Sprint Standard Film Developer vs Clayton F76+ vs Xtol?

Opinions of the developers? My usual films are FP4+ and HP5+, with occasional dabbling using Tri-X and Acros, possibly T-Max TMY2 400, in formats from 35 mm and MF to 4x5.

I suspect both Sprint and Clayton F76+ developers are phenidone/hydroquinone developers and there may not be much of a difference between the two. I love Sprint with FP4+ (which gives me great tonality and true box speed or higher [repeatedly densitometer tested] ) but still have not found a developer I have been totally happy with using on HP5+, my main concern is the film speed, where I get an EI of 250 (frankly too close to the 125 I get from FP4+).

What about Xtol probably in 1:1, though I really prefer liquid developers?

Thanks.

Sincerely,

Hany.

That's odd ... we use Sprint in our class darkrooms and many students shoot HP5 .. second in popularity only to Tri-X .. and everyone gets fine negs (once they learn how to make proper exposures that is Normal dilutions of 1+9

XTOL is good, and it will give you a little more speed; but only just a little - not 2/3 stop. My suggestion? Switch the film. Try some Tri-X, or better yet, TMY-2. You'll get box speed without any problems.

Paul was a fine guy, and Sprint has an immediate kharmic edge because of it !

Without knowing how you are determining your EI, if you aren't getting box EI from HP5 in Sprint, DEVELOP LONGER !


XTOL will give you half a stop if you develop for proper midtones, but if you are going only by some theoretical concept of Zone 1... well....

I've found Pyrocat-HD gives the cleanest looking and crispest negs with almost all films I've tried it with. It works especially well with Ilford films. I rate everything I shoot at labeled speed, and learned to develope accordingly.

df cardwell said:

Paul was a fine guy, and Sprint has an immediate kharmic edge because of it !

Without knowing how you are determining your EI, if you aren't getting box EI from HP5 in Sprint, DEVELOP LONGER !


XTOL will give you half a stop if you develop for proper midtones, but if you are going only by some theoretical concept of Zone 1... well....

Click to expand...

It is using a zone one test with a black card and densitometer measurements, usually reconfirmed using another densitometer. Technique is pretty much as described by Fred Picker (and others) in the Zone VI workshop though I usually don't do a zone VIII print test, maybe that is what is missing to determine dev time. I do still rely on obtaining good shadow details without blowing the highlights in real life. FP4+ tests at 160-200 in Sprint at 10 min with 30 second initial agitation and 2 inversions every 30 sec. I actually use an EI of 125 in real life. I usually meter (calibrated Pentax spot meter) the mid tones, e.g. foliage, in non contrasty subjects but will meter both shadows and highlights if I think the scene and light is tricky. I usually shoot in the shade and avoid direct sunlight to minimize the scene's zone spread since I usually do only N development. I use daylight tanks for all my films including a Combi tank for 4x5. I use tray development for my occasional forays into 5x7 and 8x10.

I just tested Tri-X and Tmax 400 (TMY-2) in D76 1:1. Not one of the developers I was originally thinking of, but a golden oldiie that somehow I have never used before! I am getting an EI of 200 for Tri-X in D76 1:1, and an EI of 320 for TMY-2, again with D76 1:1. I will try to test both, but particularly TMY-2 in XTOL (probably using the 1:1 dilution), and see what effective speed I get.

If you're following Fred's techniques, then the only way to determine proper development time is doing a Zone VIII print test using your pre-determined Proper Proof time.

APUGuser19 said:

When I read these types of threads, I never see much credibility (no insult intended). For instance, someone saying Tri-X turns out to be 200 in D-76 1:1. I just don't swallow it. What's the known accuracy of the shutter, what's the known accuracy of the meter? Those questions remain undisclosed. Because Kodak had determined TX to be 400 in a full-emulsion speed developer, of which D-76 is one. Their plotted charts and exhaustive testing, and quality-control has the film at the speed printed on the box. The speed is determined as to the point in the curve for widest exposure latitude. I don't get it. I shoot 8 year outdated T-Max 400 at 250 with Microdol 1:3. And Microdol has often been accused of being a speed-reducing developer. But I know the accuracy of my equipment, because I'm the one who serviced and calibrated it definitively.

Click to expand...

One reason this personal film speed testing is recommended is, precisely, to take into account YOUR meter, meteriing technique, accuracy of shutter, etc. Ideally you should test every camera with a built in shutter, and with lenses incorporating their own leaf shutter (like most LF lenses, and some MF lenses) each lens. Unfortunately I have too much gear to test every lens and camera, but I do find the testing useful nonetheless.