Why 510-Pyro?

[MattKing]

I don't know how my living situation, or my darkroom location plays into things, but I can't help those.

Only in relation to the advisability, or not, of experimenting with many different things.
Wide experimentation works so much better if you both have a good foundation of experience to reference the results to, and if you can easily, conveniently and promptly check out the results of those experiments. If you try out a new developer and then have to wait a month before you can print the negatives, it is difficult to create the necessary feedback loop for evaluating the results.

The toxicity of the developer doesn't phase me though.

The deleterious effects of catechol and pyrogallol are both invisible and cumulative. They really aren't well suited to temporary darkrooms or darkrooms that are used for other purposes as well.

 

[removed account4]

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.)

this is why I landed on caffenol
caffenol c is like the ugly cousin of paragallol and it isn't toxic.
pretty much the best developer I have ever used ( since 2006 )

 

[gone]

Maybe you should rethink that. Neurological issues are cumulative and essentially non-fixable. No one knows when their SAFE threshold suddenly will turn into UNSAFE. I had a stint w/ an OSHA research subsidiary, and our study on "toxic and hazardous materials and chemicals in the workplace" led to changes in the PEL standards. This stuff is no joke if we don't follow safe protocols.

 

[juan]

Jay said many times that his only interest in photography was taking pictures of his family. From this, I took that he was mostly interested in rendering Caucasian flesh tones well. Looking at his photos, I never saw much shadow detail.
I found the same in using 510Pyro and Hypercat - not much shadow detail which is what I think people are referring to as loss of speed.

I switched back to the Pyrocats.

 

[grain elevator]

Only in relation to the advisability, or not, of experimenting with many different things.
Wide experimentation works so much better if you both have a good foundation of experience to reference the results to, and if you can easily, conveniently and promptly check out the results of those experiments. If you try out a new developer and then have to wait a month before you can print the negatives, it is difficult to create the necessary feedback loop for evaluating the results.

The deleterious effects of catechol and pyrogallol are both invisible and cumulative. They really aren't well suited to temporary darkrooms or darkrooms that are used for other purposes as well.

That's scary stuff. I concur that it's not suited to use in multi-purpose rooms. And I think it must be emphasized that mixing from powder is where it gets real dangerous because where it goes is much harder to control than liquids, and inhalation is an immediate danger and harder to prevent than splashes. So if the OP must try pyro, better go with pre-mixed. To me, also that risk wouldn't be worth the probably small potential improvements over (fairly) harmless developers.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

Maybe you should rethink that. Neurological issues are cumulative and essentially non-fixable. No one knows when their SAFE threshold suddenly will turn into UNSAFE. I had a stint w/ an OSHA research subsidiary, and our study on "toxic and hazardous materials and chemicals in the workplace" led to changes in the PEL standards. This stuff is no joke if we don't follow safe protocols.

We live and sleep on top of 300g of unleaded gasoline. Mitigating chemicals with PPE doesn't scare me.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

Jay said many times that his only interest in photography was taking pictures of his family. From this, I took that he was mostly interested in rendering Caucasian flesh tones well. Looking at his photos, I never saw much shadow detail.
I found the same in using 510Pyro and Hypercat - not much shadow detail which is what I think people are referring to as loss of speed.

I switched back to the Pyrocats.

I read that here 510 Pyro + Kentmere 400 times?

 

[juan]

Ah, I repeat myself.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

Ah, I repeat myself.

I spent a long time yesterday searching threads on the topic, reading stuff dated all the way back to 2005. I found it to be an interesting observation though.

 

[removed account4]

If you're not confident in your ability to use and dispose of it properly, give it a miss.

john_s. that's kind of funny. disposing of it properly. most photographs I have run into in real life and online are "libertarians" and don't like to be told
to dispose of anything properly. a guy who lived downstream from a pond I regularly used to fish at used to dump his cyanide based fixers, dichromate metol and hydroquinone
in his back yard. when he moved he offered me a ton of toxic chemistry ( which I didn't take ( because I didn't want to deal with having toxins in my home or having the stuff hauled away ) and he told me the the was going to mix them all in a bucket with water and pour it in his back yard after I left. .. im sure he is an extreme example but there are a lot of people who scoff at that idea of safe disposal
and just pour it down the drain ... ( or worse )

 

[ChristopherCoy]

j.. im sure he is an extreme example but there are a lot of people who scoff at that idea of safe disposal
and just pour it down the drain ... ( or worse )

I think that example goes way beyond "extreme". If he did it with intent, I'd venture to say that's just psychotic.

 

[removed account4]

I think that example goes way beyond "extreme". If he did it with intent, I'd venture to say that's just psychotic.

You can poke around on this site’s archives and see people say they do similar things..

 

[ChristopherCoy]

You can poke around on this site’s archives and see people say they do similar things..

That... is a real shame.

 

[john_s]

john_s. that's kind of funny. disposing of it properly. most photographs I have run into in real life and online are "libertarians" and don't like to be told
to dispose of anything properly. a guy who lived downstream from a pond I regularly used to fish at used to dump his cyanide based fixers, dichromate metol and hydroquinone
in his back yard. when he moved he offered me a ton of toxic chemistry ( which I didn't take ( because I didn't want to deal with having toxins in my home or having the stuff hauled away ) and he told me the the was going to mix them all in a bucket with water and pour it in his back yard after I left. .. im sure he is an extreme example but there are a lot of people who scoff at that idea of safe disposal
and just pour it down the drain ... ( or worse )

We have an occasional free of charge government sponsored collection point for toxic chemicals. In this area, it's probably mostly agricultural herbicides and pesticides that have deteriorated in storage, but also anything else, like solvents.

Even 'libertarians' have 'responsibilities.'

 

[removed account4]

We have an occasional free of charge government sponsored collection point for toxic chemicals. In this area, it's probably mostly agricultural herbicides and pesticides that have deteriorated in storage, but also anything else, like solvents.

Even 'libertarians' have 'responsibilities.'

most cities and towns have household hazmat disposal. but it seems too much for some people to do the right thing .. oh well..
I think most do or try to to the right thing but there are always the few people that are not too swift..

 

[MattKing]

most cities and towns have household hazmat disposal.

Unfortunately, that isn't the way it works around this area.
What we have are extensive and comprehensive programs that deal with a myriad of different types of items, but they are specific to those items, and photographic chemicals are not on the lists.
There just isn't a "miscellaneous" barrel either.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

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

It's not a two-bath. You make a single solution - 1 part a, 1 part b, 100 parts water. It's not hard to mix, and just as easy to use as any other developer.

 

[removed account4]

Unfortunately, that isn't the way it works around this area.
What we have are extensive and comprehensive programs that deal with a myriad of different types of items, but they are specific to those items, and photographic chemicals are not on the lists.
There just isn't a "miscellaneous" barrel either.

bummer...
usually in the states we have that, I have heard in Europe too its too bad your area doesn't..

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I used Pyrocat-HD religiously for about 18 years. I loved it's look. It's wonderful when you want to play around with edge effects, or very dilute for semi-stand. And yes, a for the duo-purpose negative. Most of the time for alt printing I use a digital negative so a duo-purpose negative is no longer important to me. I've gone back to Xtol, playing around with replenished version. Give 510-Pyro a go and decide if it's right for you. Before I forget, I also used Obsidian Aqua. It's a very dilute staining developer that's very simple to mix up. Developed by Jay DeFehr. He uses geometric agitation ("I use a count up timer, and begin by agitation continuously for 1 minute. Then I reset the timer and agitate for 10 seconds, according to the following progression (in minutes): 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, etc.")

Obsidian Aqua:
Distilled water 700ml
Metabisulfite (sodium or potassium) 20g
Catechol 250g
Distilled water to 1 liter

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

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.

Pyrogallol may have long-term effects if you are continuously exposed to it without basic protection (ie soaking your hands in it when tray developing without gloves on) but I'd be much more concerned about the short-term toxicity of C-41 chemistry. That stuff is NASTY. But I do process it at home, because I'm capable of following directions and handling it with respect. Ditto Pyro-based developers. Safety for either is simple- don't mix it from powdered chemicals in an un-ventilated space, wear gloves, and wash it off of any exposed skin promptly. Do not ingest.

 

[RauschenOderKorn]

whose toxicity is neurological in nature.

You scared me so much that I looked up the MSDS, e.g.:

CG3 (scbt.com)
https://fscimage.fishersci.com/msds/20010.htm (lewisu.edu)

Apparently, pyrogallol is only a "Moderate" Risk and neurological damage was not mentioned?

 

[Lachlan Young]

but I'd be much more concerned about the short-term toxicity of C-41 chemistry. That stuff is NASTY.

I really wouldn't. Not now that the formalin is gone. The CD-4 is vastly safer than PPD. I think it's worth noting that by the 1960s Kodak only used pyrogallol where absolutely essential for tanning properties (and were seemingly looking to replace it, had R&D on the product sector continued), whereas CD-4 was the outcome of a major project to make PPD derivatives/ substituted variants that were as safe as possible for end users - given that in the mid 1940s Kodak researchers are very, very explicit in published texts about how nasty raw PPD is (yet plenty of hair dyes used it until recently - some may still do so). The process that is really far more concerning is wet plate - especially the fairly widespread use of Cd salts (quite apart from the potentially outright lethal components elsewhere in the process) - and as for the dichromate processes... I also think that people don't realise that acetic acid and the like can be pretty unpleasant respiratory irritants if strong enough & heated up a bit.

 

[john_s]

Unfortunately, that isn't the way it works around this area.
What we have are extensive and comprehensive programs that deal with a myriad of different types of items, but they are specific to those items, and photographic chemicals are not on the lists.
There just isn't a "miscellaneous" barrel either.

It was a bit like that here and it changed. I had 20L of a herbicide that had deteriorated (coagulated) and could not be sprayed. The environmental bureau would not take it unless they could read the label and it was gone. Although I know what class of herbicide it was, they refused. Now the local facility when they have a collection will take anything in moderate quantities. I'm guessing that they decided that that was better than letting people deal with it some other way.