A film developer published by a Hungarian photographer Rudolf Jarai in the 1950s. Belongs to the category of "acutance" developers, using low metol concentration at relatively high alkalinity. Intended for moderate to low sensitivity films (up to ISO 100).
Water…………………………………………750 ml
Metol………………………………………….4.0 g
Sodium sulfite anhydrous…………………..100 g
Tri-sodium phosphate (TSP)………………..80 g
Sodium chloride……………………………...16 g
Potassium bromide…………………………..0.2 g
Water to 1 liter.
Usage:...
If you could tell me how to devise a test to compare, I might be able to say. Off my head, it should be close.
What do you mean by "advantage"? Advantage over what? Is FP4 a high iodide emulsion? It seems to respond well.With a high pH developer like this, I doubt that it would have any significant advantage with today's high Iodide films.
PE
With all due respect, you are being too cryptic. Does "in production" mean Kodak/Ilford, other European vendors, Photographer's Formulary, or anything else? Most of the formulas here do not claim any advantage over anything in production, and neither was I. It is a historically interesting acutance developer, easy to make, no hard to get components. You said it yourself that practice always trumps theory, so this could be a case in point.Advantage over any other developer now in production, and yes, most modern films run over 3% Iodide compared to older films which were generally under that.
PE
I am glad we have an understanding. You might have noticed that my interest is primarily in preserving historically original developers, Jean Fage's, Harvey's Panthermic to name a few. for their sometimes unique principles that, as I strongly believe, should not be lost even if they were superseded by "superior" ones. When you are asking for more information, frankly, I do not know how to present it correctly. At some point I may have to involve a digital device to present an image on the web and this introduces a bias. So, I am asking to try it out with your favorite film and decide for yourself. I am fully aware that it may not work for all films, but some photographers may appreciate the interesting effects this particular formula has to offer. Personally, I do not quite understand the pervasive interest in Rodinal, but as it does not go away, there may be something in it beyond comprehension, and I accept it.I have no NDA to worry about now, so I can post what I know. In almost every case though, I can not show data as I turned it all in when I left Kodak.
I've said before that there is no magic bullet. That said, I also add - use what works for you. Thus, I assume you have data to support the fact that this developer is very good with a wide variety of films currently sold on the market. Cookbooks are no more reliable than internet posts unless accompanied by data. I'm merely pointing out that there is no comparable data when for example, your reference says that speed is increased. If there is an increase in contrast, it can often be mistakenly judged to be a speed increase.
Is there any supporting data for this, or do you just have a page in a cookbook that says it is so? I am asking for more information, but sadly I cannot show any. I no longer have any to show.
That is where I am coming from.
PE
I am glad we have an understanding. You might have noticed that my interest is primarily in preserving historically original developers, Jean Fage's, Harvey's Panthermic to name a few. for their sometimes unique principles that, as I strongly believe, should not be lost even if they were superseded by "superior" ones. When you are asking for more information, frankly, I do not know how to present it correctly. At some point I may have to involve a digital device to present an image on the web and this introduces a bias. So, I am asking to try it out with your favorite film and decide for yourself. I am fully aware that it may not work for all films, but some photographers may appreciate the interesting effects this particular formula has to offer. Personally, I do not quite understand the pervasive interest in Rodinal, but as it does not go away, there may be something in it beyond comprehension, and I accept it.
Pixophrenic, can I ask for clarification on a couple of points:
1. Is 1:10 the equivalent of 1+10 and what is the minimum stock level for roll films? I'd assume it is less than 22mls because at one part stock plus 10 parts water a 240 ml tank such as a Jobo 135 tank will only have 22mls of stock.
2. Where does the information in the "Usage Section" come from i.e. what is the source and when was this written?
3. Is there any information on what the effect on speed might be on film speeds above 100
A couple of comments now: Given the nature of this developer, the comment on it producing a half stop increase in speed surprised me but maybe this is covered by the source
The development times are particularly long by current developer standards, especially at 1:30, compared to Rodinal times. Other than a claimed half a stop speed increase there does not appear to be any other countervailing advantages over Rodinal but I may have missed what they are.
Thanks
pentaxuser
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?