Low-Contrast, Speed Reducing Developer for Mammography Film

I am looking for a suitable developer to tame the contrast and speed of X-ray mammography film that I am exposing under an enlarger.

So far I've used only Dektol, and it's very punchy, and very dense, even at short exposure times. I'll try HC-110 next. Honestly, I haven't done extensive testing yet.

But hypothetically, an ideal developer would be one that is extremely low contrast (as this film is inherently very high in that regard) and there would be added benefit in reducing the speed of the emulsion. FWIW, there are 3 emulsions in this film to create exceptional latitude. I mention this incase surface or deep working developers might have different effects.

So, I've got more work to do myself, but I wanted to at least pose the question and see what kind of thought processes this elicited.

Cheers!

D23 is a fairly soft working and speed reducing developer.

That sounds like a good one, thank you.

I found the formula to D-23; a low contrast developer for rollfilm, sheet film ,and plates.

Water, about 125°F ..... 750mL
Elon .............................. 7.5 grams
Sodium Sulfite .............. 100 grams
Cold water to make ...... 1L

Dissolve chemicals in the order given. Average development time about 19 minutes in a tank, or 15 minutes in a tray at 20°C.


I applaud its simplicity as well!

I used to use a lot of D23 and I still do when I shoot TMY in the summer. It gives very nice grain and tones while preserving sharpness. At least when using it replenished, I find it gives a good stop less shadow speed than HC110/Xtol, though. I always used 2 teaspoons Metol and 4 tablespoons sulfite per liter.

I have used one from The Darkroom Cookbook called TO-XDR4, or something like that, to get pictorial range response from lithographic film.

The only developing agent was metol, at 1g/l. I don't recall, but think that the stock was used diluted.

It gave good results for the task, which was to use the lith film to generate unsharp masks for b&w negatives.

The low contrast negatives were at first developed by inspection, and ended up with development times in the range of 3-5 minutes at 20C to yield a thin negative of the sort desired for USM work.

I think DavidDead Link Removed is worth checking out.

Thanks guys for putting these developers on my radar.

Michael, the thing about under-developing is that I've been getting uneven development, even at 3 minutes. 1:30 was very mottled and it got better at 3 minutes but I think it's still there (unevenness that is). I need to investigate this further however and make sure that this is the cause.

D-23, Microdol-X (if there's any still around or a substitute formula), or any number of soft-working metol-sulfite developers might do. Dektol in general is a fairly contrasty, grainy developer for film in general. You might just need to try something more normal like D-76 or ID-11 (stock or 1:1), or Xtol.

David, that's a great point. Perhaps I picked the worst 1st developer! That's good though... no way but up.

I'd first try diluted HC-110, and change it after each sheet for consistency, or just add a bit more stock to the tray. Try starting at 1:99. You can use it up to 1:127 IME, though that is with litho film (also super high contrast). If it is still too contrasty, try Soemarko's LC-1, as explained in the Christopher James alt. processes book. That is tailored to litho film, but it will probably work OK. It may make your negs brown or yellow, but that is OK.

That sounds good. I'll give HC-110 diluted a shot and go from there.

Most of the folks on LFPF are using plain old D-76 to soup all types of x-ray film. Dektol has to be the worst developer for film, very contrasty. I wouldn't mind trying some in Pyrocat-HD or other staining developer.