Sandy Kings p-Aminophenol version of Pyrocat - My initial Beta Testing Results

jdef, you have this transparent technique of sliding into any thread to do with Sandy as a seeker of truth, but always looking for an excuse to attack. You snipe away at the edges, ignore the core, and throw out baskets of red herrings. Your final post is always the equivalent of "your mother wears army boots". Do what you promised and stay out of it.

Not exactly. You were circling the wagons in your white truth-seekers robe, waiting for Sandy to show up so you could bring out the knife hidden in the folds of the robe. This medieval behaviour would not be tolerated in the Church of Rodinal. Maybe we can borrow their merry band of inquisitors to send you to the Attitude Adjustment Centre, where the proper dosage of your meds can be refined.

johnnywalker said:

Not exactly. You were circling the wagons in your white truth-seekers robe, waiting for Sandy to show up so you could bring out the knife hidden in the folds of the robe. This medieval behaviour would not be tolerated in the Church of Rodinal. Maybe we can borrow their merry band of inquisitors to send you to the Attitude Adjustment Centre, where the proper dosage of your meds can be refined.

Click to expand...

Jay DeFehr was clearly, at least IMHO, engaged in trolling, and that lead him to post a lot of misinformation that distorted the facts and completely misrepresented the information I have posted comparing Pyrocat-HD with Pyrocat-P. But the thing that surprises me the most is that someone would post misinformation that is so easily disproved by simple testing. If we were dealing with some type of esoteric theory about the formation of edge effects it might be possible to get away with this type of nonesense, but in this case the developer formulas are there to experiment with and test as one choses.

Prior to posting the Pyrocat-P and Pyrocat-M formulas I made numerous comparison tests with Pyrocat-HD and the formulas were specifically adjusted to produce similar intensity of stain for any given time of development. And there is no question about this fact. For a given time of development density reading will be virtually identical in V, B, and UV mode.

There is indeed a difference in the stain between any of the three Pyrocat variants and most pyrogallol based formulas, and the difference depends on whether the measurement is made with V, B, Ortho or UV. Pyrocat-HD negatives have a greater difference between the UV and Blue reading than pyrogallol developers, but less between V and B (or Ortho). This is an important point that I have made for years. See, for example, the comparison curves of Pyrocat, PMK, Rollo Pyro and WD2D on page three of my article “Introduction to Pyro Staining Developers” at http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/PCat/pcat.html

The difference in the intensity of the stain is a fact of some consequence because it explains why Pyrocat negatives function more like traditional negatives (or perhaps better stated, somewhere between traditional non-staining developers and pyrogallol based developers) with VC silver papers. For any given Visual density they will print with greater contrast and less compensation in the highlights than PMK and most other pyrogallol developers. And the difference between Blue and UV density also explains why Pyrocat is so efficient for dual-purpose negatives, i.e. for printing with both regular silver paper and with processes that uses UV light.

I can understand why persons with no experience with staining developers might look at a Pyrocat stained negative and conclude that there is not much staining compared to the heavy stain seen with many pyrogallol based developers. In fact, it happens all the time and I have repeatedly stated that visually Pyrocat negatives may appear almost neutral in color.

Below I provide some comparative data of Pyrocat-HD and Pyrocat-P negatives that were developed identically, i.e. same type of agitation (in tubes on a motor base), temperature (72F) and post-developer treatment (water stop bath, TF-3 fixer). Film was FP4+, dilution was 1:1:100. BTW, and time of development was ten minutes. This particular batch of FP4+ is several years old, which explains the slight elevation in B+F. My tests show that compared to fresh film it has developed with age an additional B+F of about 0.05. This of course has an exagerated impact on UV readings so in practice with fresh FP4+ film one should expect much lower B+F values.

For the data below I took readings through V, B and UV at Steps 1, 11 and 21.

Pyrocat-HD
Step 1, V=.13, B=.15, UV=.32
Step 11, V=.76, B=.88, UV= 1.32
Step 21, V=1.53, B=1.73, UV=2.25

Pyrocat-P
Step 1, V=.12, B=.14, UV=.28
Step 11, V=.75, B=.83, UV= 1.25
Step 21, V=1.55, B=1.75, UV=2.26

As you can see, these results are virtually identical. Data for the Pyrocat-M variant is very similar. These tests were repeated several times so as far as I am concerned the results have high reliability. Water quality, assuming you use tap water for mixing your working solution, could account for more or less stain density, but logically one would expect similar increase or decrease with both variants. Howeve, if you compare Pyrocat-HD with either Pyrocat-P or Pyrocat-M for stain density and don't get similar results I would suggest that something is either wrong with your chemicals or with your procedures. In DeFehr's case, where it is claimed that there was virtually no difference between V and B mode measurment, the most likely reason for this result IMO is either too much p-aminophenol or too much sulfite in the working solution. Both conditions would reduce or kill the stain. How could this happen? It could happen with a simple mistake in measurement, or it might result from making a measurement with a scale that lacks sufficient accuracy for the task.

Bear in mind that the purpose of creating the variants was not simply to replicate the stain intensity, but to replicate the stain intensity in such a way that the more important developer characteristics, i.e. sharpness and film grain type, could be observed and compared with negatives of very similar contrast at all points on the curve.

Sandy

Hey Guys! Lighten up! Both of you have posted formulas, information that is valuable to us all. This argument is not. Personal attacks are for that other forum. Sandy, I think your work stands on its own - no defence necessary. Attacks are never necessary.

Whiteymorange said:

Hey Guys! Lighten up! Both of you have posted formulas, information that is valuable to us all. This argument is not. Personal attacks are for that other forum. Sandy, I think your work stands on its own - no defence necessary. Attacks are never necessary.

Click to expand...

I appreciate your comments, and good purpose, but I have no intention of offering the other cheek when someone in bad faith dishonestly misrepresents what I have said. It is not that I feel any need to defend my work – I just simply have no intention of standing by and allowing someone to distort, fabricate and or misrepresent what I have previously written. This should not be a difficult principle for you to underestand

On the other hand, I would request that if Jay DeFehr has a problem with either me, or any of my writings, he should avoid posting it to this forum. If you would like to check the archives of this forum you will find that over the past 8-10 months I have carefully avoided expressing any opinions about his formulas on this forum. And further, since the flap involving DeFehr and Michael Smith I avoided DeFehr completely until last week, when he chose to mention my name in a provocative manner in one of his threads, an action which he calls an attempt at "humor." Well, I don't find any humor at all in DeFehr.

My position is very clear. I would like to avoid any and all exchanges with DeFehr, both directly, indirectly, and even by implication. That includes any involvement in threads started by him, and any comment about his developers, either in threads started by him, on whatever topic, or in threads started by others that involve his formulas. And I expect DeFehr to also avoind threads started by me, whatever the subject, and threads started by others about my work. If DeFehr does this there will be no need for further exchange between us. In fact, if he had acted this way during the past two weeks, there would have been no need for the present exchange since.

If my position is not clear, what would I need to change to clarify it?

Sandy

Sandy,
On a much lighter note. Is the P-aminophenol the straight stuff, or the p-aminophenol HCl? The formulary sells both types.

Clay,

You want the straight stuff. And I bought my p-aminophenol from the Formulary. My current pyrocatechin supply is from Artcraft.

BTW, are you seeing a pink color with the working solution? With my water the working solution turns first light pink, then a fairly dark purple or lavender. I really like this because you know immediately when both stock solutions have been added. This feature should eliminate some of the errors that result from failing to add one of the stock solutions when mixing the working solution. Tom mentioned in a pm that he was seeing this color as well and I am now wondering if it is something that will be obseved by everyone, or if it is only characteristic of certain types of water?

Sandy

clay said:

Sandy,
On a much lighter note. Is the P-aminophenol the straight stuff, or the p-aminophenol HCl? The formulary sells both types.

Click to expand...

sanking said:

Tom mentioned in a pm that he was seeing this color as well and I am now wondering if it is something that will be obseved by everyone, or if it is only characteristic of certain types of water?

Click to expand...

I just developed a set of TMY negatives and use tap-water: deep purple it is. A lovely color indeed.

Although it looks rather opaque under visible light, I was relieved to discover that it's perfectly clear when viewed through my Infra Red viewing device during development.

I haven't printed yet, but the negatives look fine, and appear quite neutral-colored. Is the stain now grey-colored ?

Yes, I see the same purple coloration. I am using distilled water to make it up. I notice that it is very dark when I pour it out of the tank. With the old pyrocatHD, that color would be a sure sign of some overall stain. With this new version, that is not the case. My b+f is normal, even with extended development. BTW, I ran one test at 1:1:200 for an hour. Still no elevated b+f. I like it.

Funny, my stain color is still greenish, although not as much as the regular pyrocatHD. It still has one heck of lot of actinic filtering, though, as you can see from those UV densitometer readings I posted earlier.

sanking said:

Clay,

You want the straight stuff. And I bought my p-aminophenol from the Formulary. My current pyrocatechin supply is from Artcraft.

BTW, are you seeing a pink color with the working solution? With my water the working solution turns first light pink, then a fairly dark purple or lavender. I really like this because you know immediately when both stock solutions have been added. This feature should eliminate some of the errors that result from failing to add one of the stock solutions when mixing the working solution. Tom mentioned in a pm that he was seeing this color as well and I am now wondering if it is something that will be obseved by everyone, or if it is only characteristic of certain types of water?

Sandy

Click to expand...

Ken Lee said:

I just developed a set of TMY negatives and use tap-water: deep purple it is. A lovely color indeed.

Although it looks rather opaque under visible light, I was relieved to discover that it's perfectly clear when viewed through my Infra Red viewing device during development.

I haven't printed yet, but the negatives look fine, and appear quite neutral-colored. Is the stain now grey-colored ?

Click to expand...

Ken,

How did you develop? Rotary processing or other? So far I have only developed with rotary since my primary objective was to get more acutance from Pyrocat with this type of agitation. With rotary processing stain color is very similar to what you get with Pyrocat-HD.

Also, did you use a water stop bath. Acid stop bath will really kill the stain with Pyrocat-P.

Best,

Sandy

clay said:

BTW, I ran one test at 1:1:200 for an hour. Still no elevated b+f. I like it.

Funny, my stain color is still greenish, although not as much as the regular pyrocatHD. It still has one heck of lot of actinic filtering, though, as you can see from those UV densitometer readings I posted earlier.

Click to expand...

Green stain? Very interesting. Were you also getting a green stain with the regular Pyrocat-HD using distilled water? My tap water is very pure from the mountains and I usually mix the working with it rather than distilled, but I may need to experiment with distilled to understand the green stain. The only color I have every seen with Pyrocat, -HD, -M and -P is brown. But pH has a lot to do with the final color so I need to look into this.

Sandy

sanking said:

How did you develop? Rotary processing or other? So far I have only developed with rotary since my primary objective was to get more acutance from Pyrocat with this type of agitation. With rotary processing stain color is very similar to what you get with Pyrocat-HD.

Also, did you use a water stop bath. Acid stop bath will really kill the stain with Pyrocat-P.

Click to expand...

I pre-soaked, then tray-developed a dozen 4x5 negatives, using tap water stop bath, and TF-3 alkaline fixer. I also soak them for 10 minutes in Sodium Sulfite 1 tsp/liter, then wash thoroughly. Heaven knows what's in the municipal water, but it all works nicely.

I have been shooting TMY at 200, and developing at 1:1:100 for 12 minutes, more according to DBI for lower contrast subjects. I prefer the longer developing time, which provides some wiggle room, since the negatives can't all be the first one into the developer.

I can't comment on matters of tonality, since I was shooting flowers at 1:1, with rather long exposures deep into reciprocity range. I plan to do more outdoor shooting under standard lighting soon.

Well, greenish brown. Not yellow green like PMK or anything. But still had a noticeable greenish brown tone when I put it on the light table. My stop bath and rinse water is pH 7.5-8.0 depending on the time of year. Whole hell of chlorine in it too.

sanking said:

Green stain? Very interesting. Were you also getting a green stain with the regular Pyrocat-HD using distilled water? My tap water is very pure from the mountains and I usually mix the working with it rather than distilled, but I may need to experiment with distilled to understand the green stain. The only color I have every seen with Pyrocat, -HD, -M and -P is brown. But pH has a lot to do with the final color so I need to look into this.

Sandy

Click to expand...

Ken Lee said:

I pre-soaked, then tray-developed a dozen 4x5 negatives, using tap water stop bath, and TF-3 alkaline fixer. I also soak them for 10 minutes in Sodium Sulfite 1 tsp/liter, then wash thoroughly. Heaven knows what's in the municipal water, but it all works nicely.

I have been shooting TMY at 200, and developing at 1:1:100 for 12 minutes, more according to DBI for lower contrast subjects. I prefer the longer developing time, which provides some wiggle room, since the negatives can't all be the first one into the developer.

I can't comment on matters of tonality, since I was shooting flowers at 1:1, with rather long exposures deep into reciprocity range. I plan to do more outdoor shooting under standard lighting soon.

Click to expand...

Your procedures should result in maximum stain. However, I need to do some tests with some type of non-continuous agitation to verify that the stain is as intense as with rotary/contant agitation.

Thanks for the report, and please let me know how the outdoor negatives come out. This is a work in progress and a learning experience for all of us.

I just love that beautiful purple color of the working solution. And, it is a great visual to ensure that both Stock A and B are in the working. Lord knows how many times I have had to respond to folks who thought something was wrong with Pyrocat-HD, when in fact the only thing wrong was that they failed to add both Stock A and B to the working solution, which results in, *clear negatives,* every time.

Best,

Sandy

clay said:

Well, greenish brown. Not yellow green like PMK or anything. But still had a noticeable greenish brown tone when I put it on the light table. My stop bath and rinse water is pH 7.5-8.0 depending on the time of year. Whole hell of chlorine in it too.

Click to expand...

Big difference here. My tap water is in the pH 6.8 to 7.2 range, usually below pH 7.0. Chlorine is only noticeable for a day or so two or three per year, and then the pH is much higher.

The low pH is a blessing for iron processes such as kallitype, Pt./Pd. and VDB..


Sandy

My developed turned a dark purple like Ken's. Since I knew that you rotary processed your work Sandy, I tray developed 2 sets of identical exposed FP4+ negatives in the new and old formula and they look fabulous. As I stated earlier, there is a slight bit of improved sharpness with the new formulation but we are splitting hairs here. I noticed that when I contact printed these images on Azo grade 2 the new formula seemed to hold shadow detail quite well even though they did not seem as "stained" as the HD negatives. Quite pleasant to work with.

Great work Sandy!

Michael Kadillak said:

My developed turned a dark purple like Ken's. Since I knew that you rotary processed your work Sandy, I tray developed 2 sets of identical exposed FP4+ negatives in the new and old formula and they look fabulous. As I stated earlier, there is a slight bit of improved sharpness with the new formulation but we are splitting hairs here. I noticed that when I contact printed these images on Azo grade 2 the new formula seemed to hold shadow detail quite well even though they did not seem as "stained" as the HD negatives. Quite pleasant to work with.

Great work Sandy!

Click to expand...

Thanks Michael,

Did you have a look at my Bannack carbon image in the Technical Gallery? This is the one I tried to send you earlier but it went out as as .pdf fiile rather than .jpeg. Anyway, I think it is a very good example of an inside/outside image where we retain detail in the lowest shadows and highest highlights. The original negative was made on 12X20 with the 270mm Computar. Really great coverage on 12X20 IMO for a lens of this focal length.

Thought you might appreciate the image because of your Montana roots, though lost in in Denver as it were.

Best,

Sandy

Sandy, my tests were done with intermittent agitation in a stainless steel tank. 5sec/minute. FWIW.

Here is one of the images with the new formula. (Scan of negative)
http://www.kenleegallery.com/html/gallery/pcatp.htm

I will look in the Technical gallery Sandy for the Bannack image. Off to do some shooting this AM. Thanks

Ken Lee said:

Here is one of the images with the new formula. (Scan of negative)
http://www.kenleegallery.com/html/gallery/pcatp.htm

Click to expand...

Ken, I love the image and have been trying to follow this thread from the beginning to a conclusion so let me ask: WHICH NEW FORMULA did you use? M or P....

Sorry for the confusion. I tried the P formula.

(Perhaps the P stands for Purple, since it appears like a Grape-flavored beverage. Maybe Sandy is secretly producing a new kind of Wine which doubles as a film developer... you never know.)

Sandy wouldn't do that. Now, a new kind of developer that doubles as a wine...that's something else.

Nice image, Ken!

BTW, light brown is the stain color (subjective opinion) I'm getting with the Pyrocat "P" formula.

And my working solution color is Violet!

gainer said:

Sandy wouldn't do that. Now, a new kind of developer that doubles as a wine...that's something else.

Click to expand...

The purple/violet color of the working solution of Pyrocat-P is very appealing, but I am definitely not promoting it as a substitute for wine.

The color of the stain I am getting with Pyrocat-P appears visually somewhat more neutral in color than the stain of Pyrocat-HD, but its intensity with both B and UV readings is almost identical. However, be sure to use only a plain water stop bath with Pyrocat-P. An acid stop bath will result in loss of much of the stain.

Sandy