- Joined
- Apr 30, 2007
- Messages
- 28
- Format
- Large Format
I’ve experimented a little with Edgar Hyman’s Microdol substitute, generally at a 1+3 dilution, and had no problems with dichroic fog. In fact, I’ve only rarely seen the characteristic brown image tone due to the colloidal silver produced from physical development. I can’t remember if this was due to a particular combination of exposure and development or the re-use of a stock solution. Perhaps the absence of dichroic fog is due to the reduced amount of sodium sulfite in the more dilute developer or the use of a fresh mix (I’ve always mixed the dilute solution from scratch just before use).
I didn’t make an exact comparison with Microdol-X I once mixed from an old can, but except for the slight pinkish tinge of the commercial product (probably due to whatever Kodak adds as an anti-silvering agent), the significantly cheaper homebrew solution seemed to be practically photographically identical.
I once tried mixing the Microdol substitute with iodised table salt, and found this is not a good idea. I didn’t think the presence of the anti-caking agent or the amount of iodide involved would be significant, or perhaps the iodide might have a beneficial effect in the “homeopathic” amount Crawley advocates, but this was not the case, and the developer was significantly less active. Development times are long enough without going down this path; in fact I’ve generally used this developer at 24 degrees.
One of the main advantages for homebrew Microdol is being able to use Kodak’s published times. Ilford’s Perceptol also seems to be pretty much the same thing. I’ve generally been more interested in taming contrast rather achieving superfine grain. The FDCB p.99 suggests trying Microdol 1+10 for low contrast; 1+3 seems fine to me. Other compensating developers seem to use exotic ingredients (pyro or colour developer chemicals), or miniscule amounts of phenidone or metol with correspondingly very long development times.
The FDCB p.70 claims no speed loss for the 1+3 dilution. I suspect this is an exaggeration, based on the fact it isn’t as great as for the undiluted stock. Kodak’s 1970s J-1 booklet, Processing Chemicals and Formulas for Black and White Photography, p. 27 seems to go the other way but may have been oversimplified in the editing process when it states “The stock solution can be diluted 1:3, in which case greater sharpness can be attained, with a slight sacrifice of quality in grain characteristics and a loss in film speed.” Kodak’s current Microdol PDF J-4027 (November 2003) doesn’t mention any speed loss at all; it says: “For greater sharpness, but with a slight increase in graininess, you can use a 1:3 dilution of this developer.” However if you cross reference their new current information sheet for the new T-Max 400, Kodak advocates ASA/ISO 200 for Microdol-X and 320 (down a third of a stop from the nominal EI of 400) for the 1+3 dilution so, there must still be some speed loss with their very precise testing.
I didn’t make an exact comparison with Microdol-X I once mixed from an old can, but except for the slight pinkish tinge of the commercial product (probably due to whatever Kodak adds as an anti-silvering agent), the significantly cheaper homebrew solution seemed to be practically photographically identical.
I once tried mixing the Microdol substitute with iodised table salt, and found this is not a good idea. I didn’t think the presence of the anti-caking agent or the amount of iodide involved would be significant, or perhaps the iodide might have a beneficial effect in the “homeopathic” amount Crawley advocates, but this was not the case, and the developer was significantly less active. Development times are long enough without going down this path; in fact I’ve generally used this developer at 24 degrees.
One of the main advantages for homebrew Microdol is being able to use Kodak’s published times. Ilford’s Perceptol also seems to be pretty much the same thing. I’ve generally been more interested in taming contrast rather achieving superfine grain. The FDCB p.99 suggests trying Microdol 1+10 for low contrast; 1+3 seems fine to me. Other compensating developers seem to use exotic ingredients (pyro or colour developer chemicals), or miniscule amounts of phenidone or metol with correspondingly very long development times.
The FDCB p.70 claims no speed loss for the 1+3 dilution. I suspect this is an exaggeration, based on the fact it isn’t as great as for the undiluted stock. Kodak’s 1970s J-1 booklet, Processing Chemicals and Formulas for Black and White Photography, p. 27 seems to go the other way but may have been oversimplified in the editing process when it states “The stock solution can be diluted 1:3, in which case greater sharpness can be attained, with a slight sacrifice of quality in grain characteristics and a loss in film speed.” Kodak’s current Microdol PDF J-4027 (November 2003) doesn’t mention any speed loss at all; it says: “For greater sharpness, but with a slight increase in graininess, you can use a 1:3 dilution of this developer.” However if you cross reference their new current information sheet for the new T-Max 400, Kodak advocates ASA/ISO 200 for Microdol-X and 320 (down a third of a stop from the nominal EI of 400) for the 1+3 dilution so, there must still be some speed loss with their very precise testing.