Pyrocat base fog

I'm trying to use Pyrocat HDC as the second developer for reversal processing in order to get a slight sepia look. One thing I've noticed is that it has a higher base fog than the other developer I tried (Ilfotech DD-X). This is making for rather muted highlights, and they don't really completely clear.

I've been looking into anit-fogging agents such as potassium bromide and benzotriazole. I was wondering if anyone might have already tried these out with this developer, and can offer any formulas or guide lines? With this reversal process, I feel like I've been through enough trail and error with just the first developer, and I want to cut down on the testing as much as possible.

I have no experience with reversal other than e6 process but with Pyrocat HD you can "bleach" it some by using a weak acid stop bath and fixing a little longer. On a couple of occasions I have gotten almost clear negatives in the margins because my fixer was too strong. Agitation plays a role in base fog with Pyrocat, so also try reducing your agitation frequency (if constant, slow it way down or do second developer by hand).

Pyrocat is a staining developer, so you are seeing base stain not just base fog and bromide or benzotriazole won't help at all with the stain. Sodium Sulphite will cut the staining you'd need to experiment.

Ian

Ian Grant said:

... Sodium Sulphite will cut the staining you'd need to experiment. Ian

Click to expand...

... and the color you're looking for, so you'd be right back at square one. Maybe you need to look into toning your final transparencies. I could imagine that a simple bleach/redevelop sepia toner or even a one-step brown toner would get you the results you desire.

Best,

Doremus

Tumbles said:

I'm trying to use Pyrocat HDC as the second developer for reversal processing in order to get a slight sepia look. One thing I've noticed is that it has a higher base fog than the other developer I tried (Ilfotech DD-X). This is making for rather muted highlights, and they don't really completely clear.

I've been looking into anit-fogging agents such as potassium bromide and benzotriazole. I was wondering if anyone might have already tried these out with this developer, and can offer any formulas or guide lines? With this reversal process, I feel like I've been through enough trail and error with just the first developer, and I want to cut down on the testing as much as possible.

Click to expand...

Forget pyro whatever as the second developer If you want sepia slides then use Kodak T-8 Polysulfide toner as a fogging second developer.

Additionally the stain formed by these developers fades with exposure to light so if you want to project them then a staining developer is not a good choice.

I went ahead and gave this another shot. I added 220mg of sodium bromide to the pyrocat, just because I wanted to see for myself. The highlights and the leader are without a doubt clearer.

One strange problem that came up was the frames on the outside of the reel appear faded. The blacks are uniformly less dark than the rest of the film. I wonder if it has something to do with the light re-exposure. This has happened once before. I think I'm going to set reversal process aside and do some normal processing for a while to cheer myself up.

I haven't messed around with toners. I looked into it a bit for sepia intensification, but I was never clear on how you would go about using it with film. I could only find directions for paper.

I am very surprised to read, that second developer has any effect on highlight density. Shouldn't the highlights be taken care off by first developer? Maybe it needs more solvent?

If the OP will forgive the side query:

[QUOTE="Gerald C Koch: Additionally the stain formed by these developers fades with exposure to light so if you want to project them then a staining developer is not a good choice.[/QUOTE]

Gerald: You seem to make the point about pyro fading fairly often. I wonder if you have direct experience with this? I tried to find corroboration on the web... and on this site, and this was all I found (link: (there was a url link here which no longer exists) ) which tends to suggest the opposite. I'm no expert by any means, and I'm not putting a lot of effort into researching it, but since you are so convinced, I'm genuinely curious and wonder if you can offer some detail. Thanks!

FWIW, I ordered another bottle of P-HD, but remain pretty open minded to finding another, less toxic developer... and have a bag of Perceptol (one of Barry Thornton's other favorites) to try. But again to show that there is no shortage of wonders on the web, I stumbled on a note where someone was abandoning some of our more traditionally modern developers to embrace P-HD... because the OTHERS were so toxic. Made me smile to think you'd have been amused. To quote, "One never knows the wonders that will unfold, does one?"

JWMster said:

I wonder if you have direct experience with this?

Click to expand...

I tracked down a quote on stain longevity from someone we can trust:

"There is really no quantitative or scientific data on keeping of stained negatives. That is a fact. All else is anecdotal.
Not my fault. Sorry guys.
PE"

And in the same thread there are anecdotal mentions of 25 years and longer with catechol stains.

That's as good as my google-fu will get during lunch!

K: Thanks, that's helpful. As a relative newby, I'm just gathering data. Yet it helps as well to be sure to try separating opinion, "received wisdom" , and documented facts.

Tumbles said:

I'm trying to use Pyrocat HDC as the second developer for reversal processing in order to get a slight sepia look. One thing I've noticed is that it has a higher base fog than the other developer I tried (Ilfotech DD-X). This is making for rather muted highlights, and they don't really completely clear.

I've been looking into anit-fogging agents such as potassium bromide and benzotriazole. I was wondering if anyone might have already tried these out with this developer, and can offer any formulas or guide lines? With this reversal process, I feel like I've been through enough trail and error with just the first developer, and I want to cut down on the testing as much as possible.

Click to expand...

I think the fog is part of pyro developer. I don't think it matters since you print through the fog anyway. Your print time should be long enough to make a true black with the for Standard Print Time (SPT).

JWMster said:

If the OP will forgive the side query:

[QUOTE="Gerald C Koch: Additionally the stain formed by these developers fades with exposure to light so if you want to project them then a staining developer is not a good choice.

Click to expand...

Gerald: You seem to make the point about pyro fading fairly often. I wonder if you have direct experience with this? I tried to find corroboration on the web... and on this site, and this was all I found (link: (there was a url link here which no longer exists) ) which tends to suggest the opposite. I'm no expert by any means, and I'm not putting a lot of effort into researching it, but since you are so convinced, I'm genuinely curious and wonder if you can offer some detail. Thanks!

FWIW, I ordered another bottle of P-HD, but remain pretty open minded to finding another, less toxic developer... and have a bag of Perceptol (one of Barry Thornton's other favorites) to try. But again to show that there is no shortage of wonders on the web, I stumbled on a note where someone was abandoning some of our more traditionally modern developers to embrace P-HD... because the OTHERS were so toxic. Made me smile to think you'd have been amused. To quote, "One never knows the wonders that will unfold, does one?"[/QUOTE]

An APUG member commented that he left a negative on a table near a window which was partially covered. After about a week the side exposed to light had noticeably faded. The stain image from these developers is composed of an organic dye and like all dyes is subject to fading over time. I do not consider them to be archival like silver negatives. Try an experiment yourself.

Gerald: Yipes! Soooooooooooooooooooooooooo.... looks like I'm gonna have to. THank you!