What does glycin add to a developer?

[gary mulder]

Glycin was expensive enough everytime I checked in Spain to discard any kind of use. Also Ilford MG RC IV was completely inmune to any change in developer, and I tried several including advertised warm and cold tone developers, it delivered always the same print. So i chose the cheapest standard paper developer I found (Dektol, Neutol, Eukobrom, PQ).

Ilford MGFB.5k will exhaust most soft working developers quickly. You need a developer based on Hydroquinone Metol to get predictable results. I had some luck with Amidol based developers on smal sized prints.

 

[Alex Benjamin]

Ilford MG RC IV was completely inmune to any change in developer

I think this nails it on the head. The problem in assessing glycin's impact may have little to do with the chemistry of the developer, but more with the composition of modern paper. As I mentioned, when I compare D-72 and Agfa Ansco 130 in MG Classic fiber I see differences, but very subtle. They are there, but I have to look closely, and they are barely noticeable from a distance. But then, this paper also gives me very little results when selenium toned. I appreciate it, but at this point, I've decided that I'll take what it wants to give me, not what I would like it to give me.

Quite possible that we would have a whole different conversation regarding glycin and Agfa Ansco 130 30, 40 or 50 years when there were many more papers available, some proving to be more susceptible to be impacted by the chemistry than today's papers.

 

[DREW WILEY]

It's also probable that glycin gourmets simply aren't into RC paper, so would have relatively little to comment in that regard.

 

[Ian Grant]

Ilford MGFB.5k will exhaust most soft working developers quickly. You need a developer based on Hydroquinone Metol to get predictable results. I had some luck with Amidol based developers on smal sized prints.

More likely the build up of Bromide is inhibiting the Metol, this also happens with MQ developers. An example is Ilford ID-20 once sold as a packaged powder MQ developer, initially it was replaced by ID-20 PQ which had far greater capacity. There were complaints about image colour shifting as Bromide built up so it was re-formulatedas ID-62 cutting the Bromide in half and adding Benzotriazole which stops the colour shift. By adding Potassium Carbonate and Hydroxide, instead of Sodium Carbonate, Ilford introduced PQ Universal, which is essentially a concentrated liquid version of ID-62.

When I started printing seriously around 1968 I used Kodak D163, an MQ developer, at that time it was the Kodak Ltd UK & Europe Universal developer, so equivalent of D72. Capacity in terms of the number of prints I could make in a session was relatively low before the developer started to collapse, and I would usually have to make up fresh developer.

Later when I switched to PQ Universal I notice a huge increase in throughput compared to D163. These days I use ID-78 essentially ID-62 with no Benzotriazole and the Bromide increased, but I mix as a liquid concentrate, capacity is really only limited with either developer by take up and carry over with FB papers. Harman Warmtone developer was initially a concentrated liquid version of ID-78, but the MSDS sheets seem to indicate it has been re-formulated.

Ian

 

[MurrayMinchin]

It's also probable that glycin gourmets simply aren't into RC paper...

True for me.

 

[GregY]

True for me.

Me too.... i don't use RC papers

 

[chuckroast]

Whats

Me too.... i don't use RC papers

I use them for one purpose - contact sheets.

 

[MattKing]

I use RC for everything. Like every other tool available, the results depend more on how you understand them and how you make use of them.
It probably is important that I use a fair amount of toning as well.
Our Darkroom Group currently has a show in the Reach Gallery in Abbotsford BC, and some of the prints are mine. As all the prints are framed behind glass, it would be difficult to tell the RC prints from the FB prints.
For anyone interested, here are the details for the show: Reach Gallery - Darkroom Group - Persistence of Process

 

[Doremus Scudder]

Apparently glycin adds more "je ne sais quoi" to the image.
I don't know what that is, exactly, but glycin definitely adds more.

Made my day!

 

[MurrayMinchin]

Here are my paper developer test 5x7 prints from a 4x5 negative on MGIV FB at 'normal' contrast and max black time that still live above the sink area. Developers used were Forte, Selector Soft, Zone VI, Ansco 130, Ansco 120, and 12/15, with the last two getting selenium toning tests as well.

Ultimately chose 12/15 which I felt worked best with my images. Hint: warm Glycin is happy Glycin. Have no data to prove this, only experience.

Point being, if you don't test, how will you ever know?

The image can be seen better at the following link from when I had a very short burst of uploading images to the APUG gallery a whopping 19 years ago: https://www.photrio.com/forum/media/users/murrayminchin.4262/

 

[MurrayMinchin]

Had never mixed my own developer until challenged to compare Selectol Soft with Ansco 120. Once that hurdle had been jumped, I mixed up some Ansco 130 because it might have been better. No way to know without testing.

Ansco 130 had too much snap/sizzle/contrast, but I'd heard about Glycin's mysterious image and keeping qualities so decided to play around a bit and came up with 12/15.

Worked for me...

 

[DREW WILEY]

Too much contrast? - What's the point of VC paper? And what the heck is "normal contrast"? Is there only one size of shoes?

 

[GregY]

Whats


I use them for one purpose - contact sheets.

I used to when paper was $38/box.... currently the price in Canada is $150 to $170 for a box of 100 Ilford 8x10 RC.... so roughly $115 USD/ box. I haven't made contact sheets for years now.

 

[Rudeofus]

Quite possible that we would have a whole different conversation regarding glycin and Agfa Ansco 130 30, 40 or 50 years when there were many more papers available, some proving to be more susceptible to be impacted by the chemistry than today's papers.

You realize, that this is precisely what I wrote in #18 here, which didn't stop you from trashing my post anyway.

A lot of these publications from 80-100 years ago were useful back then, but mostly inapplicable with today's materials. With Fomaspeed Variant 132 RC paper (and many others) I never saw a difference in anything when I switched from 130 to Dektol (both self mixed).

 

[Craig]

Me too.... i don't use RC papers

I do use RC. I was able to buy a very large stock of paper (in excess of 10,000 sheets) for pennies on the dollar, so I have a lot of RC paper I can use. It was literally about 2 tons of film and paper.

 

[Alex Benjamin]

You realize, that this is precisely what I wrote in #18 here, which didn't stop you from trashing my post anyway.

Did not trash you post, I disagreed with what you said. I still do. Part I disagreed with (and still do) is this one, and it has nothing to do with paper:

Ansco 130 and all the other "glycin developers" don't use Glycin as their sole development agent, and as soon as you have Metol and/or a Phenidone derivative in your mix, all these theories about high/low contrast go out the door. This is precisely what Lachlan referred to: Glycin may have all kinds of interesting properties, but as soon as you combine it with other development agents to make it useful, you end up with the same options as with MQ/PQ.

To be precise—I have to correct myself—, I don't disagree with it. I just can't agree with it without some kind of proof. I've also stated that in a few posts. There's not reason to assume that metol negates glycin's activity. Metol forms a superadditive pair with hydroquinone, why would it kill the effect of glycin? Who knows, may even be the other way around, i.e., that the presence of metol increases the action of glycin.

 

[MurrayMinchin]

Too much contrast? - What's the point of VC paper? And what the heck is "normal contrast"? Is there only one size of shoes?

I cut my teeth on Oriental Seagull, Ilford Galerie, and Zone VI Brilliant graded papers using a cold light source. When I switched to Ilford Multigrade IV FB paper, I was using a Zone VI variable contrast cold light head.

Previously, I had been trying to expose & develop my negatives to print at max black time on grade two with graded papers for 1st generation work prints. Upon switching to variable contrast, I found the VC setting which gave pretty much the same contrast as grade two (with the graded papers) using my usual developer and called those settings 'normal'.

Once that was established it gave a baseline going back to graded papers, and by using those same VC settings I could make comparison prints with MGIV FB at max black time using a variety of developers.

After switching to variable contrast I didn't give up on the zone system or SLIMT (selective latent image manipulation technique) to control negative contrast. Always found it better to get a negative into the middle of the playing field with sheet film and the zone system, rather than have negatives out near the edges and try to wrangle it under control with VC heroics where tiny changes have proportionally larger/twitchier effects.

 

[MurrayMinchin]

I used to when paper was $38/box.... currently the price in Canada is $150 to $170 for a box of 100 Ilford 8x10 RC.... so roughly $115 USD/ box. I haven't made contact sheets for years now.

Egad...$240.00 for 100 sheets 8x10 Ilford MG FB from Ilford Canada? Last time I bought some it was about $100.00.

Then again, I'm now hand coating handmade Gampi from Japan. Don't want to make a price comparison!

 

[Craig]

Egad...$240.00 for 100 sheets 8x10 Ilford MG FB from Ilford Canada?

No, $195 currently at The Camera Store for FB, $145 for RC. $289 for FB warmtone.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Thanks, Murray. It's always a little tenuous applying actual graded paper grades to VC paper settings. Back in my own Seagull, Brilliant, and Galerie days, I printed about 90% on Grade 3 as my own comfort spot where nearly all my negatives fit well. Today, contrast-wise, that's right about where all my LF negs still comfortably land using current VC papers and my high-output Aristo blue-green cold light. I also use RGB additive colorheads with straight "white light" as a midpoint.

But since roll film can't be individual frame developed like sheet film, it's common for me to punch up the contrast a little with those. And of course, all these light options can be filtration tweaked as needed for contrast fine-tuning or split printing etc. VC papers have made things a lot easier; but I sure miss the special qualities of the classic graded papers. I can't image how expensive a paper like Brilliant Bromide Graded would be today - it was expensive back then.