My sharpest ever negs

Bruce Robbins · May 27, 2013

I've just posted a review of the German-made developer Spur Acurol-N on my blog, The Online Darkroom. Using Ilford Delta 100, Zeiss lenses and the 35 Hexanon on my Konica Hexar AF, I've had what I'm sure are my sharpest results from 35mm negatives other than by using the likes of Technical Pan and Technidol. They're certainly the sharpest medium speed negatives I've had.

The Spur developer is excellent and well worth trying, especially since its high dilution capabilities and longevity make it economical in use.

Here's a scan from a darkroom print:

baachitraka · May 27, 2013

Hello there,

Any chance to compare with Rodinal 1+25 or 1+50. ;-)

Bruce Robbins · May 27, 2013

baachitraka said:
Hello there,

Any chance to compare with Rodinal 1+25 or 1+50. ;-)

Possibly at some point but not right now, I'm afraid. I'd say that Acurol-N produces slightly sharper results than Rodinal but that's going from memory and not a direct comparison. I'd also say that grain with Acurol is just as crisp as with Rodinal but smaller and less obvious. I agree, though, that a comparison between the two developers is an excellent idea. Let me think about that one some more...

Slixtiesix · May 27, 2013

Very nice indeed, but quite a lot of grain for my taste!

Bruce Robbins · May 27, 2013

Slixtiesix said:
Very nice indeed, but quite a lot of grain for my taste!

Remember that the sectional scans are the equivalent of a 20-inch print. I reckon the grain is very well controlled and, at least to me, is perfectly acceptable on a print that size.

Richard S. (rich815) · May 27, 2013

I'm having déjà vu. Wasn't there a post about this stuff a couple months ago?

Richard S. (rich815) · May 27, 2013

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Klainmeister · May 27, 2013

Another wonder developer?

Bruce Robbins · May 27, 2013

Klainmeister said:
Another wonder developer?

The nearest I got to a wonder developer was Nik Silver Efex Pro 2, back in the bad old days.

darkosaric · May 27, 2013

Hi,

Do you maybe know something about Spur dokuspeed professional developer? I got 3 small bottles for free, I am wondering with which films I can use it (I have some foma, kodak and ilford films)?

thanks,

Ian Grant · May 27, 2013

Michael R 1974 said:
You're probably seeing grain, like with Rodinal. "Sharpness" is the overall effect of several factors, and is exceedingly difficult to measure objectively. Subjectively it is heavily influenced by graininess, contrast and subject matter.

Having used Rodinal for about 20 years (1986-2006) for 35mm, 120 and LF negatives I have to totally disagree with you, I've always had excellent fine grain on a par with Xtol with APX100 & Tmax 100 with Rodinal.

Ian

Bruce Robbins · May 27, 2013

darkosaric said:
Hi,

Do you maybe know something about Spur dokuspeed professional developer? I got 3 small bottles for free, I am wondering with which films I can use it (I have some foma, kodak and ilford films)?

thanks,

Dokuspeed is for use with microfilm-type films. Those are the really contrasty, fine-grained and sharp films for copying documents, amongst other uses. They need a special developer to tame the contrast. Try a search for Agfa Copex. There are probably more but I can't think of them right now.

Gerald C Koch · May 27, 2013

The funny thing is that the human eye/brain does not perceive a grainless print as being particularly sharp. My best results were with a fine grain film like Kodak Pan-X and the Beutler formula. I have a 35mm negative of the old post office in Gainesville, FL taken with a normal lens from across the square and every tile in the roof is sharply defined. The detail in the print is incredible.

I might also say that it is pointless to use special films and developers as the OP mentions unless you use a tripod. If using an SLR then the mirror lock up function should be used to avoid camera shake.

tony lockerbie · May 27, 2013

Always great to read about something new though. I have found my wonder developer...Pyrocat-HD

cliveh · May 27, 2013

There is nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept.

Ansel Adams

Bruce Robbins · May 27, 2013

Gerald C Koch said:
The funny thing is that the human eye/brain does not perceive a grainless print as being particularly sharp. (snip) I might also say that it is pointless to use special films and developers as the OP mentions unless you use a tripod. If using an SLR then the mirror lock up function should be used to avoid camera shake.

I think your first point is true some of the time but not all of the time. I've seen some very sharp and grain free prints from large format negs, for example. I view the issue about tripods from a slightly different perspective. If you're after ultimate sharpness then, yes, a tripod is essential. Assume for a moment, though, that, for whatever reason, you don't want to or can't use a tripod. Under those circumstances, the results using a high acutance developer might well look sharper than those using a solvent-type developer. So although sharpness wouldn't be as high as when a tripod is used, it would still be better than you might otherwise achieve with a different film/developer combination.

NedL · May 27, 2013

cliveh said:
There is nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept.
Ansel Adams

Totally off topic here, but when I tried to think of the converse of this statement it made me laugh.

Athiril · May 28, 2013

Highest I've had clearly discernible is 150 lp/mm, normally my stuff is ~1/3rd of that, and I don't have a microscope to see if it goes any higher. But I don't even need to bother with that, other than sheer curiosity of what the lens is capable of (Was a Canon FD 28mm @ f/5.6).. I really want to try this with russian lens out of curiosity too.

Though screwed the development on this.. ended up with a dMax of 0.43 :munch:

Gerald C Koch · May 28, 2013

NedL said:
Totally off topic here, but when I tried to think of the converse of this statement it made me laugh.

Pictorialism perhaps? I have seen some very good subjects rendered in a fuzzy manner by those that embrace this concept.

NedL · May 29, 2013

Gerald C Koch said:
Pictorialism perhaps? I have seen some very good subjects rendered in a fuzzy manner by those that embrace this concept.

Very good! I was being silly, but I believe you are right.

John Wiegerink · May 29, 2013

Magic Silver Bullet

Oh my! This is exactly what I have been waiting for and got to get my hands on some. I think I'll run down to Norman's Camera (last photo supply shop in Grand Rapids, Michigan) and pick up a bottle. Truth is the last time I was there I couldn't even buy Kodak Xtol and the floor person said they were NOT going to handle any products/chemicals that come in the familiar yellow package. They will still handle some Ilford products, but that's about it. So, I guess I'll stick with Pyrocat-HD and Rodinal for the time being. I do suppose I'd try it if I could get it, but I'm not jumping through fire rings just to try it. JohnW

My sharpest ever negs

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency