Pyrogallol v. Pyrocatenin viz Grain

chuckroast

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 2, 2023
Messages
2,578
Location
All Over The Place
Format
Multi Format
For medium- and large format, I use various developers freely without a lot of concern for grain.

However, for 35mm, I long ago concluded the PMK Pyro was definitely worse for grain than, say, Pyrocat-HD.

I've just tried 510 Pyro, another Pyrogallol-based developer with both 35mm and 120. The results are not yet in, but first look suggests that it too is kind of grainy in the smaller format. I say "suggests" because I likely overexposed the negatives and that clearly can be a huge contributor.

Certainly, I will do more/better testing, but does anyone have any rigorous analysis on Pyrocallol vs. Pyrocatenin-based developers as they relate to grain?
 

loccdor

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 12, 2024
Messages
1,653
Location
USA
Format
Multi Format
I experienced medium-low grain from 510-pyro, something on the order of HC-110, possibly a bit less, but found it easier to detrimentally overdevelop with it.

510-pyro 1+100 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . HC-110 1+63 H dilution



Both Acros film from the same batch digitized the same way.
 

Milpool

Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2023
Messages
788
Location
n/a
Format
4x5 Format
Yup, and there is no rigorous analysis either. It will have to do with the amount of effective imagewise stain relative to developed silver, the other developing agent, the rest of the formula...
xkaes said:
I've read opinions that are all over the place.
Click to expand...
 

Paul Howell

Subscriber
Joined
Dec 23, 2004
Messages
9,812
Location
Scottsdale Az
Format
Multi Format
Although not staining developer, fine grain semi staining I like MCM 100. MCM stands for Miniature Camera Magazine from England, it was developed for 35mm when 35 was miniature and grain was large. Another is PRESCYSOL which is a staining developer. I have a quart kit of MCM mixed and have using it with Foma 400 and Tmax 100. I just ordered a kit of PRESCYSOL from PF to use with MF.
 

Andrew O'Neill

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Jan 16, 2004
Messages
12,150
Location
Coquitlam,BC Canada
Format
Multi Format
I compared them a while back and recall that 510-Pyro's grain stood out a bit more than Pyrocat-HD's, giving it a slight edge in sharpness.
 

DREW WILEY

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2011
Messages
14,182
Format
8x10 Format
Depends on the specific film, length of development, and even on how you print it. Try PMK with 35mm TMY400 - well defined grain and excellent acutance, yet the grain in remarkably fine for that speed of a film.
ACROS is a dual-grain film which behaves differently. Pan F with PMK is a marriage made in heaven.

In general, I found Pyrocat HD more grainy in my own large format work, so at least have a clue to what will apply with small film too. Scans of film don't necessarily give the true picture. Most of these pyro formulations of both categories are staining developers, and how that stain interacts with specific print papers themselves is the key (unless of course, you're going to digitally print them).

Even looking at grain clusters under the microscope doesn't always lead one to the right conclusion unless one is an expert at it. If you take that route, view the neg using both green filtration and blue filtration, to get an approximation of how VC papers might see it too.

I suspect that this thread might keep going for awhile, and that opinions will continue to differ. Once "pyro" is mentioned, I always think about "pyrotechnics" - the basis for modern explosive warfare.
 

ChrisArslain

Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2024
Messages
22
Location
Washington
Format
Multi Format
I've been dead set on PyrocatHD for the last two years, and have yet to try xtol for 35mm. I do love the wacky acutance glow for my current work with Pyrocat. Is Xtol/Mytol that much better (grain and tonality)?

Also here is a negative half developed in 510Pyro and half developed in Pyrocat. This was TMAX 3200 set to 1200ISO so it's already grainy film.
 

Attachments

  • 20240816P3200_PCAT_1-200 - 30minTHIN9.jpg
    1.2 MB · Views: 46

Milpool

Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2023
Messages
788
Location
n/a
Format
4x5 Format
chuckroast said:
Can some kind soul point me to a definitive formula for a clone?
Click to expand...

See example 1 here: https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/2b/eb/16/473305316ea7bd/US5853964.pdf

Years later the formula was adjusted to make use of borax instead of metaborate, but with the same target pH.

It’s perhaps worth mentioning the differences / net improvement over D-76 are / is slight.

