Pyro for a beginner.

sanking

Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2003
Messages
5,437
Location
Greenville,
Format
Large Format
I believe Michael and Paula use ABC pyro which I think tends to have more general stain than PMK does.

Not necessarily. How much general stain ABC Pyro produces is dependent on the condition of the sodium sulfite stock solution. If fresh, the general stain of ABC Pyro is quite low.

The problem with ABC Pyro for enlarging is that it gives very large film grain. This is not completely bad because in some cases film grain can enhance image sharpness.

Sandy King
 

c6h6o3

Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2002
Messages
3,215
Format
Large Format
This is simply not true. I print PMK pyro negatives on enlarging paper all the time. I believe Michael and Paula use ABC pyro which I think tends to have more general stain than PMK does.

I guess you haven't seen their negatives. I certainly couldn't print them on enlarging paper.
What I really meant to say was "Don't use ABC, which is what M&P use".

PMK has other problems, not the least of which is much greater general (aka fog) stain than ABC.

I still believe the best developer for both enlarging and contact printing purposes is Pyrocat.

Personally, I don't use either pyrogallol or pyrocatechin based developers for 90% of my negatives.

Nothing has been as overhyped as pyro developers, except perhaps Azo.

BTW, I used PMK for many years and think it's a fine developer for enlarging paper. Hutchings is a true pioneer, but there have been many improvements made in the years since he developed his breakthrough. Ask Sandy why he developed Pyrocat in the first place.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

dslater

Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2005
Messages
740
Location
Hollis, NH
Format
35mm

Their negatives are dense because AZO has such a long scale that they need to develop them to a very high contrast. Clearly they are not suitable for enlarging paper, but this isn't because of the developer they use - it's because of the development time they use. If they were using another developer like D76, their negatives still wouldn't print well on enlarging paper.
I use both PMK and Pyrocat and find little difference between the negatives other than the color of the stain. My PMK negatives certainly do not have significantly more general stain than my Pyrocat negatives.
 

c6h6o3

Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2002
Messages
3,215
Format
Large Format
My PMK negatives certainly do not have significantly more general stain than my Pyrocat negatives.

You must know something I don't, then. Maybe I'll give it another try.
 

PhotoJim

Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2005
Messages
2,314
Location
Regina, SK, CA
Format
35mm
You must know something I don't, then. Maybe I'll give it another try.

The general stain with PMK depends on the film. I find that Delta 100, Delta 400 and Pan-F Plus have very little general stain, FP-4 and HP-5 Plus have more, and Tri-X and Plus-X have the most, of the films I've tried with it.

Despite the general stain, I find that negatives from any of these films (except the Deltas, which I haven't really dialed in yet) are very printable. The quality of the image from the negative is not inversely proportional to the general stain, despite what a person's instincts might be.
 

dslater

Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2005
Messages
740
Location
Hollis, NH
Format
35mm
You must know something I don't, then. Maybe I'll give it another try.

Hmm - I'm not sure. I follow the directions in "The Book of Pyro" and I use FP4+ film. I do not use the after bath following the fix stage as it seems to only add to the general stain. I do mix all my chemistry with distilled water and I get my PMK pre-mixed from Bostic & Sullivan. I also use TF-4 as my fixer and a plain water stop bath
Hope this helps.

Dan
 

c6h6o3

Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2002
Messages
3,215
Format
Large Format
"Nothing has been as overhyped as pyro developers, except perhaps Azo."

Jim, I'm curious what you mean, given your previous use of AZO. Could you explain a little? I still use your AZO prints to see what I missed out on.

GB

Hello, my name is Jim and I'm an Azoholic. <"Hi, Jim!">

I still use Azo because I still have some, but I need to learn to use something else. Some day I will run out.

As I begin to search for alternatives I see prints on other papers that are just as good as the finest Azo prints. Maybe they weren't as easy to make as they would have been with Azo, and maybe the paper was more expensive but the end results are exquisite.

People (including myself) got too locked up on it as the be-all and end-all of photographic papers. I still love it but I've seen recent prints by Scott Killian (Kentona) and Joe Freeman (Centennial POP) which just about made me weep they were so fine.

When one is shielded with his "I've got the amazing, secret unfair advantage" armor, the realization that it's printing skill that is the most important element tends to bounce off one's helmeted head. Lately I've been a little more open minded.

Thanks for hearing my testimony.
 

c6h6o3

Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2002
Messages
3,215
Format
Large Format

I should tell you that I always did the after bath in used developer. That's probably why my PMK negatives have so much fog stain.

The exception to this is Ilford Pan F+, which yields beautifully image stained negatives with no detectable fog, even if you do the after bath. One of my all time favorite combinations. If they still make Pan F, you owe it to yourself to give it a try.

I've always like PMK for enlargements. It's just the contact prints that I didn't like with it.
 

Ole

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Sep 9, 2002
Messages
9,244
Location
Bergen, Norway
Format
Large Format
I really think I've come to the wrong place, and I really don't have enough experience to be posting here. If a moderator could please delete this thread I'd appreciate it. Thanks.

