• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up
Resource icon

PMB Pyro-Metol-Borax film developer

Ian Grant

Subscriber
Allowing Ads
Joined
Aug 2, 2004
Messages
23,418
Location
West Midland
Format
Multi Format
Ian Grant submitted a new resource:

(there was a url link here which no longer exists) - PMB Pyro-Metol-Borax film developer



(there was a url link here which no longer exists)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ian,

Having no experience with pyro developers, I'm not sure if "pyro" as used in this formula is pyrogallol or pyrocatechin. When you search on "pyro" at Photog Formulary, both come up.

Looks like an interesting formula to try out. Thanks
 
When the word Pyro is used in a formula it's always Pyrogallol, I've not tried this developer but the implication is it's finer grained than D76.

Pyrogallol was used in commercial D&P developers by both Ilford & Kodak because it gives clean working negatives with less base fog. A cleaner working developer will have better tonality.

Ian
 
Well known pyro-metol formula is Pyro-Triethanolamine. Some time ago I was playing with Pyro+Phenidone developer with next fine grain formula:

RD-108
Sodium sulphite 50g
Pyrogallol 6g
Phenidone 0.2g
Water 1l
pH 8.1

starting dev.time 9-12min.
 
I found this in the 'BJ Almanac' and made it up and developed some outdated Kodak Tri-X 120 film in it -- time needed was 13 mins -- it did not keep well though.
 
Michael the original Kodak Fine grain developer used only Metol, I've posted it(there was a url link here which no longer exists). The so called Haist version based on this.

There's two interesting articles on the Moderrn uses of Pyro written late 1930's and eearly 40's that I must put online.

Ian
 
14 fl. oz?

Ian I am still unable to equate 14 fl.oz. to approx 1.5L. 14 fl. oz. is nearer 400ml. Could you check that source again, please?
Sounds more like 140 oz. or about 2 US gallon maybe? 14oz is rather left-field to me.

Metol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 gr (2g)
Sodium Sulphite (anhyd) . . . . . . 400gr (100g)
Borax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 gr (2g)
Water to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 ozs *** (If US oz 1600ml - UK 1540ml)

Murray

 
Last edited by a moderator:
TRASK : you asked how the negatives came out -- well, the fog level was low enough and the negatives printed well -- after one film went through I noticed the next time I used it the negs were under -developed -- I think the developer oxidises quickly.
 
This is an interesting developer, which I picked independently of Photrio first from a booklet of Alfonse Cuisinier. There is development time of 14 minutes, but not much else, accompanying the formula, only that “According to its author, this developer gives images whose contrast is more normal than that of the images generated by the D-76.”

In a subsequent private conversation Ian gave me some info about the developer author, that is rather difficult to find, thanks Ian, for your efforts. This person was a well-connected amateur. IMO, a replacement of hydroquinone with pyrogallol, despite them both being hydroxybenzenes, is non-equivalent. I do not have any data that metol is superadditive with pyrogallol, but I know that pyrogallol activity is very dependent on pH, and at pH 8 is practically zero, while above 9 it is quite substantial. BTW, all other pyro-metol developers I know have a significantly higher pH (9.0-9.5 or above). In comparison, hydroquinone has zero activity at pH 10 and below and exhibits apparent weak superadditivity with metol.

So, I was intrigued and made small portions of this developer, adjusted to pH 8.2, 8.5 and 9.2., in pairs of plus or minus pyro. Without boring you with curves, I can say that at pH 8 there is no difference between the images generated by development in a solution plus or minus pyro. At pH 8.5 there is a subtle difference, primarily in the highlights, but IMHO only a highly trained observer will be able to see it. So, pH 7.6 mentioned in the BJP text clearly does not fit. My results could be explained by suggesting that my pyro lost activity, but the other two developers I made recently are performing according to expectations.

So, we are dealing here essentially with a soft-working metol-sulfite like diluted D23, which, depending on the quality of sulfite, will have somewhat better highlight discrimination. Oddly, with sulfite of worse quality the visual appeal of the images may be stronger and the development time considerably shorter. With tight pH control, one can arrive at a very personal highlight control developer, not easily achievable with D-76. I do not know how well it will keep, but within two weeks of my humble experimentation the initial pink color stayed constant, despite use. I hope this helps.