There are various XTOL substitute formulas for home mixers, usually with one or two fewer ingredients and ascorbic acid instead of a sodium salt…
 

Andrew O'Neill

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Jan 16, 2004
Messages
12,150
Location
Coquitlam,BC Canada
Format
Multi Format
I've always wanted to mix that up, but there are chemicals on there that I have no idea where to source them...I think I would probably get something very similar with Mytol.
 

Milpool

Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2023
Messages
788
Location
n/a
Format
4x5 Format
It looks worse than it is. The photographically relevant items are:

-Sodium sulfite
-Sodium metabisulfite
-Sodium metaborate
-Dimezone-S (a Phenidone and easy to source)
-Sodium isoascorbate (you can use sodium ascorbate, or even ascorbic acid if you adjust weight and watch the pH)

The second ingredient in the example formula (DTPA Na5) is the strong iron/copper chelating agent most often used in commercially prepared ascorbate developers. It used to be relatively difficult to source but a few years ago Artcraft started carrying it.

You can of course omit the DTPA but shelf life will be difficult to predict reliably (assuming you want to store it). People have found ways around this by storing it in two parts (see Mocon). Ryuji Suzuki’s XTOL-like DS-10 is worth looking at for those interested. Mytol etc. They are close enough in formulation to XTOL that the results would probably be indistinguishable.

Others have made simpler PC formulas although these are not XTOL clones. They may or may not mimic XTOL.
 
Last edited:

GregY

Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2005
Messages
3,555
Location
Alberta
Format
Large Format

I've used Xtol, but PMK & Pyrocat have been my #1 developer for decades now. Tonality is more important to me than fine grain alone. As someone mentioned in another thread..... TMX is a bear to print with because the gain is so fine you can barely see it in the focuser. For 35mm Delta 400/TMY2 in Pyrocat are far from grainy.
Here's an iPhone photo of an 11x14" print from Tri-X (more grainy than the T films)in Pyrocat from a 35mm negative. I just don't see the grain as objectionable or an issue.
 
Last edited:

DREW WILEY

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2011
Messages
14,182
Format
8x10 Format
Tri-X is way grainier than TMX, TMY, and Delta 100, even when pyro is involved. I can easily see it in a 5X7 print.
In fact, I shoot Tri-X only when I deliberately want some more "tooth" to the image. It has its own look. I just wish it were still the classic grainier journalistic Tri-X of yesteryear. We already have plenty of fine grained films.
 
OP
OP

chuckroast

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 2, 2023
Messages
2,578
Location
All Over The Place
Format
Multi Format

For my first 35mm run at 510 Pyro, I used Fomapan 200, though as noted, I seemed to have overexposed a lot which makes any findings useless.

I do have more 35mm Fomapan 200 that I processed, that was exposed more responsibly Also some 400TX as well as some 120 Lucky SHD 100.

I'm just trying to figure out if 510 Pyro offers anything worthy my mixing up a batch for regular use, that I cannot get from Pyrocat-HDC.
 

DREW WILEY

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2011
Messages
14,182
Format
8x10 Format
I can't help there. I've tried a number of pyro formulas, and even come up with a couple tweaks of my own, but never have experimented with 510.
 

koraks

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Nov 29, 2018
Messages
23,867
Location
Europe
Format
Multi Format
chuckroast said:
Can some kind soul point me to a definitive formula for a clone?
Click to expand...
'Definitive' especially on Photrio is kind of a tall order. This is what I use: https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/film-developer-with-out-hydroquinone.189624/#post-2514181
I mix it fresh and then use one shot. This avoids the problem of sudden death due to Fenton reaction. It helps to keep the formula simple and the results will be very consistent this way. I've been using this approach for several years now. Zero failures.

At some point I specifically tested a couple of developers for grain with Fomapan 400 (a fairly grainy film as you probably know) and this 'instant mytol' formulation was the best I tried. I also tried pyrocat HD and 510 pyro; for this film, the 510 pyro performed a little better than pyrocat if memory serves, but the results were close. Instant mytol was the best of the bunch. The difference were for the most part quite subtle; the only thing that was kind of coarse was a vitamin-C developer formulated by Patrick Gainer: https://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/VitC/vitc.html I used that for some time, but in all honesty, results were pretty mediocre in terms of film speed and grain.
 
