay

Thanks for the quick reply but I think you screwed the pooch with all them ingredients I dont have. I would have to buy Borax, BZT, Hydroquinone and sodium ascrobate. While this is easy for you in the US, it is a PITA for me with all the import and shipping charges.

Sorry, maybe next time.

Jorge · Aug 22, 2005

jdef said:
Jorge,

if you'd like, I could send you the ingredients, pre-measured. Just add water.

Jay

Hey men, if you want to do that I will gladly waste a few negatives testing the developer and making a few prints. If you got the plotter program I can also send you my results to compare with yours.

Jorge · Aug 22, 2005

jdef said:
Hi Jorge.

I don't have any of the BTZS software (wish I did), so I do everything manually. I know. I've always thought this would be a promising developer for alt printers. due to its ability to build contrast without fogging, but I don't do enough alt. printing myself to really verify that. Tomorrow, I'll send a kit for one liter of DRU, and another for a liter ea. of A&B solutions for the divided version. That should be enough for you to give it a try, and if you like it, I can get you more.

Jay

Thanks, I will love to try it. What I will do is I will test it, make a few prints and then send you a print and I will print the curves from the program as well as the charts, they might be of some help to you in the future.

Kirk Keyes · Aug 23, 2005

Jorge said:
I am almost sure it (high fog levels) is due to aerial oxidation.

Jorge - have you thought about using a nitrogen tank to blanket the developer in the Jobo drum with a nitrogen?

I've started doing that with PMK and not only does it reduce the base+fog level, but with PMK I find it reduces development time by about 30% from my previous technique (using 1500 ml in the 3010 drum).

Kirk - www.keyesphoto.com

sanking · Aug 23, 2005

Kirk Keyes said:
Jorge - have you thought about using a nitrogen tank to blanket the developer in the Jobo drum with a nitrogen?

I've started doing that with PMK and not only does it reduce the base+fog level, but with PMK I find it reduces development time by about 30% from my previous technique (using 1500 ml in the 3010 drum).

Kirk - www.keyesphoto.com

Kirk,

I have read your description of how to do this, and frankly it sounds much more complicated than other viable alternatives that one might consider for reducing general stain from excessive oxidation. One could, for example, modify the PMK by adding some sulfite or ascorbic acid, which would also make PMK more energetic and reduce development times, or you could just change developers.

What am I missing. Why so much trouble just to use PMK as is? Why not just modify PMK (and the fixes have been know for years), or use a more suitable developer for rotary processing?

Sandy

Kirk Keyes · Aug 24, 2005

sanking said:
What am I missing. Why so much trouble just to use PMK as is? Why not just modify PMK (and the fixes have been know for years), or use a more suitable developer for rotary processing?

Sandy - good question. To start with - for me, I like the convenience of the Jobo processor. I never could do may sheets at a time with tray processing without getting scratches and I went to a Jobo many years ago instead of trying to teach myself tray processing (and perhaps wasting a lot of film in the process). I like that I never have scratches with the Jobo and the uniformity of processing and the abitliy to process in the daylight and even walk away from the machine durings runs are valuable to me.

And actually, I was happy with my results with PMK for silver printing by using 1500 mls in an Expert drum - I really had no reason to pursue any modification to the PMK. So it was not something that I did to try and solve some problem I was having, just something I tried and found worked really well.

What happened was I noticed my dad had a 80 cu ft nitrogen tank sitting around his shop unused, and for another $40 more, I got a regulator. A few more bucks for some 1/8th in tygon tubing and a few gas fittings, and I had a nitrogen bath system. So I just gave it a try. It only takes a liter per minute of gas flow, and it only runs for the prewash and devleoper time, to it is not on that long. And it appears that the tank will last a very long time with this kind of use. So the investment of a tank would not be much in the long run. Especially considering the investment in the Jobo in the first place.

As far as mods to the PMK formualtion go - I looked in the Book of Pyro, and it seemed that Gordon seemed to like the nitrogen approach best, so I figured I'd give it a try when the opportunity arose.

It's really simple to use as well. I just thread the Tygon tube down the throat of the Jobo lift - that takes less than 30 seconds. The I put the drum on, and I simply open the main valve on the nitrogen tank. I've already got the flow set. So that's it - less than a minute of time.

I haven't tried it with Pyrocat yet - I've only run one batch of it through the Jobo so far, but I'm sure it would eliminated any aerial oxidation issues that would arrise from it's use in a Jobo. Hence my suggestion.

As for mods to PMK, off hand, I can think of adding sulfite/bisulfite to it - and I think that diminishes some of the stain, right? - so I wanted to avoid that. And for Rollo Pyro, I've never tried it. I guess I have an hangup about developers that use 3 developing agents when 2 should do... And does it produce as much stain as PMK?

Kirk

sanking · Aug 24, 2005

Kirk Keyes said:
As far as mods to the PMK formualtion go - I looked in the Book of Pyro, and it seemed that Gordon seemed to like the nitrogen approach best, so I figured I'd give it a try when the opportunity arose.

As for mods to PMK, off hand, I can think of adding sulfite/bisulfite to it - and I think that diminishes some of the stain, right? - so I wanted to avoid that. And for Rollo Pyro, I've never tried it. I guess I have an hangup about developers that use 3 developing agents when 2 should do... And does it produce as much stain as PMK?

Kirk

I think Gordon Hutchings recommended a nitrogen burst system of development as the method of agitation, with the solution remaining still for the rest of the time. Personally I think this would be a wonderful method of development but for various reasons have never gotten around to building such a system. But as best I understand this, his use is very different from what you are doing with rotary processing.

Adding extra sulfite to PMK, in the right amount, will not diminish stain. It will simply reduce the level of stain with rotary processing back toi the level you get with tray processing. Adding extra will also increase energy. If you add too much, however, you will reduce Stain. Anchell and Troop in The Film Developing Cookbook suggest adding about a pinch (0.3 g/L) of sodium sulfite to each liter of working solution. This will not work with Pyrocat-HD, however, as any extra sulfite kills the stain, though it makes the developer much more energetic.

I share your views about three developing agents. Two tango very well, with three you get some real nasty dancing and never know what the next move might be.

Anyway, I though what you did was pretty ingenious, but if the purpose was to reduce general stain from oxidation there appear to be easier solutions.

Regarding Rollo Pyro, yes, it stains a lot, in fact every bit as well as PMK. I don't think it is quite as sharp as PMK, however, though for most work who could tell the difference?

Sandy

Kirk Keyes · Aug 24, 2005

sanking said:
I share your views about three developing agents. Two tango very well, with three you get some real nasty dancing and never know what the next move might be.

Yes - that's for sure!

sanking said:
Anyway, I though what you did was pretty ingenious, but if the purpose was to reduce general stain from oxidation there appear to be easier solutions.

Thanks for the ingenious comment. I'ts been a while since I looked in the BoP for I may have forgotten my reasoning... Or perhaps it was my chemistry background and it seemed a natural solution to aerial oxidation. As I said, stain was not really my concern. And the decrease in development times was welcome, about 30% shorter than by previous technique.

By the way - did you know that a strong solution of pyrogallol in a strong solution of potassium hydroxide has been used to scrub/remove oxygen from air by bubbling the air through it?

Kirk Keyes · Aug 25, 2005

jdef said:
Isn't a development byproduct of MQ or PQ developers a developing agent as well? Wouldn't that make any MQ or PQ developer a three-agent developer?

Jay - interesting point. Your question hints at the reasons that simpler formulations are easier to design. Optimizing 2 componants will hopefully be easier than optimizing 3.

Think about something like Rollo Pyro with Pyrogallol, metol, and ascorbic acid. So does that one turn into a 5 or 6 reducing agent developer once the byproducts start to build up?

Jobo vs Tray with pyrocat hd

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency