My PC-512 Borax Developer

[John Wiegerink]

Can I ask: At what size of print might the less grain of PC-512 be evident in say a 35mm neg and then a 645 neg? To my eyes( possibly less discerning?) the FX1 full size scan looks better in the sense of having more detail than the PC-512 one

Thanks

pentaxuser

I don't know if I see more detail in the FX1 print, but I do seem to see more shadow detail and the slightly lighter sky. I certainly like the sky rendering with PC-512. I shoot nearly 100% medium format so grain from either one is fine with me.

 

[pentaxuser]

I don't know if I see more detail in the FX1 print, but I do seem to see more shadow detail and the slightly lighter sky. I certainly like the sky rendering with PC-512. I shoot nearly 100% medium format so grain from either one is fine with me.

Thanks, yes that's what I see as well so for me it's a question of what size of print in 35mm does the lesser graín of PC-512 become an advantage as I do shoot as much 35mm as 120

pentaxuser

 

[relistan]

Can I ask: At what size of print might the less grain of PC-512 be evident in say a 35mm neg and then a 645 neg? To my eyes( possibly less discerning?) the FX1 full size scan looks better in the sense of having more detail than the PC-512 one

Thanks

pentaxuser

In 35mm that level of grain different will be apparent at 5x7 I think, but certainly by 8x10

 

[pentaxuser]

In 35mm that level of grain different will be apparent at 5x7 I think, but certainly by 8x10

Thanks for what is a straight and unequivocal answer.

pentaxuser

 

[NedL]

There is no such thing as pure ethanol, either....

Thanks!

 

[Alan Johnson]

I have not run a side by side test but still think this developer compares favourably with proprietary developers in most respects.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I have, and it does compare favourably.

 

[John Wiegerink]

I have not run a side by side test but still think this developer compares favourably with proprietary developers in most respects.

I think it's as good or even better than some "off the shelf" developers. Certainly no complaints from me. Plus, it has the benefit of having a really great shelf life. I actually think Gadget Gainer would highly approve of Karl's PC-512.

 

[chuckroast]

I have not run a side by side test but still think this developer compares favourably with proprietary developers in most respects.

Those are terrific!

A couple questions if I may. What film/format were these shot on? How much post-processing sharpening and curve adjustment did you do?

 

[John Wiegerink]

Those are terrific!

A couple questions if I may. What film/format were these shot on? How much post-processing sharpening and curve adjustment did you do?

You can click on the image and it will bring up the Flickr image. Shows it's 35mm P&S Ricoh cameras. Not bad!

 

[chuckroast]

You can click on the image and it will bring up the Flickr image. Shows it's 35mm P&S Ricoh cameras. Not bad!

Ah! Thanks. And, yeah, that's pretty impressive.

 

[Peter Schrager]

Ive shot a few rolls in my Canon sure shot; still working out the details but it's always nice to have alternatives

 

[relistan]

I have not run a side by side test but still think this developer compares favourably with proprietary developers in most respects.

Thanks! And that looks great.

I have, and it does compare favourably.

I appreciate the testing that both and you have done on this! I still owe everyone an updated blog post. I resolve to use part of the time I have off next week to make it happen!