Strange Pyrocat Observation

coriana6jp · Mar 10, 2007

Hi All,

I have recently been playing around with Pyrocat-HD a little more and run into a strange (at least to me) observation.

When ever I develop "traditional" films like FP4, FP5 or Tri-X. The negatives come out great and they look exactly I would expect them to. Full range of tones, and they print nicely.

However, when I develop modern types of emulsions like Fuji Acros, Fuji Neopan, Ilford Delta 100 or Tmax. The negatives come out very very thin, the highlights usually look pretty good, but there is virtually no detail in the shadows at all. They print poorly as well, no detail in the shadows, though the highlights are pretty good. I have played around with changing the dilution from 1:1:100, to 2:2:100 as well as the time, and the results come out virtually the same everytime.

Just curious if anybody else has encountered this problem, or as any suggestions how to improve my results. I really like the results I can with Pyrocat with traditional style emulsions, and would like to see if I can get he same with the newer style as well.

I would post some examples, but the scanner has decided to take a holiday.

Thanx a bunch!

Gary

George Collier · Mar 10, 2007

I've had a similar problem with TMax100, but many others don't. FP4 works great. Maybe it's genetic?

sanking · Mar 10, 2007

coriana6jp said:
Hi All,

I have recently been playing around with Pyrocat-HD a little more and run into a strange (at least to me) observation.

When ever I develop "traditional" films like FP4, FP5 or Tri-X. The negatives come out great and they look exactly I would expect them to. Full range of tones, and they print nicely.

Gary

I have tested with very controlled conditions all of the films you mention, on multiple ocassions and over a period of many years with many different mixes of Pyrocat-HD, and never observed any generic difference between *traditional* fillms and *contemporary* fillms. In fact, my favorite film and the one I use the most is TMAX-400, a contemporary *T-grain* emulsion.

It is not possible to explain all of the mysteries of the universe. If any given developer does not work for someone with any given film, for whatever, reason, I suggest one just move on and try another combination.

Sandy King

Bob F. · Mar 10, 2007

I would have thought that "no shadow detail" means you are under-exposing and therefore need to find the appropriate EI for those films when used with Pyrocat. If the EI you find is significantly different from other people's then your problem may lay elsewhere, but I'd try giving more exposure first.

Cheers, Bob.

Tom Hoskinson · Mar 10, 2007

coriana6jp said:
Hi All,

I have recently been playing around with Pyrocat-HD a little more and run into a strange (at least to me) observation.

When ever I develop "traditional" films like FP4, FP5 or Tri-X. The negatives come out great and they look exactly I would expect them to. Full range of tones, and they print nicely.

However, when I develop modern types of emulsions like Fuji Acros, Fuji Neopan, Ilford Delta 100 or Tmax. The negatives come out very very thin, the highlights usually look pretty good, but there is virtually no detail in the shadows at all. They print poorly as well, no detail in the shadows, though the highlights are pretty good. I have played around with changing the dilution from 1:1:100, to 2:2:100 as well as the time, and the results come out virtually the same everytime.

Just curious if anybody else has encountered this problem, or as any suggestions how to improve my results. I really like the results I can with Pyrocat with traditional style emulsions, and would like to see if I can get he same with the newer style as well.

I would post some examples, but the scanner has decided to take a holiday.

Thanx a bunch!

Gary

I develop Tri-x, EFKE 100, EFKE 25, ILFORD FP4+, Fuji Acros, Fuji Neopan, Ilford Delta 100, Tmax100 and TMax 400 in PYROCAT-HD AND PYROCAT-MC. My negatives from all these films look good with good highlight and shadow detail.

If you have no detail in your shadows, IMHO the most likely cause is underexposure.

Scott Peters · Mar 10, 2007

Or, expired pyrocat, Or contaminated bottles (like getting the A and B solution into one another). This happened to me and the negs were VERY thin.

coriana6jp · Mar 11, 2007

Thanx to all the replies. I am going to shoot a couple of more test rolls and see how things come out, I will try a different EI and see what happens.

Thanx!

Gary

noseoil · Mar 11, 2007

Gary, I recently had a problem with my pyrocat-hd, but it was due to the mix being about 1 1/2 years old. A "fresh" batch cured my problem. What speed did you use when exposing the various films which showed a lack of shadow detail? Are you shooting at "box speed" or something different?

How are you developing the film? My favorite method is called "minimal agitation" which consists of a longer time in the developer, with fewer and longer times in between agitation cycles. Typically, the film is agitated gently for a full minute, then allowed to rest for three minute intervals with only ten seconds of agitation at each interval. This will need to have more time than a more constant type of agitation ( try times which are 1.5x your normal amount of time),but does give very nice shadow detail and helps control high values. A good starting point is to use the 1:1:150 dilution for your working solution. You may want to start at about 20 minutes with (100 speed films) to see what type of exposure and contrast you end up with initially. tim

AlanC · Mar 11, 2007

Whan I was using Pyrocat HD to develop 5 x 4 film I often exposed Efke 100 and Delta 100 to the same scene using identical exposures.
Efke needed longer development time than Delta if both films were to print on the same paper grade, but Delta 100 always had as much shadow detail as the identically exposed Efke 100.

Alan Clark

AlanC · Mar 11, 2007

I should have added that I developed both sheets of film together in a divided dish, pulling the Delta out before the Efke.

Alan Clark

coriana6jp · Mar 11, 2007

noseoil said:
Gary, I recently had a problem with my pyrocat-hd, but it was due to the mix being about 1 1/2 years old. A "fresh" batch cured my problem. What speed did you use when exposing the various films which showed a lack of shadow detail? Are you shooting at "box speed" or something different?

How are you developing the film? My favorite method is called "minimal agitation" which consists of a longer time in the developer, with fewer and longer times in between agitation cycles. Typically, the film is agitated gently for a full minute, then allowed to rest for three minute intervals with only ten seconds of agitation at each interval. This will need to have more time than a more constant type of agitation ( try times which are 1.5x your normal amount of time),but does give very nice shadow detail and helps control high values. A good starting point is to use the 1:1:150 dilution for your working solution. You may want to start at about 20 minutes with (100 speed films) to see what type of exposure and contrast you end up with initially. tim

Thank you for the kind reply.

As a base, I shoot everything at box speed, trying to establish an EI. Though within in the roll I varied the exposure +1.5 to -1.5 stops.

I am not sure the age of the solution. It came as a premixed liquid from PF, so it could be rather old. I am using standard agitation, one every two minutes at the stock 1:1:100 diluation. I havent tried semi stand with Pyrocat, but I do it all the time with Rodinal and love the results. I will give this a try sometime.

This is very very helpful!

Thanks very much!!!

Gary

coriana6jp · Mar 11, 2007

AlanC said:
Whan I was using Pyrocat HD to develop 5 x 4 film I often exposed Efke 100 and Delta 100 to the same scene using identical exposures.
Efke needed longer development time than Delta if both films were to print on the same paper grade, but Delta 100 always had as much shadow detail as the identically exposed Efke 100.

Alan Clark

Thank you Mr. Clark!

This also helps a too!

Best Regards.

Gary

Tom Stanworth · Mar 12, 2007

I find Tmax 100 has to be exposed (for me) at Ei50 to get decent shadow detail in pyrocat. I find FP4+ similar in the same dev so I have found similar results as Sandy - both new and old tech films respond pretty well the same in terms of film speed. I generally find half box speed to be spot on for anything in Pyrocat HD. This includes TriX, which I also rate at half box and get good results. I find pyrocat HD gives a stop less effective film speed compared to DDX which works well at approx box speed with the films I have tried.

Strange Pyrocat Observation

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency