pushing with Caffenol C

Untitled

A
Untitled

  • 1
  • 0
  • 59
Volcano Vixen

H
Volcano Vixen

  • 0
  • 0
  • 65
1000002287.jpg

H
1000002287.jpg

  • 0
  • 0
  • 61
Hydro Power Maintenance

H
Hydro Power Maintenance

  • 2
  • 0
  • 99
Bangor Mural.

Bangor Mural.

  • 2
  • 0
  • 105

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
199,540
Messages
2,792,927
Members
99,938
Latest member
pixellegolas
Recent bookmarks
0

mabman

Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2007
Messages
834
Location
Winnipeg, MB
Format
35mm
Just wondering if it's possible to do a 2 or 3 stop push using Caffenol C (with Tri-X) - it looks like an interesting developer, and some searching seems to indicate there is a slight push with it.

However, I can't find any info one way or the other on deliberate pushing, so any info is appreciated (times, good/bad sample results, etc).

(I'm new to b/w developing, so I apologize if this is a stupid question - I also searched for pushing info with staining developers generally, but didn't come up with much.)

Thanks!
 

Michael W

Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2005
Messages
1,594
Location
Sydney
Format
Multi Format
I'd be surprised if you got any push from Caffenol devs based on my admittedly limited experience. My first attempt with Era 100 & basic caffenol was underexposed & underdeveloped, although done according to instructions. Based on the results I did a second roll rated at 25, added 25% extra each of the coffee & washing soda & developed for 30% more time. Results were excellent, well exposed & developed with good tonal range.
However this indicates to me that Caffenol is a speed reducing developer. I know that adding ascorbic acid is meant to boost speed, but I heard it's only about 1 stop. So I reckon you'd be lucky to get box speed, let alone a push. Still, I look forward to hearing from those with more experience.
 

htmlguru4242

Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2005
Messages
1,012
Location
Eastern NC, USA
Format
Multi Format
If memory serves, Donald Qualls was talking about it increasing speed in some of his tests. I believe that he was specifically using it with AGFA Copex, though.

I don't believe it was deliberate, but check for his posts on it to find out.

From my (also limited) experience, it doesn't seem like this is going to be great for pushing films. I don't really have any chemical or photographic explaination, it just seems this way. If anything, you'd have issues keeping the temperature in the right place. After the ~15 minutes needed for some films, its already cooled down significantly; for pushes, it'll be even colder and work slower.

Try it (maybe with a water bath to keep it around its original temperature), and see what happens.

Tri-X is a good choice for this experiment, as it handles a two or three stop push very well in certain developers.
 

rwyoung

Member
Joined
Apr 18, 2006
Messages
708
Location
Lawrence, KS
Format
Multi Format
In my experience, Folgerol in a small tank, minimal agitation cost me about -2 1/2 stops (maybe a little less like -2 1/3). Seems to oxidize quickly and didn't work well in the Jobo with constant agitation.

Next, Vit-C (not Folgerol-C) gave me about the same speed as D76 with Tri-X, or -1/3 stop. However that was in a Jobo and I have a feeling the constant agitation is speeding up the oxidation/exhaustion.

I have not gone beyone one try of Folgerol-C as my reason for playing with Folgerol in the first place is its staining (sorta) properties. Folgerol-C leaves less stain.
 

like2fiddle

Member
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
29
Location
Vermont
Format
35mm RF
I know this thread is a little outdated, but I recently played a little with this subject and felt I might be able to contribute.

I rolled a short roll of Tri-X and exposed the same scene at different EI's (100, 200, 400, 800) then developed it in caffenol-c (Price Chopper instant coffee 4 tsp, Arm & Hammer Washing soda 2.25 tsp, vitamin c 1 gram, 10 oz./300ml water at 67.5 F) for 15 minutes with continuous agitation for first 30 seconds and then 10 sec agitation every 4 minutes. The negatives actually look pretty good to the naked eye, but are somewhat fogged. My scanner can't seem to figure out where one exposure ends and the next begins. The 800 exposure appears to be the best of the lot. Previous to this test, I tried a few shots with HP5 at 200 and developed x 30 minutes and the negatives looked very over-developed.
 

like2fiddle

Member
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
29
Location
Vermont
Format
35mm RF
caffenol-c and HP5

Here's some examples of HP-5 rated at 200, 400, and 800 and developed in Caffenol-c for 15 minutes. Low resolution scans, flatbed, no post processing.

cafc200.JPG
exposed as if ASA 200

cafc400.JPG
exposed as if ASA 400

cafc801.JPG
exposed as if ASA 800
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom