The formula for GVM1, a custom and unique phenidone-glycin film developer

The main article with tons of examples, detailed info, contrast curves, etc is here: https://grainy.vision/blog/gvm1

After a lot of research and testing, here is finally the article describing GVM1, a highly concentrated, custom phenidone-glycin film developer.

GVM1 is recommended for:

• Extremely smoothed portraits of light skinned people in controlled light
• High contrast landscape scenes
• Pushing film to use it at increased speed without greatly increasing contrast
• Taming the contrast of very high contrast materials
• Getting all of the image detail onto a print in the darkroom without great difficulty

NOTE: please do not republish the following mixing instructions, instead link to the article above to share this formula with other people. I am providing these instructions on my website and on Photrio exclusively at this point.

Mixing instructions:

Distilled water is highly recommended and gentle heating may be useful, but is not required. Follow these steps in exactly the order given.

1% Dimezone-S Instructions:
First, a 1% solution of Dimezone-S in propylene glycol should be mixed as so:

• 90ml propylene glycol
• 1g Dimezone-S
• top to 100ml with glycol
• This may take a while of stirring, warming will help. NOTE: warming glycol above 140F will cause the glycol to give off non-toxic but highly flammable vapors. Do any heating with care away from open flame and lightly cover the container using foil or filter paper
• Solution should be a pale orange once mixed. Expected to stay good for several months if kept in an airtight container and no water is introduced.

GVM1 Formula:

• To make 100ml of concentrate, used to make between 5L and 2.5L of working solution depending on dilution used
• 30ml distilled water (highly recommended to use distilled!)
• 16ml potassium sulfite 45% solution, or otherwise equivalent to 7.2g and 16ml of water (in case using a solution strength other than 45%)
• 5g sodium metaborate. Note, you do not need to wait for this to dissolve
• 18g potassium carbonate. The solution will heat up slightly.
• Stir until both the carbonate and metaborate are fully dissolved. The solution might be slightly cloudy
• 3.6g glycin. This will not dissolve, create a slurry. Do not proceed to the next step until all of the glycin is wet and the solution is somewhat frothy and either brown or tan (Depending on freshness of glycin)
• 34ml of Dimezone-S 1% by weight, dissolved in propylene glycol. Using glycol is absolutely essential here. Solution should go from a slurry to a fully dissolved solution.
• top to 100ml with distilled water. (add about 5ml of water)
• Solution may appear somewhat cloudy due to very small bubbles in solution. This will clear after a few hours as the solution stands. There should be no dissolved powder at the bottom of the container though.
• Use at 2+100 (dilution A), 3+100 (dilution B), or 4+100 (dilution C). A for normal to low contrast, B for normal to increased contrast, or C for high contrast.

Solution will be a moderately deep tan to a dark orange-brown depending on how fresh the glycin used is. When added to water to make a working solution, no matter the freshness of glycin, will turn a pale iridescent pink-orange. After use developing film, will appear either a deep yellow-green, deep green, or moderate blue, depending on the dilution used and the type of film processed.

If the concentrate appears black or dark green, or does not turn pink-orange when diluted, the concentrate should be considered untrustworthy. It will likely still develop film and produce an image, but it is expected to be of lower activity or to have other detrimental effects.

The color changing effects of this developer should be the primary way to judge if the developer is still good.

Please see the article linked above for more detailed instructions, development times, and plenty of examples.


FP4+@400


HP5+ pushed to 3200, ambient light. Printed on Ilford MGV RC, grade 2.5


Ultrafine Extreme 100 pushed to 400

Very impressive.

All three samples are very good but the push of FP4+ to 400 ASA is very good. Regardless of whether it is 120 format or possibly sheet film as the continuous tonal scale across the shadow to highlight is seamless, that is bordering on spectacular results.

The Ultrafine Extreme 100 pushed to 400 is holding the highlights very well but at the same time holding very good shadow detail; as in, your hair, which is normally quite difficult to do. My normal exposure for the last one with a 400 ASA film, would be around 1/30 at f/2.8 under Tungsten, but it would look a bit more like the grain in the HP5+ print as I use D76 1:1.

I've never heard of Ultrafine Extreme film, is it a tabular grain film?

Mick Fagan said:

Very impressive.

All three samples are very good but the push of FP4+ to 400 ASA is very good. Regardless of whether it is 120 format or possibly sheet film as the continuous tonal scale across the shadow to highlight is seamless, that is bordering on spectacular results.

The Ultrafine Extreme 100 pushed to 400 is holding the highlights very well but at the same time holding very good shadow detail; as in, your hair, which is normally quite difficult to do. My normal exposure for the last one with a 400 ASA film, would be around 1/30 at f/2.8 under Tungsten, but it would look a bit more like the grain in the HP5+ print as I use D76 1:1.

I've never heard of Ultrafine Extreme film, is it a tabular grain film?

Click to expand...

All examples except for the Plus-X and labeled 4x5 FP4+ is 35mm. And yes, I do not personally use D-76 for anything other than as a test reference developer due to issues with how it produces fine yet "pokey" grain which I find extremely ugly.

Ultrafine Extreme 100 and 400 are unknown rebrands. They have custom edge branding so not simply slapping a label on a film, but rather something supplied from a manufacturer with customization. It is believed by some to be Kentmere 100/400, but I'm not sure I believe that from my limited testing with Kentmere 400.

The things people see in a screen image of an image...
I do not understand pokey grain...

D 76 is a very good developer, specially diluted..
There are also a few variants that could be further explored... If you have access to some chemistry.
Do not be afraid of the obvious...

ruilourosa said:

D 76 is a very good developer, specially diluted..
..
Do not be afraid of the obvious...

Click to expand...

Agree. You might want to try D-76 dilution 1:10 spiked with 0.5-0.75g of Sodium Hydroxide per litre of the working solution. Use 0.75 x D-76 stock time as starting point. Beautiful results guaranteed at a fraction of the price of stock solution.

ruilourosa said:

The things people see in a screen image of an image...
I do not understand pokey grain...

D 76 is a very good developer, specially diluted..
There are also a few variants that could be further explored... If you have access to some chemistry.
Do not be afraid of the obvious...

Click to expand...

I've used D-76 stock, 1+1, and 1+3. It is not capable of providing the results, especially with pushing, that I desire. I don't want "fine grain", I want "smooth grain", where you can basically see the grain in the image, but it is smooth in a way that it actually compliments it, rather than is a thing that must be coped with. D-76 1+1 specifically does not do well for pushing as I'd like it, resulting in too much highlight density and too little shadow density. One of the reasons I formulate developers is because whats on the shelf does not satisfy my creative needs, so here's my list of issues of developers I've used enough to critique:

* D-76 stock tends to have a bit too much highlight density and though it is fine grain, when the grain is visible it has a structure which tends to stand out rather than blend into the image
* D-76 1+1 is actually worse than stock to me about how it renders grain, but it has a better restraint on highlight density
* HC-110 (old formula) B is great and provides a nice distinct bold look, BUT it comes at the cost of a small amount of lost shadow detail which can make a big difference when pushing... and it's unique rendering is not great for every subject
* DD-X is actually great especially for pushing, but if you under develop it even a bit, it can give really intrusive and harsh grain. It's expensive though and it's grain is also nothing special
* Rodinal stand is great but gritty. It also isn't great for pushing though and does best with a bit of over exposure
* Rodinal non-stand is decent, but again not great for pushing due to highlight density running away

I've never tried the 1+10 with hydroxide trick though, that actually sounds pretty interesting, it'd turn into a high sharpness, high acutance developer I assume, but likely in the way that Rodinal tends to render a scene. Have you tried that only with Kodak D-76, or with home mix D-76, or even with home mixed D-76H?

I didn't realize I had kicked a bees nest by saying I don't like D-76 lol. I'd challenge anyone to provide 35mm FP4+ pushed to 400 in D-76 which also can be printed to get all the detail onto the paper at grade 2-3 without even looking like pushed film. Regardless, I'm not saying D-76 doesn't have it's place or that my developer is better than D-76 in every possible way. I prefer it though for landscape, portraits, and especially in applications where pushing is needed without contrast running away, and I prefer the way GVM1 renders grain

By pokey grain, I mean randomized. Where if you take a small 100% crop of a grey card, if the grain is "pokey", then it is like looking at white noise with some grain being very light grey and others being very dark grey. If the grain were "smooth", the grain may not be bigger or smaller but rather the grain is much more uniform in value, with only a moderately light grey and only moderately dark grey grains being present. Hopefully that makes sense.

I do not use commercial developers.
I am using a 2 bath variant of dd76 using metaborate...
I find the carbonates tend to give a sharper grain...
Borax seems low on activity for 2 baths

I tend to find grain relates more with the film type nowadays...

Maybe rodinal with PAN f or FX 37 with PAN f or even fx1 with PAN f

But when i dont want grain i reach for mf or lf...
And when i do i reach for half frame...

Raghu Kuvempunagar said:

Agree. You might want to try D-76 dilution 1:10 spiked with 0.5-0.75g of Sodium Hydroxide per litre of the working solution. Use 0.75 x D-76 stock time as starting point. Beautiful results guaranteed at a fraction of the price of stock solution.

Click to expand...

If you mix your own... D76 is really cheap...
D23 is even cheaper...

ruilourosa said:

If you mix your own... D76 is really cheap...
D23 is even cheaper...

Click to expand...

The most expensive part about D-76 is the amount of sulfite it uses, which kinda says something. I use D-76H instead of D-76 though (more shelf stable) which is actually even cheaper

D 76 1+3 has 25grms of sulfite, well bellow its high grain solvency needed amount...

Sodium sulfite costs 3 euros per kilo...

I may give your formula a try, along the 76 with the added hydroxide, but for smooth grain with great tones, the best formula I've found is MCM 100. I used for years, kept a tank going for more than 2 years, but at $80 a gallon I moved on.

I also have a mixeed feeling about D76 and grain.... Sometimes, it is pretty intrusive, sometimes it is quite invisible!

regarding D76, PF4 and 200 ISO, it is achievable with divided D76. I remember using it a loooong time ago (more than 30 years ago) with I think David Vestal split formula.

ruilourosa said:

I do not use commercial developers.
I am using a 2 bath variant of dd76 using metaborate...
I find the carbonates tend to give a sharper grain...
Borax seems low on activity for 2 baths

I tend to find grain relates more with the film type nowadays...

But when i dont want grain i reach for mf or lf...

Click to expand...

I'm still trying to understand metaborate. This is my first film developer formulation containing it. Borates I believe have a strange reaction with glycin, affecting it's activity and superadditivity, maybe similar to how it reacts with Hydroquinone. Regardless, I've tried using only metaborate with no carbonate and could not get activity to a proper level, even when the solution contained enough metaborate to match the pH. Adding a small amount of a different alkali was required. In prototype formulations that was TEA, but in the final formulation here it is potassium carbonate.

Here is two examples for fun if we're peeking at grain. Two scans that are much higher resolution, resized to 4000px width for consistency, then 100% crop. Both are HP5+ pushed to 1600 with no in-camera filtration

D-76 1+1 (home mixed):


GVM1, dilution B:


And the actual images:




As you can see, the grain is definitely visible in both examples, but to my eye is actually less "in the way" for the GVM1 example, it's smoother even if very much there.

The funny thing that would probably surprise you though is that the GVM1 example is using a 35mm negative, while the D-76 1+1 example is a 6x4.5 negative. Both uncropped and both had similar density aims (though the D-76 example was much harder to print the sky detail with when I tried to print this negative, GVM1 negative had no problems at grade 2 getting most of the clouds)

I see you are using potassium salts...
Some claims of different grain structure are mentioned on the new film dev cookbook...

If you keep the developing agents and alkalis separate , as did Crawley with FX-2, the developer will last much longer, at least this was my experience with the single solution GSD-10.

Alan Johnson said:

If you keep the developing agents and alkalis separate , as did Crawley with FX-2, the developer will last much longer, at least this was my experience with the single solution GSD-10.

Click to expand...

I greatly prefer single solution if I can get away with it. And with this formula specifically I have a bit of a conundrum because you need the pH to be high enough that the glycin is easily soluble and the glycin is active enough to regenerate/preserve the dimezone-S. With sufficient concentration, I think that the shelf life will be at least decent and hopefully similar to Rodinal or HC-110. I found a small graduate with prototype #9 (just slightly less alkali) that I had forgot about. It was exposed to open air for about 1.5 weeks, and looked exactly the same as the day I mixed it.

I've made 2 part developers before. Splitting the developer parts does increase shelf life, but not nearly as much as would be expected in comparison to figuring out a way to decrease the amount of water in the concentrate. I have a formula called GVK1 which uses a sulfite+metol+glycin part A. It has an observed shelf life of around 1-2 months, while another formula, GVK3 was 2x more concentrated and combined into a single part. It lasted 5 months before it started to go off.

GSD-10 is much higher pH and much more weakly concentrated compared to GVM1. Here's a comparison

GSD-10 working solution 1L:
* 5g sodium sulfite
* 7.5g sodium carbonate
* 1g glycin

In comparison to GVM1 dilution A working solution, 1L:
* 1.4g potassium sulfite (equivalent to about 1.2g sodium sulfite)
* 1g sodium metaborate
* 3.6g potassium carbonate
* 0.7g glycin
* 0.07g dimezone-S

In GSD-10, the amount of water to contain those ingredients is 50ml. In GVM1, the amount is about 10ml, with an additional 3.4ml of propylene glycol.

If you focus on only the glycin and sulfite amounts in the concentrates, GSD-10 contains 0.1g/ml of sulfite and 0.02g/ml of glycin. In GVM1, this amount would 0.12g/ml of (sodium equivalent) sulfite and 0.07g/ml of glycin. Focusing only on carbonate (salt) amounts, GVM1 has 0.36g/ml and GSD-10 has 0.15g/ml. I'm not adjusting for molar weights and there's definitely more to a formula than just concentration (I believe borate plays a special role) but you get the point.

Oxygen is not very soluble in glycol, and glycol is non-ionic meaning most developing agents will not undergo any reactions in it (non-ionic solutions are similar to dry powders in reactivity). Also the more salts and other chemicals in water, the less oxygen can be dissolved in it. There is actually a patent which preserves developing agents by using as much potassium carbonate as can be dissolved in the amount of water used, and despite pH being very high, the solution was very shelf and tray stable. I'd have to figure out what that patent was, but the effect is well known.

...Low key, I think it'd be really cool to make a "GVSD-20" which massively increases concentration by incorporating glycol and substituting potassium carbonate. Glycin is extremely soluble in glycol once it is neutralized. I've dissolved 3.6g in as little as 5ml of glycol once the glycin is neutralized

ruilourosa said:

I see you are using potassium salts...
Some claims of different grain structure are mentioned on the new film dev cookbook...

Click to expand...

I've not seen anything about different grain structure (assuming you're talking about the Steve Anchell book?) but I've found the non-solvent chapter of that book to be incredibly useful, and the book in general is chocked full of info that is very difficult to find. Highly recommend to anyone else wanting to formulate their own developers, including paper developers

edit: I do know that using a majority of potassium salts is documented in the book to potentially allow for more speed, depending on developer design

More speed yes, marginally...
Maybe also diferent grain look... Fdevcookbook or maybe some other... I do not remember, i search or test...

In Europe Metol isn't what I'd call cheap. And I, at least, don't know of many sources. For that reason I consider D23 a very expensive developer. Could just as well buy a SPUR developer and buy something special.

lantau said:

In Europe Metol isn't what I'd call cheap. And I, at least, don't know of many sources. For that reason I consider D23 a very expensive developer.

Click to expand...

If you try the D-76 dilution 1:10 spiked with 0.5-0.75g of Sodium Hydroxide per liter of the working solution, it'll turn out to be significantly economical compared to D-76 stock or D-23 stock. Same idea works well with D-23 as well.

Raghu Kuvempunagar said:

If you try the D-76 dilution 1:10 spiked with 0.5-0.75g of Sodium Hydroxide per liter of the working solution, it'll turn out to be significantly economical compared to D-76 stock or D-23 stock. Same idea works well with D-23 as well.

Click to expand...

Got any examples developing times like for FP4 or HP5?

grainyvision said:

Got any examples developing times like for FP4 or HP5?

Click to expand...

I've tried the the lye supplemented 1:10 dilution of D-76 only on Double X, TMax 400, and Orwo UN54. Sorry no HP5 or FP4. I've found that 0.75 x D-76 stock time for the film is a good starting point. Before commiting a whole roll, experimenting with a small strip of film is advisable.

grainyvision said:

Got any examples developing times like for FP4 or HP5?

Click to expand...

For D-23 please see this thread. No FP4 or HP5 but some information on some other films.

lantau said:

In Europe Metol isn't what I'd call cheap. And I, at least, don't know of many sources. For that reason I consider D23 a very expensive developer. Could just as well buy a SPUR developer and buy something special.

Click to expand...

7,5 grams of metol can be reduced on d23...
Comercial developers are always a worst choice...
Price, quality and consistency are traditionally much better than imediate convenience...

Just look at hc110...