Experience is a cumulative thing, and here on APUG you will get several centuries of cumulative experience in reply to even the simplest question. That doesn't mean that all the answers will be correct, not even that they will all agree. But that's just the way it is with experience.

Your seemingly simple question has sparked off a very interesting exchange of opinions on the different experiences with different varieties of staining developers, which is far too valuable (and interesting) to be deleted.

So your request for deletion is denied - at least for the time being.
 

sanking

Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2003
Messages
5,437
Location
Greenville,
Format
Large Format


I agree with you that if you develop with pyro staining developers the switch between graded and VC silver papers requires some forethought. But it is fairly easy to do if you develop for the graded paper and adjust for VC papers with filters.

As to the first point, it depends on what graded paper you are using, and what other use is intended, but I have found that with some of the common graded papers, Ilford Gallery #2 for example, that if you develop for the right contrast for silver you have a very good negative for printing with a number of UV sensitive alternative processes. In my own tests I found that I needed a DR of about log 1.5 for the Ilford Gallery #2 (with contact printing. Turns out that a negative that prints with a DR of log 1.5 by blue light has UV blocking of about log 2.0 - 2.2 for alternative processes. About perfect for kallitype, vandyke and pure palladium. Also about perfect for carbon.

One of the characteristics of pyro stained negatives is that they have different CI for printing with blue sensitive and UV sensitive processes. One can really take advantage of this if you understand the specific CI need of each of different processes.

Sandy King
 

JBrunner

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
7,429
Location
PNdub
Format
Medium Format
Hutchings himself (somewhere, I'd have to hunt for it) said forget the after bath.
 

dslater

Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2005
Messages
740
Location
Hollis, NH
Format
35mm
Hutchings himself (somewhere, I'd have to hunt for it) said forget the after bath.

I have heard that a number of times before and I believe it. What I find a little strange is that the after-bath is still in the latest edition of his book. I have this edition and noted a few changes from an older edition a friend has. Even if he couldn't take it out entirely, you'd think he'd put something in there about not using it anymore.

Dan
 

JBrunner

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
7,429
Location
PNdub
Format
Medium Format

It could be hearsay, I could have read somebody else saying "Gordon said..."
All I can tell you for sure is that I dumped it, and my contrasts improved and my BF went way down.
 

Brook

Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2004
Messages
94
Format
8x10 Format

No No No, you have it all wrong. If you would just add 4.3 g/l of Kodak Unobtanium you will be able to make the finest prints ever made, under any lighting conditions, even on the back of a Big Mac wrapper. 'sept I bought up all the Unobtanium.....

(hat tip to kevin at B&S)
 

JBrunner

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
7,429
Location
PNdub
Format
Medium Format

Damn. I was saving up my Big Mac wrappers.LOL!
 

sanking

Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2003
Messages
5,437
Location
Greenville,
Format
Large Format

My position on the after-bath alkaline wash has always been that is serves no purpose. In my article, “An Introduction to Pyro staining developers, with special attention to the Pyrocat-HD formula” which has been at http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/PCat/pcat.html for many years, I state.

“Do not use an alkaline after-bath after fixing as recommended by Hutchings for PMK. My tests show that the stain added by this after-bath is primarily b+f, or general stain. General stain increases printing times and does nothing to enhance the printing qualities of your negatives.”

That was published at a time when it was pretty much accepted as fact that the after-bath alkaline was best procedure. Many people challenged my position back then, but not so many now.

Sandy King
 
Last edited by a moderator:

gainer

Subscriber
Joined
Sep 20, 2002
Messages
3,699
Furthermore, it decreases contrast on VC paper.
 

dslater

Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2005
Messages
740
Location
Hollis, NH
Format
35mm

So Does Hutchings still recommend it? Personally, I never used spent developer as my after bath instead I used a solution of sodium metaborate. However, since I couldn't see any difference in my negatives and after reading the unblinkingeye, I stopped using it.
 

PhotoJim

Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2005
Messages
2,314
Location
Regina, SK, CA
Format
35mm

sanking

Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2003
Messages
5,437
Location
Greenville,
Format
Large Format


According to reports I have heard from people who have attended workshops with Hutchings, or discussed the issue with him, he apparently no longer recommends the after bath.

The after bath will increase the B+F, or general stain, of most films. However, the increase may not be enough to appreciate visually. But if you read the stain with a transmission densitometer before and after you should see a slight increase in overall stain. The increase will not be proportional, but equal in the shadow and highlight areas.

Sandy King
 
Last edited by a moderator:

schroeg

Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2004
Messages
101
Format
Medium Format
I have been an avid pyro user for years now and have tried all the varieties. I would have to say that for a beginner you might want to start with Pyrocat-HD. It stains beautifully with a wide number of films and yields very printable negatives. I use it with T-Max 100 and am very pleased with its flexibility. Added to that it is less toxic than some of the others.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…