R3 MONOBATH DEVELOPER - experiences with film?

[TheToadMen]

I've seen this Dead Link Removed" mentioned on the internet several times now.
Mixing developer with fix feels a bit quirky though, but who knows.

I was wondering if anyone on APUG used it and what the results were:
- Was it any good?
- Does the developer have a good shelf life?
- Any comments on archival quality of (older) prints or films developed with this monobath developer?

The recipe is mentioned here:

400TX 135, souped ten minutes, 75 F.

16 ml HC-110 USA concentrate
50 ml household ammonia (ammonium hydroxide, 5% solution)
10 ml Ilford Rapid Fixer concentrate
water to make 256 ml

Mixed by adding most of the water to the HC-110 concentrate, then ammonia, then fixer, then remainder of water to make up volume. Heated to 75 F in an external hot water bath.

IMPORTANT: Be certain the ammonia used is a 5% concentration. Test it first using an ammonia hydrometer available through ebay or Amazon.

Result: normal appearing negatives, within approximately 1 stop of rated speed at worst. I won't know for certain until I can scan them (they're drying now, probably won't get them scanned tonight), but to my eye contrast range appears normal and low light details are preserved -- I intentionally shot at a wide range of exposure, from about +2 to -2 stops, to test whether the latitude of the 400TX would be preserved, and it appears it was; there is considerable detail in a shot taken with a simple camera (most likely f/11, 1/100) in a grocery store aisle by available light, a situation that normally demands f/2.8 at 1/30 with ISO 400, give or take one stop.

BTW: I've seen (there was a url link here which no longer exists) about R3 Monobath as a print developer.

(sample from New55 FILM)

 

[Gerald C Koch]

The basic idea behind monobaths appeals to many people, only one bath to keep and use. However, what do you really save? A very small amount of time at added cost if you are lucky, poor results if you are not. Monobaths are expensive, do not keep well and cause softening of the emulsion. There was recently a long thread on monobaths in general on APUG. I would suggest that you read it before buying one. A monobath very similar to the R3 one can be made from HC-110, read the follow article http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/hc110/

I have used the MM-1 monobath which appears in Grant Haist's book The Monobath Manual. Results were very good. Monobaths tend to sludge after use limiting their usefulness. R3 claims that their's does not. As a chemist I have my doubts about this claim. Then too you lose the ability to control contrast and density in the negative.

 

[Ricardo Miranda]

Hi Bert

This has been discussed in the last few weeks here. There is some discussion on the New55 project threads. There might be there some answers to your questions.

On the RFF forum there are some samples, particularly this one: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2482138&postcount=1187
Have a look at the whole thread, there are more.

 

[TheToadMen]

Thank you both!

 

[swhiser]

R3 develops sludge. I decant the sludge through a coffee filter and give the modest amount of residual silver to my friend who makes jewelry. My R3 lasts a long time.