stick to one developer and film combo: really?

[audible]

a common piece of advice i hear is for someone new to developing to stick to one film and developer for the first XX number of rolls and get to know the characteristics. this makes a lot of sense, since it's hard to know what's going right or wrong if the variables keep changing.

now... hands up... who actually followed this advice when they started learning?



i know i didn't (maybe that's why i'm so bad at this)

 

[MattKing]

I did, but it was 616 Verichrome Pan, and Kodak's basic hobbyist oriented developer, and I was 11 .

Naturally, now that I am way more mature, I probably wouldn't be nearly as wise .

Matt

 

[Vaughn]

I did, but I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now....

120 Panatomic-X in Microdol-X 1:3.

Vaughn

 

[dpurdy]

You can learn a lot by doing side by side comparables. A lot of people think that testing is a waste of time but I like doing it. Pick a full range subject and shoot it with a variety of films or with one film and then process the same thing in a variety of developers. That way difference will become obvious and you can make choices. Write on the backs of prints all the details and save them.

 

[dmax]

Plus X and D76. For many, many years.

 

[mmcclellan]

I found two combos that work great for me:

LARGE FORMAT -- Tri-X and HC-110
35MM -- Pan F and Rodinal

I like to settle on one combo that works well for me so I can concentrate on making images and not the photographic processes. Others will differ, of course, by given that I move from time to time due to my work and prefer to simplify everything in my life, I like to keep my working methods as simple as possible, too.

I tested various films and developers, but once I found something that was predictable, workable, and gave good results, I saw no reason to change as long as the supplies were there and I continued to get the results I need. Once this system cannot give me what I need -- change in vision? change in suppliers? change in chemistry? -- I will find something else. But like the old saw goes, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

To each his own . . . .

 

[payral]

Almost only large format and contact prints:
TXP with ABC Pyro for years
Is there really something else ? )))

 

[jd callow]

I had no choice what other than c41, or e6 will process colour negs and chromes? As for that single channel film I started out on D76 and Microdol-x.

 

[k_jupiter]

I'll tell you what got me through photo school... Tri-X D76 1:1...

Haven't touched D76 in 20 years.

Too many developers, too many films (although less and less as time goes by).

If I had to choose a film? Tough call with APX-100 in short supply. Perhaps a combo of Tri-X in Pyrocat and Pan-F in W2D2+...

Nah, I love playing with HS films in Diafine or 777, slow speed films in Rodinal.

Finest combo over the last 25 years? APX-100 in W2D2+.

Amazing.

tim in san jose

 

[Roger Hicks]

now... hands up... who actually followed this advice when they started learning?

I did because I was given 800 feet (4x 200 foot cans) of outdated ex-WD FP3, and D-76 was the only readily available developer in Bermuda at the time, though I think I also tried a couple of others.

Maybe that's one of the reasons I think it's lousy advice, and always recommend trying lots of films until you find the one that's 'magic' for you.

 

[pcyco]

hallo

after 15 years of testing
tmax100 in rodinal (or sometimes emofin)
hp5 in emifin (or rodinal)

thats all

bit in the coming weeks i will test the acu-1 developer with tmax100
maybe i need something new

good light

thomas

but often im testing foma films in various combinations

 

[Steve Smith]

I think you need to try a variety of film and developer combinations before you find two or three which suit you.

Dont go to the extreme of trying everything though, half a dozen films and two or three developers should be enough.

After twenty five years on and off of black and white photography, I have only this year settled on Ilford HP5+ @ EI 200 when using the camera hand held and Ilford PAN F when using a tripod.

I use Ilford LC-29 to develop both - mainly because it is what I usually find in my local Jessops shop.

It is my opinion that apart from some 'exotic' developers like Rodinal, PMK, etc. the choice of developer will not make as much difference as the choice of film.

Others are welcome to disagree with this as these are only my opinions of what works for me. Obviously, everyone has different styles and tastes and will, hopefully, be able to find a combination (or combinations) to suit their style.

Steve.

 

[jim appleyard]

Close. In high school we had Plus-X for "outdoor" photography and Tri-X for "indoor" photography; all done in d-76, 1+0. I worked!

I stayed with that for some years and then branched out to Pan-X, T-Max, Tech Pan, etc.

 

[removed account4]

i hate to jump the chuckwagon ...
but i've been using the same developer for
a long time as well ...

i use a different developer from time to time, but always
fall back on my good friend.

 

[rhphoto]

I confess to being one of the ones who messed around. Started with 4x5 Super XX and some over-the-counter premixed developer in a brown plastic bottle. Kept switching developers. Bought a box of Tri-X. Messed with dilutions. Etc. Amazing I got anything that would print. So I never knew the capabilities of any of my materials for years. I bake bread for a living and I'm the same way with recipies and methods. Now, at age 55 and after having open-heart surgery, you'd think I would friggin' settle down.
So this is a cautionary tale for any starting out with B&W photography: pick one reliable, available film, and one developer -- watch your temps, your procedures, deep records, learn. You might end up being something other than an aging dilettante.

 

[rhphoto]

It is my opinion that apart from some 'exotic' developers like Rodinal, PMK, etc. the choice of developer will not make as much difference as the choice of film.

I totally agree. Only dev. I found really made a difference was Pyro, due to the way it hardens the emulsion as it goes in. Other than that, I've seen an awful lot of excellent work done on good old Tri X and D76.

 

[Akki14]

At the moment almost every I do is hp5+ in diafine because I'm just too lazy to go out and get anything else. I've used perceptol and microphen lately for pull and push processing and that's about it. Need more microphen or possibly to try rodinal since I have buckets of delta3200 hanging around...

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

At first I didn't stick to any one thing particularly, but eventually I standardized on TMX and D-76 (1+1), and stuck with it for several years. When I started shooting formats other than 35mm I started to realize that grain was less of an issue and I could think more about tonality, so today I shoot mainly Tri-X, FP4+, and Efke PL100, and develop mainly in ABC and PMK pyro (depending on format), occasionally Acufine or RAF pyro-metol for speed.

I try other things just for the sake of learning about them, but I'm pretty settled otherwise. Having stuck to one combo for a long time, the experiments are much more meaningful now.

 

[Stan160]

Mainly been using Ilford FP4+ and HP5+, developed in Ilfotec LC-29, about 15 months ago when I started back into film photography. Friends gave me various expired rolls of Fuji, Kodak, and Ilford film but only used these for testing equipment or unimportant shots.

Have a good feel for HP5+ exposed at 250 EI in LC-29 1+29 for manufacturer's recommended time for 400 EI. Found that FP4+ at 125 EI in LC-29 1+29 works fine at manufacturer's recommended time.

Only complaint with the FP4+ is rather more grain than I would like, seems like more than the HP5+. Recently tried Ilfotec DD-X 1+4 with both films and both have noticeably finer grain plus the HP5+ can be exposed at 400 EI and still give me good negatives.

Just started experimenting with Delta 100 to see if it gives me even finer grain than FP4+ in DD-X.

 

[efreddi]

Actually I prefer to shot pictures than to make experiment with different films

Some word of wisdom: unless you decide to use some special developer (PMK, etc...), the most important part is done by the film, so find a good film you like and stick on it. The developer shall fit your liking, but normally it will not make miracles out of a crappy film.
Ciao


Elia

 

[nicolai]

*hands firmly in pockets*

 

[MurrayMinchin]

Before the 4x5 I used 35mm Kodachrome...but that doesn't count

Since I'd never seen a 4x5 before mine arrived in the mail and had never developed film before, I used the film/developer combination most used by the photographers whose work inspired me the most; TRI-X and HC110.

I stuck to that combination for over 20 years...until Kodak turned its back on me. Now I use HP5 in a developer of my own concoction.

Murray

 

[Ray Heath]

hallo

after 15 years of testing
tmax100 in rodinal (or sometimes emofin)
hp5 in emifin (or rodinal)

thats all

bit in the coming weeks i will test the acu-1 developer with tmax100
maybe i need something new

good light

thomas

but often im testing foma films in various combinations

your kidding, 15 years testing?

how many images have you created in that time?

why might you need something new?

 

[MurrayMinchin]

your kidding, 15 years testing?

Have you disabled the 'smiley' faces Ray? There's a huge one after "15 years of testing".



Murray

 

[DWThomas]

Similar to an earlier poster, I started with Kodak Tri-Chem packs and Verichrome (Pan?), it was what I could get. But that was back in the late Bronze Age. On this return to the magic arts, I've thus far stuck with two developers -- D-76, a gold standard, a monument ignoring the passage of time, almost every set of film data mentions D-76 developing times -- and HC-110, Dilution H (see other thread). Since my developing episodes are somewhat sparse and random, I lean toward the HC-110 for just plain convenience, doing Dilution H as a one-shot.

Film, heh heh, guess I haven't been listening to the advice. There's a shelf here to my left that looks like behind the counter at a photo store. (We know it's not, because most local stores don't offer that much in 120. )

I do admit to using a lot of 400TX. Right now I would use it with the most confidence. I've been pretty happy with Delta 100, but am presently doing some PlusX (an ancient friend!), including a roll of 35mm when my Bronica acted up.

Anyway, I agree it's good and informative to explore the depths, but it can also be fun to explore the breadth -- life is short!

DaveT