Why 510-Pyro?

ChristopherCoy · May 15, 2021

Aside from the entertainment value of the epic sanking/jdef battles fought early in APUG history, (which I wasn't here for but just read).... what are the characteristics of 510-Pyro as compared to say... HC-110?

I know that paragallol is extremely toxic. I know that the stain lends itself well to alternative processes. And I know that there were great debates between both creators, and their followers, and that some have attempted to scientifically test both formulas and there's really been no concrete findings.

So aside from the learning experience, what could I expect from this formula?

(and now I shall hide behind this here couch as to not get caught in the crossfire.)

MatthewDunn · May 15, 2021

Still relevant https://www.sandykingphotography.com/resources/technical-writing/pyro-staining-developers

ChristopherCoy · May 15, 2021

MatthewDunn said:
Still relevant https://www.sandykingphotography.com/resources/technical-writing/pyro-staining-developers

I read that before posting.

This paragraph left me puzzled.

DO PYRO NEGATIVES REALLY PRINT DIFFERENTLY?
Many photographers consider the advantages cited by advocates of Pyro developers (edge effects, internal acutance, increased highlight separation) as subjective and unproven, and argue that if a curve of a stained negative looks much the same as that of a conventionally processed negative the result in the print can not be different. On this subject the experts simply disagree. Phil Davis, author of numerous books and articles on the technical aspects of photography, was asked by Steve Simmons in an interview in View Camera, "Would you say that, if it were possible, to create the same curve with a specific film and a non-PMK developer and the same film developed in PMK that the prints would be identical to the eye?" Davis responded, "To answer you question as objectively as possible, I'll say that if it were possible to produce identical film curves with PMK and some other developer on the same film, and if the prints were matched at two or more density levels, and if the tests were conducted with a panel of unbiased viewers under totally "blind" conditions, I suspect that the prints would be judged to be indistinguishable."6 Responding to the same question, Gordon Hutchings, who developed and popularized the PMK formula, disagreed with Davis, with these comments "Would two prints from identical gamma pyro and non-pyro negatives look the same in the prints? Absolutely not. If there was no difference in developers we would never have needed but one."7

MatthewDunn · May 15, 2021

#4 on that list nails the reason I use Pyro:

Pyro staining developers are ideal for photographers who want to make dual-purpose negatives, that is, negatives that print well with both silver papers and with alternative processes such as platinum or palladium. This is not possible with traditional developers because Pt/Pd requires negatives of much greater density range than silver papers. However, a stained negative has in essence two printing density ranges, one for the bluish/green light used in printing silver papers, and another for the UV light used with alternative processes.

If I wasn't doing alternative process, I would likely never have strayed from D76.

MatthewDunn · May 15, 2021

ChristopherCoy said:
I read that before posting.

Sorry, than what is it you are asking exactly? Apologies for my confusion. You seem to have done all the research and everything but try it for yourself. What exactly are you expecting us to tell you at this point? Or am I just overthinking another Chris thread...

ChristopherCoy · May 15, 2021

MatthewDunn said:
Sorry, than what is it you are asking exactly? Apologies for my confusion. You seem to have done all the research and everything but try it for yourself. What exactly are you expecting us to tell you at this point? Or am I just overthinking another Chris thread...

Well, I've read about the benefits. It's very cost efficient, it has a very very long shelf life, it helps control the highlights, it lends itself well to Pt/PD printing or other alternative processes, but are there any other major characteristics that would champion over HC-110?

How is grain rendered as compared to HC or XTOL (since those are the only two I'm familiar with)?

I've not had any interest in mixing my own developers other than a passing attempt at caffenol in prior years, but through a convoluted mixture of private messages, other forums, youtube, and websites today, I've arrived at a sincere interest to try it, if for no other reason than to say I have. I've priced all the chemicals at ArtCraft and they came out to right at $70 with shipping.

Paul Howell · May 15, 2021

I not used Pyro 510, have used ABC Pyro and found it useful, living the desert southwest it not uncommon for a scene to exceed the SBR of many film and developer combos, when shooting sheet film I can generally develop -2, with roll film stuck with a standard development time for all frames on the roll. I have used MCM 100 which is semi compensating, it does contain Catechol along p-Phenylenediamine.so it's rather toxic. When faced with high contrast scene I generally resort to a divided developer.

MatthewDunn · May 15, 2021

ChristopherCoy said:
Well, I've read about the benefits. It's very cost efficient, it has a very very long shelf life, it helps control the highlights, it lends itself well to Pt/PD printing or other alternative processes, but are there any other major characteristics that would champion over HC-110?

ChristopherCoy · May 15, 2021

Don't judge me, I've never seen Monty Python....

TheFlyingCamera · May 15, 2021

ChristopherCoy said:
Well, I've read about the benefits. It's very cost efficient, it has a very very long shelf life, it helps control the highlights, it lends itself well to Pt/PD printing or other alternative processes, but are there any other major characteristics that would champion over HC-110?

How is grain rendered as compared to HC or XTOL (since those are the only two I'm familiar with)?

I've not had any interest in mixing my own developers other than a passing attempt at caffenol in prior years, but through a convoluted mixture of private messages, other forums, youtube, and websites today, I've arrived at a sincere interest to try it, if for no other reason than to say I have. I've priced all the chemicals at ArtCraft and they came out to right at $70 with shipping.

If you want to try a pyro based developer, Pyrocat HD is easy and inexpensive. A 10 liter kit (which will get you potentially 100 rolls if you do 10 roll batches in a Jobo) is $18.95 from Photographers' Formulary. Get the kit in Glycol - it will last a lot longer that way. If you don't like the results, you're not on the hook for $70 worth of chemicals.

Paul Howell · May 15, 2021

For 35mm I would recommend MCM 100, MCM stands for miniature camera magazine which was a English publication. Grain is tight, tones are excellent, I shot Tmax 400 at box speed, I kept a batch going for 3 years, only reason I've moved on is cost, at $48 a gallon just too pricy for my not so deep pockets.

MatthewDunn · May 15, 2021

ChristopherCoy said:
How is grain rendered as compared to HC or XTOL (since those are the only two I'm familiar with)?

I only really shoot 8x10 so grain is just not something that I really think too much about. I've never heard of Pyro and grainy, but I am far from an expert on all things Pyro.

If you are interested in mixing Pyro, mix Pyro. If you are just interested in homebrewing your own developer to say you've done it, I might personally start with something simpler and less toxic. But you do you!

ChristopherCoy · May 15, 2021

MatthewDunn said:
SOr am I just overthinking another Chris thread...

I'm probably the one that's over thinking it. I probably should have just kept reading, bought the chems, and gave it a whirl.

MatthewDunn · May 15, 2021

TheFlyingCamera said:
$18.95 from Photographers' Formulary. Get the kit in Glycol - it will last a lot longer that way. If you don't like the results, you're not on the hook for $70 worth of chemicals.

This is what I use and its awesome.

MatthewDunn · May 15, 2021

ChristopherCoy said:
I'm probably the one that's over thinking it. I probably should have just kept reading, bought the chems, and gave it a whirl.

I'm sure you have come across this in your searches (almost requisite reading for this kind of thing) - https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B08287HCCZ/ but I suspect that there is enough chemistry and recipes to keep one so inclined occupied for quite some time.

TheFlyingCamera · May 15, 2021

MatthewDunn said:
This is what I use and its awesome.

I started off with PMK, and switched to Pyrocat HD. HD is not speed-losing, and the stain is more effective, without building base fog. It has been my go-to developer for oh, 15 years now. I still keep Rodinal around as a back-up because it NEVER dies.

ChristopherCoy · May 15, 2021

MatthewDunn said:
I'm sure you have come across this in your searches (almost requisite reading for this kind of thing) - https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B08287HCCZ/ but I suspect that there is enough chemistry and recipes to keep one so inclined occupied for quite some time.

Yes, and I've often thought about purchasing it, but there's always something else I want to buy instead.

ChristopherCoy · May 15, 2021

TheFlyingCamera said:
I still keep Rodinal around as a back-up because it NEVER dies.

I did NOT like Rodinal, but don't ask me to tell you why. I just didn't like it.

ChristopherCoy · May 15, 2021

TheFlyingCamera said:
I started off with PMK, and switched to Pyrocat HD. HD is not speed-losing, and the stain is more effective, without building base fog. It has been my go-to developer for oh, 15 years now. I still keep Rodinal around as a back-up because it NEVER dies.

Ah.... it's a two bath, part A & B. That may have been why I started reading about 510.

pentaxuser · May 15, 2021

Christopher, yes, I have enjoyed all the Monty Python films. The possible problem for a non UK audience is that they have IMO some subtly disguised nuances that rely on a knowledge of the way we portray trade union officials and the like of "revolutionaries" in British comedy

Anyway to return to the question: I am unsure that for most of the time when taking most pics that you could necessarily see much of a difference in the finished print from the same scene in say HC110 and 510 Pyro but I am sure others will disagree.

Interestingly an engaging video presenter called Roger from the Isle of Wight has done a video on his experience with some 510 Pyro that he was given. My impression is that he clearly feels it was a worthwhile developer from which to print negs and that it gave him better prints. He appears to be still a relative newcomer to film and darkroom printing and makes no secret that he is still learning but that admission and his enthusiasm and engaging approach is what has earned him a lot of followers in a relatively short space of time

Here's his video on 510 Pyro: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Shoot+Film+Like+a+Boss+510+Pyro+video

His site is called Shoot Film Like A Boss. Worth a look IMO

pentaxuser

ChristopherCoy · May 15, 2021

This was interesting

ChristopherCoy · May 15, 2021

michael_r said:
...There are a few alternate versions.

These are the ones with at least some semblance of proper objective testing for sensitometric and image structure characteristics. The rest are basically haphazard tinkering.

I would highlight that both catechol and especially pyrogallol are highly toxic. Please be careful if you use one of these.

Yeah, what I've gathered is that "pyro" is kinda like the genre of car called "muscle cars", and each variant of pyro is kinda like individual vehicles, i.e. the Camaro, or the Mustang, or the Charger. They all do the same thing, they all look good, they all go really really fast, but each guy says his car is better.

MattKing · May 15, 2021

In another thread you just posted that you can't really tell the difference between a bunch of different films.
And in another thread (I think) you mentioned that your negatives are inconsistent, and your test strips vary widely.
You aren't using large format, and you have to drive 2.5 hours each way to get to your printing darkroom.
You also live on a boat (although you have a place on the shore for film development).
Somehow, it doesn't seem ideal that you start experimenting with a new developer whose toxicity is neurological in nature.

ChristopherCoy · May 15, 2021

MattKing said:
Somehow, it doesn't seem ideal that you start experimenting with a new developer whose toxicity is neurological in nature.

I understand what you're saying. Pick a format and shoot it until I'm proficient at it, learn the characteristics of my films first, and standardize my processes before jumping into something else. But.... Bro, do you even know me? When have I ever heeded that advice?

I don't know how my living situation, or my darkroom location plays into things, but I can't help those. The toxicity of the developer doesn't phase me though.

john_s · May 15, 2021

Now that mercury compounds are no longer used by most photographers, pyrogallol is probably the most toxic chemical in darkrooms. If you're not confident in your ability to use and dispose of it properly, give it a miss. If you could put up with a 2-part developer I recommend Pyrocat-HD like someone above has done already.

FWIW, the elegance of the 510-Pyro formula appealed to me so I made up a batch. I didn't get far with testing it because I got very low film speed. It was the only time in my years of mixing developers that I've had unexpected results.

Why 510-Pyro?

ChristopherCoy

MatthewDunn

ChristopherCoy

MatthewDunn

MatthewDunn

ChristopherCoy

Paul Howell

MatthewDunn

ChristopherCoy

TheFlyingCamera

Membership Council

Paul Howell

MatthewDunn

ChristopherCoy

MatthewDunn

MatthewDunn

TheFlyingCamera

Membership Council

ChristopherCoy

ChristopherCoy

ChristopherCoy

pentaxuser

ChristopherCoy

ChristopherCoy

MattKing

Moderator

ChristopherCoy

john_s

Why 510-Pyro?

Membership Council

Membership Council

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency