Paper developer

There is talk in the literature about developers effecting the toning results, as well as the fixer type. With a non hardner fixer being the standard for non staining.I found that paper type makes a huge different.

If you are happy with your results continue to do what you are doing, it you just want to be playful and experiment try some other paper types with one developer and then move to another. If you get too many variables going your eyes will glaze over. Just my 2 cents worth.

 

Very good 2 part article in View Camera (March/April & May/June issues) by Bruce Barlow - "The Great Paper/Developer Shoot-out". Dektol, 4-6 mins for fiber, was his preferred developer. I like Photo Formulary's version (TD-30).
Have to admit, though, the articles are a bit rambling.

 

Apparently not everybody like it.....

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/lfforum/topic/498648.html

 

I don't have experience with Ansco 130 although I have heard that it is an excellent developer. I do know that the MAS Amidol formula is a highly energetic developer capable of printing very deep and convincing blacks. I have recently with the help of Jorge formulated a catechol/pyrogallol/phenidone paper developer that is very energetic and probably the best paper developer that I have used next to the MAS Amidol formula. Formulas for both the Amidol and Pyro Plus Paper developer are found on www.unblinkingeye.com

 

we do a similar class every year and the leading winners for the past few years are LPD 1 :4 and Ansco 130 1:2. Which just goes to show "whatever floats your boat". That class will begin again in mid june so it will be interesting to see what happens this year.

 

I never found a significant difference in paper developers until I tried 130, with which I'm able to get a beautiful range of tones, and especially deep blacks. It's not a huge difference compared to Dektol or Ilford Universal, but it's there.

Where 130 really shines is in the life of the working solution. I had working solution that was well over 6 months old and was dark as could be, but still worked just fine.

 

Agfa Multigrade Fiber does not contain incooperated developer. I tested this for lith printing. Other Agfa Fibers like Brovira and the last Portriga contain developer

 

If you expose and develope accordingly you can get the max black out of a paper with about everything. See also Richard Henry's "Controls in Black and White Photography" who took a deeper look into this than probably most
of us did.

Over the years I used Eukobrom, Dokumol, Neutol NE, Neutol wa; Neutol plus, Ansco 130, D72 and others. Most of their differences can be adjusted for in the process the one exception being print tone. With respect to Dmax: No difference, nil, nada!

Stefan

PS.: Ansco 130 keeps *very* well.

 

I agree - to a point. Max blacks are not a problem The problem is producing maximum blacks plus rich microtonality.

Beware! Pursuit of microtonality can lead you to the slippery slope of LF, ULF and contact printing on Azo!

 

David,

Where did you buy the Cachet paper? I bought some grade 3 and 4 last month and they were fogged.

Cheers,

Cecil

 

Cecil,

What paper developer are you using with the Cachet? Have you tried adding some Benzotriazole to your working developer?

 

I use 130 paper developer from PF, diluted 1:1. I developed the paper for 3 minutes because the image did not start to show up until about 1 minute. The grade 4 turned grey. The grade 3 paper, while not as bad as the grade 4, had a shade of grey on it. I have been using this developer/development time on Ilford and Oriental papers for a few months and have never had this problem.

Which grades do you guys use?

B&H did not have Cachet papers in stock. I bought them from Freestyle and they took them back and refunded me promptly. Great service.

 

You really need to get a few different devlopers like the ones suggested and give them a try comparing prints from the same negative. You cannot go wrong trying Ansco 130, i think you will find it makes richer prints especially on Oriental IMHO. I also liked the quality on Agfa Warmtone but did not see an appreciable difference between 130 and Dektol on Agfa Neutral FB. But of course what I like in a print may vary from you.

 

Then again looking into other papers might not be such a bad idea.

Got this from the other LF forum:

http://biz.yahoo.com/rc/040531/tech_agfagevaert_3.html


Hope they get their act together. I do enjoy using Agfa paper for many applications.

Now what did I do with that Rodinal recipe?

 

I tried Ansco 130 (Photographers' Formulary F-130) and Dektol with several papers: Ilford MGIV FB and Galerie, Seagull VC and graded. I found Ansco 1+2 and Dektol 1+2 to be virtually indistinguishable with the Ilford FB papers. That statement is based on subjective inspection of prints as well as quantitive measurements on test strips with a densitometer. If there really was a difference between the two developers with the Ilford papers, it was that prints developed with Ansco might have slightly warmer blacks - certainly not an effect which jumped out at me.

Max black might have been a bit darker with Seagull than Ilford - have to go back and check my notes, don't use Seagull too often so my memory of those tests isn't so clear.

The F-130 is a lot more expensive per print, but the stock seems to keep better than Dektol stock - that's even with Dust-Off blown into my storage containers to displace oxygen. The F-130 got very brown by the activity didn't seem to degrade. I'm not so confident saying that about Dektol.

Chris