Staining Developers with CHS ii?

[m00dawg]

I see on the CHS ii datasheet that a few staining developers (PMK, Tanol) are not recommended. I had planned in the future to try Pyrocat-HD in large format. The idea being I might have negatives better suited for alt processes when I get to that point but would also like to look at doing some contact printing (once I am up and running with my 8x10 setup). Most of the time I'll be printing enlargements. The anecdotal evidence in stained negatives being easier to print is something I'd like to try as well.

I dug around a bit and the reason for PMK not being recommended, I think, is because of the pH which can cause emulsion liftoff and pinholes? I couldn't find as much info about the pH of Pyrocat-HD so I don't know if this might be a risk as well?

I used to use Xtol replenishment but am not using XT-3 (also with replenishment) as my current developer of choice with a water pre-soak, a water stop and TF-5 fixer. This is all done using a rotary process (Jobo 2500 drum with the 4x5 reel and my own built motorized rotary running at about 45 RPM). I was hoping to use a similar process for Pyrocat-HD.

I have seen lots of posts saying they have good results with CHS ii and Pyrocat-HD but figured I might ask on the Adox sub-forum specifically in hopes to get an official recommendation?

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

More than the alkalinity it's the tanning effect of Pyro and Catechol developers that's of concern for such films I guess. If you add a few grams of Sodium Sulphite to the working solution, both staining and tanning effects usually go away. Not sure if there's any way to get rid of tanning effect while retaining the stain as they seem to be interlinked.

 

[Vaughn]

Another route I have heard of but have not tried, is to develop the film in one's usual developer. Bleach the negative and re-develop in a pyro developer. This can be done in the light from what I understand and you can watch the redevelopment (w/ stain). Might be fun to try with a test negative. Perhaps cut a negative in half and bleach/redevelop one half and print both to compare.
I have used PyroCatHD with TMax, FP4+, Acros, Tri-X, Kodak Copy Film and maybe some others.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I've had no issues with this combination. I use either vinegar or citric acid stop, and fix the film with Ilford rapid fix.

 

[m00dawg]

Oh I would not have guessed the concerns were about the tanning/stain? I recall reading (I think on a thread here, I'll link to it if I can find it) that PMK was suspect as to causing lift-off. Simply removing the tanning/stain wouldn't really change that behavior would it? Curious then, what would be the negatives of having the stain? Does it somehow make the emulsion more brittle if left? I find XT-3 is a pretty good developer for CHS ii so I'm not at a big loss to stick with that though since it's the main medium speed film I tend to shoot in 4x5, it would otherwise be a convenient choice to test Pyro-based developers (510 and Pyrocat-HD in particular, though I'm having trouble getting a good direct comparison of the two).

Glad it's working for you Andrew! Does the vinegar/citric-acid have any impact on the stain? I recall reading that using at least a conventional stop tends to reduce the staining affect?

 

[pentaxuser]

We seem to have the usual range of views. It might be worthwhile to get the full explanation from Mirko if he is happy to reply

pentaxuser

 

[Vaughn]

Many years ago I heard that the tanning, or hardening, of the gelatin during development created a sharper image due to less migration (growth?) of developing silver in the gelatin. Something along those line.

Any truth to that? Or just Old Men's Tales?

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Oh I would not have guessed the concerns were about the tanning/stain? I recall reading (I think on a thread here, I'll link to it if I can find it) that PMK was suspect as to causing lift-off. Simply removing the tanning/stain wouldn't really change that behavior would it? Curious then, what would be the negatives of having the stain? Does it somehow make the emulsion more brittle if left? I find XT-3 is a pretty good developer for CHS ii so I'm not at a big loss to stick with that though since it's the main medium speed film I tend to shoot in 4x5, it would otherwise be a convenient choice to test Pyro-based developers (510 and Pyrocat-HD in particular, though I'm having trouble getting a good direct comparison of the two).

Glad it's working for you Andrew! Does the vinegar/citric-acid have any impact on the stain? I recall reading that using at least a conventional stop tends to reduce the staining affect?

Not what I can see.

 

[Sal Santamaura]

A closer look at ADOX's CHS 100 II data sheet will reveal that there's absolutely no problem using staining developers with sheet film. Here's the full document:

http://www.adox.de/Technical_Informations/TA_CHS100II_EN.pdf​

The relevant excerpt:

"Films with an AHU undercoat are not recomended to develop in taning developers such as Finol, Tanol
or PMK containing either Brenzkatechin or Pyrogallol, because they may cause small holes in the film
(emulsion lift off)."​

Note that, as shown on the datasheet layer diagrams, only 35mm and eventual 120 versions have an AHU undercoat. Sheet film does not.

 

[m00dawg]

Aha! Well that helps explain things. Thanks for all the good info folks! Michael, thanks for that explanation about tanning developers in particular. That was very helpful!

Cool well sounds like it might be worth a try in sheets then. I do kinda wonder how much of all this is hype but I do wanna try it just to see if it fits my workflow and approach. As noted, XT3 I find is a great combination with CHS ii and am quite happy with that combo but yeah I'd like to see what some of this hype is all about at least.