Yes. Re-immersing the film in an alkaline solution or used developer only creates an overall stain and does not contribute to the image. At the point where bath/solution C is used all the silver halide has been removed from the film. Using C only makes the negative harder to print. Think of it as just adding fog to the negative. One of the reasons that I dislike staining development is all the mythology that has grown up around it. Most of it is bad science.
hi kidA
when i was living in a cheap loft
i ran out of money. i was film and paper rich
and barely had enough money for my rent and food.
i found a red and white can of " gaf universal developer" that
had been sitting on a drafty windowsill for probably 25 years. i had
never heard of gaf universal, and i mixed it up. it was 5 gallons, and i
processed all my film and paper in it continuously for a summer before
it went bad. ... i ran out of developer and money and eventually found
work and used a few other developers that didn't really cut the mustard,
so a couple of years later i got a photo lab index and had a conversation
with a guy names jc welch who owns equinox photographic. he knew of
gaf universal and didn't really know what it was but suggested i use ansco130
and it might have been the same stuff, so i did. that was around 1999-2003
i don't remember exactly but it began a long long relationship
i had with ansco 130. i used about 6 or 8 gallons of it a year, i'd buy it all at once
and mix it all at once and just use it until i ran out ( it has a mixed stock shelf life of a year )
and i'd buy some more .. i used it as a print developer and used it as a film developer. i put every film i could find in it.
it ended up being armloads ( thousands of sheets of tri x, tmx(100) and tmy(400) (4x5 and 5x7, and some 8x10 )
as well as every kodak, and ilford, sometimes foma and forte 35mm and 120 roll i cold find ( again thousands of them ).
the directions on the gaf-can said 1:1. 1:2paper, and 1:6 film and something like 6mins@68ºF so that is what i did with 130.
eventually i changed the dilutions to see what would happen if it was more or less dilute, if it was replenished,
exhausted, done in deep tanks or trays, or hand tanks, stand, semi stand, with hangers, rotary processors ..
i used this developer every way i could so i knew it backwards and forwards with every film i could find, expired,
fresh, papers expired fresh, and liquid emulsions too. about 5-6 years into this love affair
i met up with caffenol c .. and used that the same way too, and decided to break rank, and add 10-20 drams ( about 1-2oz )
of ansco 130 into the coffee and it worked great.
they were the perfect compliments for each other- easy to mix, easy to use, and PREDICTABLE ...
i used this developer like this for about 10 years. about 4 of those 10 years i sourced my own coffee
and roasted it myself for this coffee developer i eventually decided to use the ansco130 split processing so the A130 as a 1st bath developer
for 1/2 the development time and the coffee developer ( with a little ansco130 mixed in ) for the other half.
i did this for a couple of years too for both sheets and rolls until i ran out of ansco130 and didnt' want to pony up the cash for a few more gallons of it.
eventually after a bunch of tests i decided dektol would work just as well as ansco 130 and i could use up the few gallon packets i have on hand,
and lately i have scratch-mixed D72 ( pretty much the same thing as dektol ) and i have been using dektol and caffenol c
as my main print and film developer for about a year maybe more. i can't really complain.
a little bit of dektol ( or ansco 130 ) in 3-4 L of caffenol gives it an enormous shelf life
( i have procesed hundreds of sheets of paper and film ( rolls and sheets ) without replenishment ...
as for the reason why ... i like to know my chemistry and film backwards and forwards and not have any surprises
i like to know how it will work in any situation, so i use a developer and film until ... i know.
as with everything YMMV ...
good luck with your developer search !
I dislike the myths too. That's not a problem limited to staining developers though.
I'm also interested in your thoughts on specific characteristics of the developers, films and papers you used. What, other than economic reasons, did you change and tweak your developers for? What was lacking? What was gained? And I'm not only asking you; if everyone here can give a little explanation, it would help us all.
Yes there is always Rodinal. But staining developers seem to have more myths associated with them. The one that staining developers produce less grain is particularly egregious. The dye-cloud around each grain just makes the grain less apparent.
The problem is the expectation that finer grain will result in greater resolution. The dye-cloud is several times larger in diameter than the silver grain and actually lessens resolution.
I like to keep things simple and today I shot a roll of Tri-X using ID-11 stock developer and the pictures are just right for my eyes. I am going to go with that and just work on other aspects of my photography. Well when I run out of ID-11 I will try D76 and decide on the 2 developers. I know they are about the same but D76 has a lot of information that comes with it for developing Tri-X and the ID-11 only gives develop time for box speed.
I went to BHPhoto to order some Tri-X and I looked at the 100ft roll which is $110.00. So based on 20 rolls you would be losing money over just buying the single rolls which would be $99.00. Very strange. However if you buy HP5 in 100 ft rolls you would save about $36.00 based on the 20 rolls figure. I guess I want to take another look at HP5.
What works for d76 works for id11 and vice versa. You can even exchange the instructions for developing.
Well I just ordered 10 rolls of Tri-X. I have a question if somebody wouldn't mind. I did google it up but every answer in the book comes up and that does not help. Anyway the question is does Tri-X need a pre rinse before the developer. With Illford they actually say not to in their info but I did not see a word about it with Tri-X. I have only shot one roll of Tri-X so far and I did not do a pre rinse and the results were fine. The developer did not turn purple or anything but maybe it will after a couple rolls. I am using the developer as a stock solution so that I can get 10 rolls per liter.
Well I just ordered 10 rolls of Tri-X. I have a question if somebody wouldn't mind. I did google it up but every answer in the book comes up and that does not help. Anyway the question is does Tri-X need a pre rinse before the developer. With Illford they actually say not to in their info but I did not see a word about it with Tri-X. I have only shot one roll of Tri-X so far and I did not do a pre rinse and the results were fine. The developer did not turn purple or anything but maybe it will after a couple rolls. I am using the developer as a stock solution so that I can get 10 rolls per liter.
Thank you for your help Matt. I guess I will go with a pre rinse at least for now. Besides it will probably bring the film and container closer to the 68 degree developing temperature.
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?