SPUR-HRX For EMA/Semi-Stand?

[Andrew O'Neill]

Tried it, and...

 

[john_s]

Interesting sharpness. I wonder if you could get more contrast with longer development, maybe with a larger volume of equally diluted developer.

I'm not looking to make up another developer, I'm happy with Pyrocat and Microphen. But out of curiosity I looked up the MSDS of Spur HRX and I see it has five developing agents. Is that a record?

 

[pentaxuser]

Thanks for the video and I agree the better sharpness does not compensate for the flat contrast. john-s' comment above might be worth exploring but I do wonder if the effort and reward for so doing will prove to be worth the effort

pentaxuser

 

[Alan Johnson]

I don't know if all the ingredients listed in the msds have to be included in significant amounts in the marketed product.

https://www.fotoimpex.com/shop/images/products/media/56160_4_MSDS_EN.pdf

Dimezone-s and the lesser amount of phenidone are adsorbed on the grain surface and pass electrons from HQMS-K and HQ .
Metol does some development but more slowly and increases speed (Crawley).
Thiocyanates were being investigated at Kodak when the the labs were closed down (PE). This seems to have been continued at Spur.
IIRC there were earlier versions of HRX . Spur seem to have optimized Dimezone: Phenidone and HQMS-K: HQ, added some metol and balanced the buffer in part B which contains the solvent thiocyanate.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Thanks for the video and I agree the better sharpness does not compensate for the flat contrast. john-s' comment above might be worth exploring but I do wonder if the effort and reward for so doing will prove to be worth the effort

pentaxuser

Nope. Not worth the effort. I'd rather spend the time playing around with regular SPUR-HRX and other fine grained films. It was just an itch that I had to scratch. It's too expensive of a developer to fart around with