jdef said:Have you tried semi-stand development with 777?
jdef said:Hi Jim.
looks like fun, I wish I could be there. Have you tried semi-stand development with 777?
Jay
c6h6o3 said:No. I would think that 777, since it contains glycin (or so I believe) would be an excellent stand or semi-stand developer. I haven't tried it mostly because it's not a one shot developer, and I'm worried about trying to pour it back into the jug in the dark.
I did try it with Pyrocat and Sandy King's recommended times and dilutions for TMY. The highlights were blown and there was nowhere near the local contrast Steve gets.
Steve and I are planning on going out to shoot on the day before the workshop. I'll make some TMY negatives (and some PL100s too) and experiment during the workshop with the master present. I'll let you know what happens.
sanking said:Glycin is supposed to be good for stand development, but my own experiments with it have not shown it to provide any advantage over straight Pyrocat-HD. In fact, for a non-staining developer I have gotten much better results with Rodinal.
BTW, what times did you use for TMY? And what process are you printing with? I just developed some sixty sheets of TMY 5X7 using extreme minimal agitation with the 1:1:150 dilution of Pyrocat-HD and the contrast of most of the negatives is perfect for my printing with long exposure scale processes.
Sandy
c6h6o3 said:For a negative calling for +2 development, I gave it 5 stand cycles of 11 minutes each. I would've done it in 4 cycles but I decided to give it a little more time after 3 cycles. The dilution was 10:6:1200, at Steve's suggestion. The negative looks incredibly sharp, but seems to have a lot of general stain. (because of the accelerator having been scaled back?) I'll be printing it on (very probably grade 3) Azo.
I haven't printed it yet, but I made a second TMY negative of this image which I developed in 777. It's perfect, so the comparison should be interesting. Stay tuned.
sanking said:Also, what do you mean by "stand cycles"?
Steve Sherman said:Jim,
Pot Carbonate is an accelerator and increases the energy of the developer. When mixed 1 to 1 with solution A and during extended periods of time in developer can increase film base fog. I have reduced Pot Carbonate up to 40 % of A with good results.
When designing negatives for projection I would also try a small amount of Ascorbic Acid in conjunction with reduced Pot Carbonate. Try 3:2:200 with 1 part of Ascorbic Acid for contact prints and evaluate.
I got Ascorbic Acid from a local health food store. The brand name NOW is said to be the most pure and comes in easy to dissolve powder form.
Keep us posted. Steve
jdef said:Hypercat works really well for me.
jdef said:Hypercat works really well for me. Hypercat contains more ascorbic acid than you guys are using, but contains no sulfite or bromide, which I think makes the difference. There is certainly no loss of stain with Hypercat compared to Pyrocat HD. I think the Pyro-glycin-TEA developer I'm testing might also be useful for this kind of technique.
Jay
jdef said:According to Gordon Hutchings, 510-Pyro, which contasins both ascorbic acid and phenidone shouldn't produce very sharp negs
jdef said:Jim,
you break it up, and I'll twist it up. Have you printed your TMY/510-Pyro negs?
Jay
jdef said:Jim,
I use 510-Pyro with reduced agitation for Freestyle APHS Ortho film, at 1:500 for 20min, with one inversion at 1/3 and another at 2/3 dev. time. Works great. Andre` de Avillez has used the same, or similar technique with good results. I haven't tested the technique with TMY, so I can't recommend times or dilutions. Good luck.
jdef said:Sandy,
I don't think the pH of Hypercat is as high as you say. Ascorbic acid is about 10X more acidic than sodium metabisulfite, and neutralizes some of the sodium hydroxide in the working solution to form sodium ascorbate, so the pH of the working solution is not the same as the pH of the B solution alone. In any case, I've tested it using the B solution of Pyrocat HD with no significant difference in stain formation, maybe because potassium carbonate has a much higher buffer capacity than the weak solution of sodium hydroxide used with Hypercat, and is less sensitive to the addition of ascorbic acid. The sodium metabisulfite in Pyrocat HD might not reduce the stain appreciably, but when you start adding ascorbic acid, it doesn't take much before you'll see stain loss because of its addition with the metabisulfite. There is as much sodium metabisulfite in Pyrocat HD as there is ascorbic acid in Hypercat. If I was to add sodium metabisulfite to Hypercat, it wouldn't take much to begin to reduce the stain formation. I think that using both is redundant.
Jay
jdef said:Hi Sandy.
Your hypothesis ignores the fact that Hypercat still produces very high stain when used with the Potassium carbonate B solution of Pyrocat HD. I would guess that the pH of the Hypercat A/ Pyrocat B solution would be lower than the pH of Pyrocat-HD. If the difference in the pH levels of the working solutions of Hypercat and Pyrocat HD was responsible for Hypercat's tolerance of its much greater ascorbic acid content, I would expect to see much reduced stain formation when using a working solution made up of Hypercat A/Pyrocat B. It seems clear to me that the presence of sodium metabisulfite reduces the pH of a working solution of Pyrocat HD, and the addition of ascorbic acid would reduce it further, which, beyond a certain point, could impact stain formation. According to your own tests, that point is fairly low. I would expect the same, or similar result by adding sodium metabisulfite to Hypercat. If I wanted to increase the energy of hypercat, I would substitute some of the ascorbic acid for sodium sulfite, which would activate the catechol/phenidone pair, but Hypercat is energetic enough as-is, and the addition of sulfite would require much higher mixing temps, and generally compromise the formula, I think. Adding sulfite to the working solution wouldn't work very well, because the ascorbic acid is scaled to reduce general stain to zero, and the addition of even a small anount of sulfite would impact stain formation, just as the addition of a smal anount of ascorbic acid to Pyrocat HD impacts stain formation.
For all their similarities, it is the differences between Pyrocat HD and Hypercat that fascinate me. Pyrocat HD depends on the catalytic action of the sulfite ion on the catechol/phenidone pair for its activity, while Hypercat relies more heavily on the ascorbic acid/phenidone pair, lacking any form of sulfite to activate the phenidone/catechol pair. I suspect that like it's close cousin, phenidone/hydroquinone, the developer product of the phenidone/catechol pair is itself a developer, possibly more active than the catechol itself, while the product of the ascorbic acid/phenidone pair is weakly acid and retards development. The choice of restrainer/antifoggant is also interesting. Pyrocat HD uses KBr, and Hypercat, BZT. Thes agents also work in completely different ways. KBr retards development, and reduces contrast and film speed, while BZT works much more selectively, having no effect on the progress of development, which might be why Pyrocat HD needs 60% more phenidone than Hypercat uses. Then there's the choice of alkali. Since both developers use separate alkali solutions, it's very easy to isolate the effect of the alkali in testing, by substitution. I should rephrase, it's easy to test the obvious effects of the alkali, such as activity and stain formation, by substitution. I believe that the choice of alkali also has an important effect on the formation of adjacency effects, but while that seems obvious enough, it's very difficult to quantify, and even more difficult to ascribe the difference to the choice of alkali. The conventional wisdom has always been that a strong solution of a weak alkali is to be preferred to a weak solution of a strong alkali, for robust and constant working properties, but the formation of edge effects depends on the local exhaustion of the developer, which is much enhanced by a weak solution of strong alkali. It's all very fascinating.
Back to the subject, it seems that if one was interested in adding ascorbic acid to Pyrocat HD, one should consider substituting sodium sulfite for a part, or all of the sodium metabisulfite in the Pyrocat HD formula. This substitution would negate the pH reduction effect of the addition of ascorbic acid with its attendant reduction in stain formation, while maximizing the energy of the developer. If the reason for specifying sodium metabisulfite over sodium sulfite is to decrease the pH of the working solution, it seems to me that the same thing could be accomplished by the scaling of the alkali, as Steve Sherman suggests above. I think that the high phenidone content of Pyrocat HD is a prime contributor to fog, and only needed to offset the effect of KBr, which is added to control fog. A real catch 22.
Jay
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?