RAF Pyro-Metol

[craigclu]

Has anyone been pursuing any further testing on this? I was feeling like I was winding down on some decisions about specific developer/film combos to settle into and then thought it might be worth investigating a speed enhancing, tanning developer like this, especially on a medium speed film such as FP4+. I'm getting real world speeds of 160-200 with HP5+ with the developers that I like best and thought it might be worth the time to also look into FP4+ at 200 if the overall look is something that I like. I'll be trying it, now that I'm curious, but would like to know what others have discovered along this line?

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

I'm still testing, but I don't typically shoot HP5+ or FP4+. If you go to the Chemical Recipies link, then "Staining Developers," I've been posting results as I get them over there, and would welcome results of anyone else's tests. Here's a direct link--

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

I think HP5+ would be a good candidate for RAF P-M.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Ran another more real-world test roll of old TX 400 under various lighting conditions. EI3200 seemed right on for daylight, but about a stop under for indoors in tungsten.

I shot some indoor portraits recently with old TXT (320) 8x10" rated at 800 for safety's sake, and the negs look great. I probably could have gotten away with 1000, but it wouldn't have mattered much. This was under tungsten gallery spots.

 

[craigclu]

Sorry to be so lazy but has anyone got the 1L formula recalculated with the Brit based origins adjusted for?

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

I'm all tested with the "wrong" formula, so for now I'm sticking to it. It wouldn't be that hard to recalculate.