Second developer

silentsignal · Jul 23, 2006

Hi All,

I'll be shooting a some forte 200, forte 100, efke 100 and some lucky 100 once i redeploy to the states next month. I also have a few rolls of across.

My normal developer is rodinal, and i'm happy with it, but i was curious if any one could recomend another developer. I plan on developing 1/2 with rodinal and 1/2 of what i shoot with one or 2 other developers.

I've used d76 and its clones before so i was looking for something else. Any recomendations?

Markok765 · Jul 23, 2006

Do it al in rodinal, or if you have to try something thy PMK

DBP · Jul 23, 2006

My two are Rodinal (or R09) and Diafine, for a slow/fast mix. But if you aren't trying for speed, maybe something along the grain-reducing line, like Microdol.

removed account4 · Jul 23, 2006

hey there

some folks LOVE xtol and tmax/tmaxRS ...

have fun!
john

Tom Hoskinson · Jul 23, 2006

Why are you changing from Rodinal? What are you looking for?

If you are looking for fine grain together with high acutance and box-rated speed, I would recommend Kodak Xtol.

silentsignal · Jul 23, 2006

why

I just want to try something different. Look and try what's out there that i haven't used.

I've used pyro wonderfull stuff but don't like using it with roll film.

How does tmax look on the older style emulsions

Donald Miller · Jul 23, 2006

silentsignal said:
I just want to try something different. Look and try what's out there that i haven't used.

I've used pyro wonderfull stuff but don't like using it with roll film.

How does tmax look on the older style emulsions

How would anyone be able to give you an objective analysis to a subjective question? If you have an interest, give it a try and see what you think.

silentsignal · Jul 24, 2006

subjective

I'm just looking to try something else. I really like rodinal, but in someways i'm in an experimental mood.

I just don't want to make a mistake and put the film in a developer that it really isn't suited for.

I don't want it to end up being like putting a delta film in rodinal. I didn't like the results.

I haven't tried some of the suggestions i was given so i'll go and research tmax, and microdol.

eumenius · Jul 24, 2006

I always have some ILFORD Ilfotec-HC concentrated developer on hand. It gives a beautiful picture with old-style emulsion, is quite economical, and can be used with all kinds of films I use (including technical films). It also keeps very well, and is cheap. The working dilutions range from 1+31 to 1+79, and it works fine with all new technology fine-grained films like Delta 100. So my current choice is Rodinal and Ilfotec, and I'm very satisfied with both.

Cheers, Zhenya

ricksplace · Jul 24, 2006

HC110. You can play with dilutions and times for different acutance results. I like it with Delta 400.

I use HC110, Rodinal, and a little d76.

John Bragg · Jul 24, 2006

Why not try Rodinal at a higher dilution in stand or semi stand ? Now that would be different at no extra cost !

Michel Hardy-Vallée · Jul 24, 2006

silentsignal said:
I'm just looking to try something else. I really like rodinal, but in someways i'm in an experimental mood.

I just don't want to make a mistake and put the film in a developer that it really isn't suited for.

I don't want it to end up being like putting a delta film in rodinal. I didn't like the results.

I haven't tried some of the suggestions i was given so i'll go and research tmax, and microdol.

There is no such thing as an inappropriate developer for a given film. All films are calibrated to give correct result with D-76, and the differences created by other devs, while they exist, are not revolutionary.

You're using slow film, so you can soup it in pretty much everything that exists--some people may not like the pronounced grain that is the result of a fast film and high accutance developper like Rodinal.

It also makes a difference whether you're shooting 35mm or 120 (you just said "rolls"). In 120 you want to work on the tonality, grain not being an issue. In 35mm grain can be a nuisance, depending on what subject you shoot.

If you want to try a developer for the sake of it, buy a pack of something, and get times from the massive dev chart, soup your neg, and print it. Even your errors will be interesting; a priori discussion won't tell you much.

df cardwell · Jul 24, 2006

I like using Rodinal and Xtol in tandem.

Their differences ? When you've equalized the midtones from both developers, XTOL gives fuller shadows and tends toward a slight shoulder with some films.

Rodinal can give a more three dimensional result, because of the faster drop-off from low shadows to black. And Rodinal always gives a brighter response to the highlights than XTOL.

Which is NOT to say one is too flat and the other too hot: they give perfectly predictable and correct results. But they have different character, and between them you can cover a great range of emotion while being technically correct.

The two developers have one important similarity, and they both allow for expressive contol by agitation. There is a range of results possible with this team of developers, while using a prettty simple and consistent approach.

If you want to stick with a concentrated developer, I think Ilford DDX would be a reasonable substitute for XTOL, using a higher than normal dilution.

Good luck

silentsignal · Jul 24, 2006

au contrair

mhv said:
There is no such thing as an inappropriate developer for a given film. All films are calibrated to give correct result with D-76, and the differences created by other devs, while they exist, are not revolutionary.

You're using slow film, so you can soup it in pretty much everything that exists--some people may not like the pronounced grain that is the result of a fast film and high accutance developper like Rodinal.

It also makes a difference whether you're shooting 35mm or 120 (you just said "rolls"). In 120 you want to work on the tonality, grain not being an issue. In 35mm grain can be a nuisance, depending on what subject you shoot.

If you want to try a developer for the sake of it, buy a pack of something, and get times from the massive dev chart, soup your neg, and print it. Even your errors will be interesting; a priori discussion won't tell you much.

The suggestions in this thread have given me places to look, and options to explore. I would never have thought about microdol or trying a tmax developer with the old style stuff. Ilfo-tec is also a product i would never have considered.

And again i think trying to figure out what developer is suited is a pretty good idea. Having put delta 100 in rodinal and seeing the results i would call that inappropriate. Yes it develops, yes you can print it, but it looks like crap. You get neither the benefits of rodinal, or the benefits of delta.

Markok765 · Jul 24, 2006

silentsignal said:
The suggestions in this thread have given me places to look, and options to explore. I would never have thought about microdol or trying a tmax developer with the old style stuff. Ilfo-tec is also a product i would never have considered.

And again i think trying to figure out what developer is suited is a pretty good idea. Having put delta 100 in rodinal and seeing the results i would call that inappropriate. Yes it develops, yes you can print it, but it looks like crap. You get neither the benefits of rodinal, or the benefits of delta.

Ilove tmax 100 in rodinal stanf

df cardwell · Jul 24, 2006

And again i think trying to figure out what developer is suited is a pretty good idea.

Part of whether a developer makes a good combination with a given film, is HOW you use it. Three common agitation patterns with Rodinal give three VERY different signatures. Much of recently published appreciations of the developer ( over the past 20 years ) have assumed constant rotation, which is the least suitable way to use Rodinal. On the other PRACTICAL extreme, agitation every five minutes, gives a very different result.

In other words, it's seldom the WHAT and usually the HOW.

Peter Schrager · Jul 24, 2006

developer

I'm using Rodinal 1:100 on a rotary base with Fuji Acros100 (120 size) and lovin it. The combo just worked out perfect for me. Don't do this with APX100 however....
Best, Peter

silentsignal · Jul 24, 2006

three VERY different signatures

This is exactly what i'm looking for. The different signatures of a different developer given small tank processing with a normal number of inversions.

I've used rodinal and d76 but what i'm interested in is the little subtle nuances that would differentiate it from tmax, or ilfotec.

df cardwell · Jul 24, 2006

I've used rodinal and d76 but what i'm interested in is the little subtle nuances that would differentiate it from tmax, or ilfotec.

Well, you're in the right place. Photography is a Craft, and like the old song says, "Little Things Mean A Lot".

Michel Hardy-Vallée · Jul 24, 2006

silentsignal said:
The suggestions in this thread have given me places to look, and options to explore. I would never have thought about microdol or trying a tmax developer with the old style stuff. Ilfo-tec is also a product i would never have considered.

And again i think trying to figure out what developer is suited is a pretty good idea. Having put delta 100 in rodinal and seeing the results i would call that inappropriate. Yes it develops, yes you can print it, but it looks like crap. You get neither the benefits of rodinal, or the benefits of delta.

Some people would argue otherwise:
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

There are no a priori incompatibilities between films and developer. Some people could even make great stuff with Dektol stock and Tri-X. That's a combination that you could call inherently wrong, but someone somewhere will make it work.

That's why it doesn't matter in the end what suggestions you receive. You're the only one who will find out whether it looks like crap or not FOR YOU, but you won't discover a law of nature that way. Of course having other people's recipes are interesting starting points, but you had set no other goal than to experiment to get something interesting, so your question has endless answers to say the least.

My suggestion to you is to read up on the general properties of various developers, then pick one that seems to have some features you might like, and try it on. Properties like grain, accutance, or resulting speed are generally consistent for a given developer, regardless of the film, and that could help you decide which direction you want to go.

Or do something at random and see what happens. Some people discovered great things that way too.

Second developer

silentsignal

Markok765

DBP

removed account4

Tom Hoskinson

silentsignal

Donald Miller

silentsignal

eumenius

ricksplace

John Bragg

Michel Hardy-Vallée

Membership Council

df cardwell

silentsignal

Markok765

df cardwell

Peter Schrager

silentsignal

df cardwell

Michel Hardy-Vallée

Membership Council

Second developer

Membership Council

Membership Council

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency