Paper Developers

Ian Grant · Feb 3, 2009

I rather suspect your right but most of my books are in storage in the UK, I've realised that I must have at least another 150- 200 here in Turkey in odd files that need adding and that's on top of the ones I mentioned earlier. That's without going through the Lab Index

My data started as part of research for work in the mid 70's but I only resurrected it again seriously about 18 months ago. My weakest area is some of the US companies, except Kodak & Agfa Ansco.

I do intend to make it all available at some stage, probably as some kind of Online database, it will include, Film, Paper & specialist B&W devs, sop baths, fixers, toners, etc etc.

Ian

Photo Engineer · Feb 3, 2009

I think a point to be made here is that of the literally hundreds if not thousands of developers for films and papers have been touted over the years, only about a dozen or so of each type have been commercialized. And, looking over the data that I have seen over the years, I find that there is no magic bullet. It is like squeezing a baloon filled with water. It still stays the same size, changes shape a bit, and if you squeeze too hard, your bubble bursts.

You get any two from film; Speed, Grain and Sharpness, not all 3. With paper, you might say it is Speed, contrast, shadows, highlights and tone or something like that. You cannot get all of these either. Paper developers have virtually no effect on grain and sharpness at normal viewing distance and due to the emulsion types used.

PE

Ian Grant · Feb 3, 2009

My own view mirror yours Ron (PE) there are only a few types of developer most user would want to use or try, and most companies produced quite similar products that were and still are almost interchangeable.

The interesting aspects are the deviations from the norms, the more obscure formulae that were once common place, and sometimes the origins. Even Capstaff's D76 is a reworking of a much older Wellington MQ Borax formulae and Kodak's research into Fine Grain developers only really began in earnest after D76 with the variations etc.

In addition some excellent products have been lost after companies closed or merged, some of these formuale are published.

Ian

Photo Engineer · Feb 3, 2009

Ian, I have some old ammonia developers and some old copper developers that just boggle the mind. Yes, I think we pretty much agree. And, the lost formulas are tragic as some of them were quite good.

PE

Ray Rogers · Feb 3, 2009

The Lone Ranger would only load his gun with Silver Bullets!

Ian Grant said:
The interesting aspects are the deviations from the norms... In addition some excellent products have been lost after companies closed or merged, some of these formuale are published.
Ian

Photo Engineer said:
I have some old ammonia developers and some old copper developers that just boggle the mind... the lost formulas are tragic as some of them were quite good.
PE

Hmmm, Since we all agree, I guess it is not unreasonable to expect, eventually, these developers to be described in an accessible location, such as Randy's Collection, Ian's online database, Apug articles, the proposed wiki, or one of Ron's upcomming books!

Photo Engineer · Feb 3, 2009

Ray;

Why? There is no magic bullet. I use D-76, HC110, Dektol and Liquidol. (more to come on this..... )

PE

Ray Rogers · Feb 3, 2009

Photo Engineer said:
Ray;

Why? There is no magic bullet. I use D-76, HC110, Dektol and Liquidol. (more to come on this..... )

PE

Because it is like the gene pool;
its better not to lose what you already have engineered.

Esoteric, new or forgoten processes might be visited and the one key fits all might not be the best solution to a particular problem.

Photo Engineer · Feb 3, 2009

Lets see then, the earth should have Trilobites, Tyrannosaurus Rexii, and Neandertals? They were a great loss to the gene pool. I think you miss the point that there is no magic bullet. They didn't offer any great advantage and should go the way of all extinct offerings by nature due to evolution. Or, we might be stuck with the Dodo bird too.

PE

Kirk Keyes · Feb 4, 2009

I can do without the Neaderthals as I'm sure we'd just make second class citizens out of them, and maybe it would be cool to have a few T. Rex around (but not a lot of them), but man, I would love to have some Trilobites around today!

Anyway, I think this reflects an interesting aspect of human behaviour that we always romanticize things that are "lost", be it civilizations, ways of life, or crappy old developers.

sun of sand · Feb 4, 2009

I think it's fun

Since they all do the same basic thing we should all just drive one automobile made by the US or Japanese government?

I'll go with.. the cherry red version?
Sorry
Black or Navy Blue, please
That sucks a bit

Even throw in a mercedes option and you still have a pretty plain highway

Not even saying that outlook is wrong
I'm just saying that unless you take this approach seriously for all things..

Is HC-110 better than any old crappy developer? Is its longevity due to marketing only? No idea.
Maybe there isn't a magic bullet but perhaps there is some great product that simply fell out of favor for long enough to be forgotten? I doubt every developer has been duplicated but I don't doubt that most are within the specified ranges of another
Range sounds like variability to me

What is so great about SuperXX Panatomic-X Azo Amidol Petzval lenses
..film?

Film could be the Dodo Yugo soon enough

Anyone know what Dupont/Defender 57-D is? Rectigraphic type processor paper developer.
Don't know if it's more paper or film developer
It'll be fun to try out some month though..sometime

Ray Rogers · Feb 4, 2009

The Photographic Renaissance

"Lets see then, the earth should have Trilobites, Tyrannosaurus Rexii, and Neandertals? They were a great loss to the gene pool."

I think you missunderstand the concept behind why there is value in maintaining gene pools!

Anyway, I don't understand your POV.

I might agree with you if we are limiting the scope this discussion to traditional b/w materials but I had other photographic systems in mind.

The database I refer to is not one for the casual user,
but just a record of what has been done and learned by others.

What do you have against that?

Have you never heard of the lone wolf who goes and does exactly what others said was impossible?

A potential stepping stone at best and at worst, a good public historical record is all I am talking about.

If you do not want to pass on your knowledge of esoteric developers then that is your choice - but another possibility is that you simply share your knowledge and let others think and fiddle as they wish.

The loss of knowledge is my point. Frequently, only "positive" results are published, but I think records of what didn't work are of value as well.

Photo Engineer · Feb 4, 2009

I think you guys need to stand over a tray full of good ammonia developer and take a deep breath!

There are hundreds of useful and good developers now in use, and I'm sure more will be forthcoming. But there are thousands of developers that have fallen by the wayside, and probably for good reason. The question is WHY did they fall out of favor. Some of the old developers were the thing in their day simply because we did not KNOW how to make something better. Now we do. At one time, we didn't even know how to fix an image!

So, although we might enjoy seeing a trilobite or two in a zoo or somewhere, they would not quite measure up to a modern life form in many ways. Why revive a primitive developer when you have some pretty good choices today?

PE

Kirk Keyes · Feb 4, 2009

Ray Rogers;747006Have you never heard of the lone wolf who goes and does exactly what others said was impossible? [/QUOTE said:
I've heard of him. He's a an extremely rare guy - the one that gets something to work that others (at least knowledgable others) have said is impossible.

But then, have you heard of the other lone wolf that goes and does exactly what others said was impossible only to find they were right? He's a lot more common lone wolf. Infact, there are a lot more of these lone wolves than one would think considering they are lone wolves...

Anyway, I'm all for preserving the information gained in the past and making it freely available. So when is the integrated APUGiki coming online?

Kirk Keyes · Feb 4, 2009

You can call trilobites primitive, but they were one of the most successful species ever - we know of over 20,000 species known. If it hadn't been for the Permian Extinction and sharks coming along, we'd probably have them everwhere today, and not just in the zoo!

CBG · Feb 4, 2009

I can't speak for anyone else, but my collecting of various formulas is not directly leading to using or experimenting with them all, but simply gathering most of them as relics of history. A certain few will get used, but they are generally so well known that they are common knowledge. The rest, I really can't describe why I like collecting. I just do.

My particular interest so far has been the best known ummm thousand or so mid to late twentieth century major maker formulas plus a few hobbyist / inventor / re-inventor creations from people such as Patrick Gainer, our own PE, etc. I do like the idea that those formulas could be used, even if I don't.

I'm very grateful that various people like Ian Grant have done the original research to make such a wealth of material available on the net - and especially grateful they have taken the time - as in here - to correct the numerous errors that have slipped into some of the well known compendiums.

My own research - which does not deserve the name research - has been 98% done on the net, with all the errors that entails. I have combed through many sites, most of which are secondary sources, and found endless contradictions and variations. It's been interesting.

Anyway, thanks to Ian and PE and Pat Gainer and the others who have made all this info available!