OP
OP

chuckroast

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 2, 2023
Messages
2,578
Location
All Over The Place
Format
Multi Format
koraks said:
'Definitive' especially on Photrio is kind of a tall order.
Click to expand...

You don't say


Thanks for this. Archived for future reference.


Interesting. Thanks for sharing all that.

I am not particularly interested in introducing yet another developer into my darkroom since I already have D-23, DK-50, D-76, HC-110, PMK, Pyrocat, and raw chemicals so to make a variety of other concoctions at my disposal.

There was a bit of breathless hyperventilation about 510 a while back on the UK 5x4 site and I wanted to see what the fuss was about. The only thing that really caught my eye was that it was a Pyrogallol-based developer capable of semistand/EMA processing which PMK definitely cannot do.

P.S. If anyone (in CONUS) would like to try DK-50, I have a few original tins I would be happy to share for the cost of shipping.
 

Raghu Kuvempunagar

Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2016
Messages
2,824
Location
India
Format
Multi Format
koraks said:
For tight & small grain in 35mm, xtol (or any of its clones) is very hard to beat.
Click to expand...

Halcyon seems to give finer grain than XTol and Pyrocat-HD:

Halcyon p-phenylenediamine developer test

Opinion is divided over PPD, some say it has unique properties, others that it was replaced by Microdol (now discontinued) and by Perceptol (still available) as an ultrafine grain developer.(See the Film Developing Cookbook by Anchell and Troop for more details) PPD can cause permanent allergy...
www.photrio.com

Comparison with Perceptol and D-76:

Halcyon p-phenylenediamine developer test

Opinion is divided over PPD, some say it has unique properties, others that it was replaced by Microdol (now discontinued) and by Perceptol (still available) as an ultrafine grain developer.(See the Film Developing Cookbook by Anchell and Troop for more details) PPD can cause permanent allergy...
www.photrio.com
 

koraks

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Nov 29, 2018
Messages
23,867
Location
Europe
Format
Multi Format
chuckroast said:
There was a bit of breathless hyperventilation about 510 a while back on the UK 5x4 site and I wanted to see what the fuss was about.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I looked into it for similar reasons. I still keep a little on hand for...well, I don't know really. There are two real downsides to this developer. (1) It's quite liable to uneven development (think surge marks etc.) - much more so than any other developer I've used. (2) It's kind of dirty, in the sense that it readily deposits a lot of overall/general stain. For enlargement this isn't necessarily a big deal, but for alt. process printing (where the stain really starts to be desirable), it's kind of a dealbreaker. A minor annoyance is how difficult it is to pipette, but that's survivable. So given all that, I've never really adopted it.

I understand your desire to keep life simple and limit the number of developers you work with. I do the same. For me it's instant mytol, pyrocat and ID62. That's at least one more than I really need, and strictly speaking two.

Raghu Kuvempunagar said:
Halcyon seems to give finer grain than XTol and Pyrocat-HD:
Click to expand...
Yup, but ppd...that's where the story ended for me as I didn't feel like stocking up a(nother) one-use chemical that had a limited number of sources and high toxicity to boot.
 
OP
OP

chuckroast

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 2, 2023
Messages
2,578
Location
All Over The Place
Format
Multi Format
koraks said:
A minor annoyance is how difficult it is to pipette, but that's survivable. So given all that, I've never really adopted it.
Click to expand...

I found that mixing the stock 1+3 with glycol made that problem much more manageable. Not only does it flow more easily, but you're mixing 4x the stock to make working developer, which is less error prone.

I have a few more runs of negs I did in 510 to try out, but unless they are breathtaking, I suspect the remaining 510 is all I will use and that will be it.
 

koraks

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Nov 29, 2018
Messages
23,867
Location
Europe
Format
Multi Format
That's a good idea, yes. Mind you, most of what I've processed in 510 and especially smaller format negs intended for regular enlargement and/or scanning came out just fine. It's one of those things that, to paraphrase Ken Rockwell, "if I were to find myself stuck on an island with just this developer to my disposal, I'd make fantastic photos with it all the time." Except that we evidently cannot all be as talented as our Ken.
 

ChrisArslain

Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2024
Messages
22
Location
Washington
Format
Multi Format

Now that is a top tip for 510-P! But I agree, I haven't touched my bottle of 510 since I tried PyrocatHD.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…