Lumiere "Supermicros" Fine-Grain Developer

[Wigwam Jones]

I recently purchased an old book, "Chemistry for Photographers" by Allen R. Greenleaf, published 1941 by American Photographic Publishing Company, Boston, MA.

I have been collecting various film developing formulas with an eye towards eventually compounding my own B&W soup. I have begun to notice the similarities many formulas have to each other. This one, however, seems very different:

Fine-Grain Developer (Lumiere "Supermicros")

Orthophenylenediamine 146 Grains (10.0 grams)
Metol 73 Grains (5.0 grams)
Sodium sulphite 2 Ounces (60.0 grams)
Tri-sodium phosphate 51 Grains (3.5 grams)
Potassium bromide 10 Grains (0.7 grams)
Water to make 32 ounces (1.0 liters)

I have not read anything like this before. I am not a chemist and do not know what "Orthophenylenediamine" is or how available it might be these days, let alone the "Tri-sodium phosphate," unless that is the "TSP" you can buy at the local hardware store (I suspect that isn't pure TSP, though).

I have also come across a "Rapid Developer" (J.I. Waters) which claims to process film in 20 seconds (17 seconds dip in dev, 3 seconds to get it into short stop, then fix). I can post that recipe if anyone's interested.

In the meantime, anyone familiar with the Lumiere Supermicros or this kind of formula?

Best,

Wiggy

 

[Photo Engineer]

Ortho-phenylene diamine is just a simple analog of p-phenylene diamine. It is not really special and the ppd can probably be used in place of the opd. Analogs of these diamines are still used as color developers today. In B&W, they are mild, fine grain developers.

PE

 

[Wigwam Jones]

Ortho-phenylene diamine is just a simple analog of p-phenylene diamine. It is not really special and the ppd can probably be used in place of the opd. Analogs of these diamines are still used as color developers today. In B&W, they are mild, fine grain developers.

PE

Thank you for the reply! The book I have states that opd is 'less toxic' and has a 'lower reduction potential' than ppd, if I am reading it correctly. Any comment on that? Also, where might one find either of these compounds today, would you happent to know? I found nothing on Photographers' Formulary, but I haven't searched exhaustively, since up until now, I just cut the corner off a packet of D-76.

Best,

Wiggy

 

[Donald Qualls]

FWIW, I recall reading in Anchell & Troop that PPD based developers are less popular today than they once were because the high solvency causes dichroic fog with modern films (this has been an ongoing issue requiring repeated reformulation of superfine grain developers over the past 70 years). Don't know if the KBr in the Supermicros formula would offset that, or if o-phenylene diamine is less (or more) prone to dichroic fog than PPD.

 

[Gerald Koch]

Ortho-phenylene diamine is just a simple analog of p-phenylene diamine. It is not really special and the ppd can probably be used in place of the opd.
PE

Orthophenylenediamine has little developing action in most formulations. Rather it is used for its silver halide solvent action. Substituting paraphenylenediamine (which is a developing agent) will change the character of the developer. Fine grain developers of this type due not usually produce good results with today's films, often producing dichroic fog.

As PE states, one of the color developing agents can be substituted in a ppd developer. These substances are less likely to produce allergic reactions, however, they are much more expensive. IMHO, you would get better results with today's films with Xtol than with any of the older formulas.

 

[Wigwam Jones]

Orthophenylenediamine has little developing action in most formulations.

That's my understanding as well. That is not necessarily a bad thing.

Rather it is used for its silver halide solvent action. Substituting paraphenylenediamine (which is a developing agent) will change the character of the developer.

That is also my understanding.

Fine grain developers of this type due not usually produce good results with today's films, often producing dichroic fog.

The book I read stated that Orthophenylenediamine was not known to produce fog. This is just what I read, mind you.

As PE states, one of the color developing agents can be substituted in a ppd developer. These substances are less likely to produce allergic reactions, however, they are much more expensive.

I appreciate the advice. But I'm exploring old and perhaps neglected formulae because I find them interesting and thought others might as well. If that is not the case, then I'm sorry to interrupt.

IMHO, you would get better results with today's films with Xtol than with any of the older formulas.

Thank you. With respect, if I wanted to use Xtol, I'd use Xtol. That was not the point of my question - was I unclear in some way? I wish to experiment, not use off-the-shelf developers that I already know are good.

Best,

Wiggy

 

[Gerald Koch]

Experimenting is fun. Sometimes the objective is not the photograph. Enjoy!