Ian Grant · Feb 4, 2009

The important thing is that we only place accurate information on the internet. There are too many errors floating about.

Ian

Photo Engineer · Feb 4, 2009

Kirk Keyes said:
You can call trilobites primitive, but they were one of the most successful species ever - we know of over 20,000 species known. If it hadn't been for the Permian Extinction and sharks coming along, we'd probably have them everwhere today, and not just in the zoo!

Kirk;

I am quite well aware of the Trilobite situation, as the author of one of the best books on the subject is Tom Whiteley of Wey and Whitely emulsion fame. Tom is an acknowledged world-wide expert on the subject. In addition, one of the largest deposits of Trilobites can be found at Kashong NY which is within about 2 hours driving distance from here.

As for extinction, yes, something better or more "useful" comes along.

And, lone wolves can be either right or wrong. Usually the percentage is rather lopsided, or they find that they are right before their time. Again, Tesla comes to mind. He was both right and wrong, as well as being before his time.

As for being right in terms of accuracy, I agree with Ian. We must try to fix the errors that creep in!

PE

Kirk Keyes · Feb 4, 2009

Photo Engineer said:
As for being right in terms of accuracy, I agree with Ian. We must try to fix the errors that creep in!

Most Certainly!

We don't need to fear KCl creep, but we do error creep.

(Sorry, pH electrode joke there...)

Ray Rogers · Feb 4, 2009

Kirk Keyes said:
Most Certainly!
We don't need to fear KCl creep...
(Sorry, pH electrode joke there...)

Actually I am afraid of this... it keeps getting closer and closer...
Are you sure it is harmless? Can you explain this most curious behaviour?

It is quite cute! I feel like it has imprinted me as it's mother!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kirk Keyes · Feb 4, 2009

Curious behaviour - KCl creep? I'm pretty certain it's harmless.

Explain - how about as the KCl solution concentrates from evaporation, the crystals grow and push out of the liquid. As the crystals push out, they wick more concentrated KCl solution which then saturates and causes more crystals to form. Repeat this process a lot. And then you have a bunch of KCl on the outside of your electrode.

Actually, there is one concern, and that is getting the crystals into your lab gear or having it fall off and into solutions where it could contaminate them.

Ray Rogers · Feb 5, 2009

Master Wickers

Kirk Keyes said:
Curious behaviour - KCl creep?
Explain - how about as the KCl solution concentrates from evaporation, the crystals grow and push out of the liquid. As the crystals push out, they wick more concentrated KCl solution which then saturates and causes more crystals to form. Repeat this process a lot. And then you have a bunch of KCl on the outside of your electrode.

I like this explanaion! It fails however, to describe what is unique to creepers... I am not sure but I think given saturated solutions of table salt, sugar and hypo, none of these would creep.

Of all the solutions I have left out to go dry, the "creepy crawlers" seemed to be quite a small group.

Has your experience been different?
If we agree that some solutions creep and some don't - then the question is "Why?"

Does some characteristic of their crystals make them "master wickers"?

Kirk Keyes · Feb 5, 2009

I agree, most things do not creep when crowing crystals, but KCl easily does.

I have no idea why it does, but a rather fruitless search of the interweb did bring up one geology paper that mentioned that KCl can grow into fibrous-like crystals that can transport liquid through them and allow for creep in the growth. At least that what I think they were saying... So they wick through the "middle" of the fibrous bundle.

A mechanism like this would allow the crystals to grow from the inside out and extend the physical length of the crystal without having solution surrounding the crystal, which is needed typically for crystals to grow.

Sounds like a potential masters thesis to figure it out.

Ray Rogers · Feb 5, 2009

Kirk Keyes said:
A mechanism like this would allow the crystals to grow from the inside out and extend the physical length of the crystal without having solution surrounding the crystal, which is needed typically for crystals to grow.

Sounds like a potential masters thesis to figure it out.

I like it! The Hollywood film version: "The Blob Meets The Creepy Crawler"
followed 9 months later by their offspring "Amoeba Crystals".

Photo Engineer · Feb 6, 2009

Assumptions will fail you in your thesis. What if the gestation period of baby amoeba crystals is not 9 months?

PE

Paper Developers

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency