Tokyo Pyro Black-and-White Film Developer

I have recently discovered Tokyo Pyro developer, which seems to have been invented in the past few years. I haven't used it (more on that). My summary from reading about it online, "A new Pyro developer with very fine grain, high speed, high sharpness, and exceptional shadow detail. Best paired with a dedicated TP fixer to retain tonality. Compared to 510 Pyro, they say the shadow detail is better and speed is higher. Many other characteristics (shelf life, staining, avoidance of acid fixer and avoidance of hypo-clear etc) are similar."

Sample photos are flat-out gorgeous. I know this is a) a matter of taste and b) as much about the skill of the photographer and other factors as the developer, but wow. The samples I've seen make me desperate to try this developer. A few links:

1. https://tokyoaltphoto.com/tokyo-pyro/
2. https://mcr-good.jimdofree.com/tokyo-pyro/
3. https://www.ilfordphoto.com/friday-favourites-12th-september/

Now to my question. It looks like this product has been out-of-stock on tokyoaltphoto.com for a while. I've been checking back every month or so and it remains out of stock. Does anyone know anything more about obtaining it, or the recipe and making it oneself, or... anything?

Since there is no existing thread on this developer here, feel free to just add your experiences with it, sample photos, or anything else, I don't intend for this thread to be limited to the questions in the preceding paragraph. Cheers!

arn_becker said:

Compared to 510 Pyro, they say the shadow detail is better and speed is higher.

Click to expand...

Possibly. Based on the ingredient listing in the MSDS, which is as follows:

Triethanolamine 70-90% pyrogalol 1-5% contained

Click to expand...

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that this is pyrogallol and phenidone (which is often not listed since it's present in a relatively small amount), or otherwise pyrogallol and ascorbate, or otherwise all three of them: pyrogallol, ascorbate and phenidone.

arn_becker said:

Sample photos are flat-out gorgeous.

Click to expand...

I see nothing there that is specific to this developer, except that they are surprisingly grainy for this film (RPX100) and a staining developer.

I'm sorry to be a little cynical here, but how a photo comes out is 85% what you point the camera at and the lighting of the scene, then 10% choices in printing or digital post processing, with the remaining 5% being the cumulative effect of the myriad technical choices in-between. The developer contributes, let's say, 0.05% as well.

OK, of course, those numbers are kind of nonsensical, but so is the concept that it's a developer that will produce gorgeous images. There are subtle differences between developers, sure. The keyword is 'subtle'.

arn_becker said:

I have recently discovered Tokyo Pyro developer, which seems to have been invented in the past few years. I haven't used it (more on that). My summary from reading about it online, "A new Pyro developer with very fine grain, high speed, high sharpness, and exceptional shadow detail. Best paired with a dedicated TP fixer to retain tonality. Compared to 510 Pyro, they say the shadow detail is better and speed is higher. Many other characteristics (shelf life, staining, avoidance of acid fixer and avoidance of hypo-clear etc) are similar."

Sample photos are flat-out gorgeous. I know this is a) a matter of taste and b) as much about the skill of the photographer and other factors as the developer, but wow. The samples I've seen make me desperate to try this developer. A few links:

1. https://tokyoaltphoto.com/tokyo-pyro/
2. https://mcr-good.jimdofree.com/tokyo-pyro/
3. https://www.ilfordphoto.com/friday-favourites-12th-september/

Now to my question. It looks like this product has been out-of-stock on tokyoaltphoto.com for a while. I've been checking back every month or so and it remains out of stock. Does anyone know anything more about obtaining it, or the recipe and making it oneself, or... anything?

Since there is no existing thread on this developer here, feel free to just add your experiences with it, sample photos, or anything else, I don't intend for this thread to be limited to the questions in the preceding paragraph. Cheers!

Click to expand...

the samples in the links above are truly impressive;very clean,sharp and detailed!

Thanks for your thoughts and analysis. What do you think of the following translated and paraphrased excerpts from the link I gave above, https://tokyoaltphoto.com/tokyo-pyro/#yin_li_zitosuteinga_zuoru_hua_xiang

Images created by silver particles and stain​

Do you think this is attempting to describe a difference in behavior from 510 Pyro or another staining developer? Or is the author simply explaining a staining developer's difference from non-staining, and this isn't something distinct to Tokyo Pyro? It's always difficult for me to read a translated text and grasp subtleties in the author's intent. Given that elsewhere, the author compares to 510 Pyro and says "Tokyo Pyro significantly outperforms it in shadow detail contrast and texture [...] achieves higher film sensitivity" and doesn't mention any other differences, I think the author is just trying to orient a reader to a staining developer in the excerpt, not something unique to Tokyo Pyro.

Depiction of highlights​

Do you think the ingredients you proposed/speculated would relate to this claim, or to shadow detail and film speed?

arn_becker said:

Or is the author simply explaining a staining developer's difference from non-staining, and this isn't something distinct to Tokyo Pyro?

Click to expand...

This. The claims made about the developer can be applied to e.g. pyrocat HD just the same, as well as several other staining developers. I don't see anything of any particular interest here.

In the Ilford link there are images with very extreme digital post processing. Whatever the developer contributed is entirely lost.

koraks said:

In the Ilford link there are images with very extreme digital post processing. Whatever the developer contributed is entirely lost.

Click to expand...

That link has only one photo processed in Tokyo Pyro. I am not sure I see digital processing in that example, but I agree about others. Do you think the Tokyo Pyro example is digitally manipulated too?

arn_becker said:

Do you think the Tokyo Pyro example is digitally manipulated too?

Click to expand...

That's hard to tell, but what's certain is that whomever chose to edit it this way, opted to set both the white and the black points a little bit away from the actual image density boundaries, making for a rather muted look that has everything to do with a post-processing choice, and nothing with the developer. Frankly, the effect is rather bland to me and an aesthetic I've never really understood, but there's no accounting for taste.
If you set the black & white points at the edges of the image data, you get this:

That still looks fine to me, but the merit here is:
1: Subject matter choice, composition and light (although I'd personally crop it for presentation/printing)
2: Correct exposure of the film used
3: It's medium format, which even presented at a smaller size creates a sense of depth which is helped with the shallow depth of field (see the foreground).
The developer really doesn't do much either way here. It did its job, but there was relatively little it could mess up here anyway.

What I also see is rather poor differentiation in the upper midtones, which could be due to anything, including compensating effects in development. Look at the problematic patch of brightly lit ground cover in front of the tree, and to a lesser extent the foliage in the background. This can also be largely due to the film's spectral response esp. when detail starts to be pushed onto the right-hand side of its HD curve (it's exposed rather liberally, after all).

You can do this with the same film with Xtol, Pyrocat, D23, D76 or Rodinal for that matter.

I think this case is like so many others, and I'm very familiar with it because I'm as liable to fall for it as the next guy or gal: someone reasonably competent making something pretty, you look at the tech details and think "so that's where the magic is". But it isn't. You take Tokyo Pyro or Obsidian Aqua or whatever other developer that someone made magic with once, and in your own hands it produces the same kind of photographs or prints that you always produce. Because it's in the hands and the eyes, not in the bottle.

PS: the two images of the tulip on the product page are again a combination of subject matter (who isn't a sucker for a pretty flower), lighting and exposure (correctly exposed for the flower itself, and consequently allowing the rest of the scene to drop away into deep shadows. The one underexposed image of the vase with the dried plant is the same - but I suspect that vignetting was added to this one in post processing.

The second link features a series of IMO ho-hum photos that aren't particularly interesting in any way; they're technically competent captures of urban scenes, except for the apparent problems with uneven development in the first two series (2024-07-26 and 2023-07-30). Pyrogallol developers are often prone to uneven development and require some care in determining an optimal agitation scheme.

koraks said:

opted to set both the white and the black points a little bit away from the actual image density boundaries[...] What I also see is rather poor differentiation in the upper midtones

Click to expand...

I agree about the upper midtones, but when I copy and paste the image into Photoshop and look for blown highlights and shadows, I actually see a fair number of clipped pixels at both extremes in the image itself. So I am not sure I agree about the white and black points. I do agree, however, with your remarks about the framing, cropping, going for an aesthetic etc. I think this image is on-trend, although I don't want to read too much into that or the photographer's intentions; it's a pleasing image and I don't think any criticism from me is merited or appropriate especially since nobody asked for it! But back to the topic, I agree that this sample image doesn't show any magic attributable to the developer, and as you pointed out, technically the highlights are actually not showing off a lot of subtlety and nuance where the developer could have influenced the tonality.

Although I'd included that link to a sample photo for completeness (I haven't found a lot of example photos with Tokyo Pyro online), it's actually the photos on the Tokyo Alt Photography website that I thought were particularly arresting. And in some of those, I do think the tonality in the highlights is handled with a lot of grace. Those, too, are scans of prints, which is a much more compelling case for developer performance in my opinion. You can digitally scan a garbage negative and do a lot of magic to get a nice-looking image, but if a print is well executed, there's more to be said about the chemistry.

arn_becker said:

Those, too, are scans of prints

Click to expand...

Wait — I am not sure of that now. I think I was conflating this in my mind with some other websites I'd looked at recently. I retract this. Maybe they're scans of prints, maybe just digital scans of negatives.

arn_becker said:

when I copy and paste the image into Photoshop and look for blown highlights and shadows, I actually see a fair number of clipped pixels at both extremes in the image itself.

Click to expand...

arn_becker said:

it's actually the photos on the Tokyo Alt Photography website that I thought were particularly arresting. And in some of those, I do think the tonality in the highlights is handled with a lot of grace.

Click to expand...

This is due to reduced exposure, moving the highlights to a more favorable part of the film curve than they would have landed if the exposure would have favored the shadows more. In fact, a compensating developer (as this would be) is really not that much of a benefit in this regard as it'll smash flat highlight tonality (see example above). So what is really a potential drawback of this developer in this particular case (the white tulip) is avoided by means of judicious exposure.

arn_becker said:

Maybe they're scans of prints, maybe just digital scans of negatives.

Click to expand...

If I were to put my money on anything, I would say that 0% of the examples linked to are scans of prints and all are scans from negatives. They could be either and I think ultimately it doesn't matter much. Either way, choices have been made in how the negative densities mapped onto the final image as presented. Those choices generally overpower whatever subtle effects the developer has.

One particular aspect that this developer can affect, is acutance by means of edge effects. But a pyrogallol developer is a bit of a liability IMO in this sense, due to its proneness to uneven development (of which we also see examples). Something like Pyrocat (or even Rodinal) also has this same benefit, but tends to be more forgiving in terms of agitation patterns and oxidation during extended development times.

I'm sorry to be a bit of a negative Nancy on this, but I'm extremely skeptical of the qualities often attributed to developers, especially under circumstances of no objective data (e.g. HD curves or evidence of testing) and myriad factors/choices in the imaging chain that remain unidentified, while they can be expected to have major effects on the end result.

koraks said:

I'm sorry to be a bit of a negative Nancy on this, but I'm extremely skeptical of the qualities often attributed to developers

Click to expand...

You're not being negative, or not unduly so anyway; your skepticism and analysis (as well as others in this thread) is welcome in response to my initial enthusiasm.

Thanks for taking it that way. As to your enthusiasm - please hold on to it. Whether it focuses on developers or makes you search for the nearest pretty vase and a suitable flower - regardless. That's the fun of photography!

Btw, I am genuinely interested in what others may have to say about the possible composition of this developer.

I would like to see some film curves. Side by sides curves of a film developed in this Tokyo Pyro, and say, Pyrocat-HD.

At the risk of going off-topic, I see something quite different in the Ilford sample photo. I wonder what can explain this? I right-click, copy, open Photoshop, new document, paste. Crop, remove the black borders (plus a little margin for safety). Result:




And then, ticking the "Show Clipping" box and nudging the white-point handle to 254, I immediately see clipped pixels. I actually still see clipping at 255. Same thing for the black point. I wonder what explains this difference in renderings between our systems. Default ICC profiles, perhaps? I have often noticed outrageous differences in image rendering in browsers versus image editing apps. I have never investigated to isolate why.

Oh, I don't doubt you're right, but look at those clipped pixels. That's not a really meaningful bunch; it's a handful. Now take an average sample (let's say 5x5 box) of the brightest sky in the background. That comes out at RGB 230 for me, which is a considerable way off of white. Now, there's no law anywhere that says that a part of the sky in an image like this should be pure white. Heck, there's a lot to be said for having it inch back from pure white just a little. But to my eye, the image as it's presented on the Ilford site is a little flat, and that's due to an again in my view artificial compression of the tonal scale, that's not attributable to the actual negative, but purely a choice (or accident) in digital editing.

Also, if you look at the distribution of those pure-white pixels, I have a very strong suspicion they do not represent actual image values, but are the result of sharpening applied to the digital file.

Note also that a dramatic contrast enhancement of the highlights (basically pulling the upper midtones down to dark grey) leaves no differentiation in the highlights. There's just no image information there. The histogram is just squished a little esp. on the highlight side. I see no clear reason for this.

I concur with all of that; but your histogram shows significant flat areas at the black and white ends, which mine doesn't. I don't know how to explain that.

Must be something to do with how Photoshop constructs histograms. There might be a setting in the preferences somewhere that controls this; it seems like it normalizes image data before building the histogram. I've long ago stopped using Photoshop so I can't comment any further, but this is what I'd expect.
I've taken your screenshot and put it into my GIMP and the highlight measurement is the same, so I think we're looking at the same image data. If there were a difference in ICC profile interpretation, this would translate into the screenshot as well. Given that the images look pretty much the same, that can't be it and it must be a mathematical artifact related to histogram construction.

I have a photography friend in Japan who couldn't find access to premixed 510-pyro there. So I'm glad they're getting access to some kind of pyro developer.

As someone who likes long shelf life liquid concentrates, it's nice to have one that gives good film speed (unlike Rodinal, HC-110), pleasant grain (unlike Black White & Green), and strong contrast if you want it (unlike Diafine).

Andrew O'Neill said:

I would like to see some film curves. Side by sides curves of a film developed in this Tokyo Pyro, and say, Pyrocat-HD.

Click to expand...

And you're just the guy to do it Andy. Check with your connections in Japan to see if it's made anymore? Just kidding of course! If it were that much better a pyro developer than what we are using now, it wouldn't be "out of stock" for any length of time. I'd say it might be out-of-stock permanently.

John Wiegerink said:

And you're just the guy to do it Andy. Check with your connections in Japan to see if it's made anymore? Just kidding of course! If it were that much better a pyro developer than what we are using now, it wouldn't be "out of stock" for any length of time. I'd say it might be out-of-stock permanently.

Click to expand...

Not sure if I'd want to pay that much (including shipping) for such a small bottle. It looks to have the same dilution ratio as 510-Pyro. I found some curves. With extended development, the contrast does seem to increase more in the shadows (which I find appealing), than in the highlights.

I wonder what James Lane, the producer of commercial 510 Pyro in the U.K. would say about the claims made against his claims?

With his plans and ambition I am surprised he hasn't broken into the Japanese market yet

I always get a little concerned when the "inventor" makes the claim that for best results the developer should be combined with what I assume is TokyoPyro (TP) fixer. It reminds me of the adverts by a washing machine maker in the 1950s who recommended a certain washing powder for use in its machine for the "whitest wash" possible

pentaxuser

At the end of the day, it all comes down to what koraks said. A big part of it depends on what you point your camera at.