Why So Many Kodak Standard Developers?

Sirius Glass

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
50,389
Location
Southern California
Format
Multi Format
Paul Verizzo said:
I love that chart. But our endeavor here in the last few comments is about DK-50. Not searching for the best all around developer.
Click to expand...

Always a good time to consider a change for the better.
 

Paul Verizzo

Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2008
Messages
1,643
Location
Round Rock, TX
Format
35mm
You may have noticed that many of us have our niche projects and are not looking for something "better." Ascorbic acid developers have their own issues.
 

Sirius Glass

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
50,389
Location
Southern California
Format
Multi Format
Paul Verizzo said:
You may have noticed that many of us have our niche projects and are not looking for something "better." Ascorbic acid developers have their own issues.
Click to expand...

One can always learn by digging in or expanding out. Every think can be an opportunity.
 

Paul Verizzo

Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2008
Messages
1,643
Location
Round Rock, TX
Format
35mm
Sirius Glass said:
One can always learn by digging in or expanding out. Every think can be an opportunity.
Click to expand...

You don't get it. This is the path I, and many others, choose to do. I've been "into" photochemistry since about 1985. Thousands of experiments, readings, etc.

This is what I choose to do.
 

foc

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 30, 2010
Messages
2,523
Location
Sligo, Ireland
Format
35mm
I found a few old PDFs from Ilford with their equivalent in Kodak and Agfa (film & chemistry)
I think some of the equivalents don't seem correct to me....................
 

Attachments

  • Ilford-equiv-agfa.pdf
    48.7 KB · Views: 182
  • ILFORD-PHOTO-to-Kodak-equivalents.pdf
    55.3 KB · Views: 241

Juan Valdenebro

Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
1,286
Location
South America
Format
Multi Format
The reason for different developers is not the photographer's taste, but their specific effect on different films' tone and grain.
D-76 produces an appropriate curve on contrasty Tri-X, while HC-110 makes soft HP5+ more vibrant... TMaxDev gives more speed and pushability for TMax for films, while Xtol and PyroHD are bought by people who consider less grain means better photographs.
What I mean is developers have real differences, and it's not true we can use any developer to shape a film's curve as if it was developed in any other developer: sometimes it can be done to a certain degree, but not always.
That's why several developers and different types of developers survive.
IMO we need a few: one for sharp grain and acutance, one for grain control in portraiture, one for upswept curves, one for pushing when there's no better option...
I have not found any developer that's the best option for all films and types of scene.
 

Sirius Glass

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
50,389
Location
Southern California
Format
Multi Format

Thank you for a great synopsis.
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
53,097
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
It's best not to rely too much on Kodak's recommendations for developers like DK-50.
Those recommendations were entirely appropriate when they were current, but the films and typical usage were significantly different then when compared to the nature of current films and current usage.
Remember that, in many cases, those recommendations were made when 120 film was considered a small format - 135 was "miniature" - and a lot more people were using hot lights and condenser enlargers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…