Why was Plus-X so fast?

MattKrull · Oct 4, 2013

I have a few hundred feet of Plus-X 125 left. When that's done, I'll need to find a new 100/125 speed film. Thing is, I'm cheap and lazy, so I like developing in D-76 at 1:1. And Plus-X is fast (7 minutes at 1:1, 4.5 minutes at stock).

When I look at my options, they take a lot longer to develop.

Across 100, 10.5 minutes
Delta 100, 11 minutes
Fomapan 100, 10 minutes
FP4 125, 9.5 minutes
Kentmere 100, 11.5 minutes
Rollei RPX100, 8 minutes
Tmax 100, 9.5 miuntes

Only the Rollei is in the same league as the Plus-X - and it is not cheap (almost twice the cost of HP5+)
Okay, I'm not going to moan too much about adding 4 minutes to a process that, all told, takes me almost an hour (from loading the reels to hanging the negatives).

But it raises the question, why do all the still-produced films take longer to develop than Plus-X? Was Plus-X simply a higher silver content? (I recall someone saying the reason Kentmere takes so long to develop was due to the lower silver content)

Bill Harrison · Oct 4, 2013

How long does Super XX cine film take?

MattKrull · Oct 4, 2013

According to the Massive Dev Chart, Eastman Double X (the closest name I can find to "Super XX cine") takes 10 minutes at 1:1 for ISO250.

I can't say I've ever seen that for sale at B&H.

Gerald C Koch · Oct 4, 2013

Eastman 5222 (Double-X) can be purchased directly from Kodak in 400 and 1000 ft lengths. There is also the possibility of buying "short ends" which would be a cheaper alternative. There are several sites that sell short ends.

BTw, Kodak cine films are marketed under the name Eastman rather than Kodak. The films are numbered either 5nnn (36 mm) or 7nnn (16 mm).

hacked - sepiareverb · Oct 4, 2013

Look at ORWO UN54. Not too pricey,and mighty Plus-X in look too. Not sure about times in D-76 off the top of my head.

Jim Noel · Oct 4, 2013

Why are you in such a hurry to develop the film. What is a few minutes devoted to getting good negatives?

erikg · Oct 4, 2013

Jim Noel said:
Why are you in such a hurry to develop the film. What is a few minutes devoted to getting good negatives?

+1

Seems like a strange priority.

Pioneer · Oct 4, 2013

Move to a different developer. I believe that Rodinal will work quicker.

MattKrull · Oct 4, 2013

Definitely learning stuff today.

The Orwo looks very interesting. Dev time is same as Plus-X. Price is right ($47/100'). Unfortunately the website says they are sold out of it and the ISO 400 equivalent. Their tumblr and twitter accounts have been quiet for 3 months. I hope their still going.

Jim, it isn't that I'm in a hurry (well, maybe I am). Like I said, I'm not moaning about adding less than 10% time to my total time. Although, I'll admit, I find 7 minutes to be a good amount of time standing in the basement waiting to agitate. By 12 minutes I find it's tedious. Because I tend to develop in cold water (I adjust times rather than work to get my water temp exact), my times tend to be a bit longer.

The reason for this post was the question I put at the end - what is it about Plus-X that makes it develop so much faster than newer films?

Pioneer - I'm still learning, so I'm keeping my 'playing with developers' to a minimum. D-76 is definitely easy for me to use, and I like the way it develops all my films so far. That said, I've got some Rodinal on order. I like what I've seen with how it does edges. Semi-stand, while taking longer, fits well with my personality (I can do other things while it devs). I'm really looking forward to playing with Rodinal and some Retro 80S in the future.

nworth · Oct 4, 2013

Back to the original question. There are several possibilities for the faster development time, among them: the emulsion formulation, a thinner emulsion, or a more permeable emulsion. I don't know the answer.

~andi · Oct 4, 2013

You could standardize on a slightly higher temperature. Constant agitation (as in rotation) shortens the time too.

cliveh · Oct 4, 2013

MattKrull said:
FP4 125, 9.5 minutes

Try 12.5 minutes at 68F/20C.

removed account4 · Oct 4, 2013

in coffee it will be even longer .. it takes me 30+ minutes to process film
and all of it nomatter the brand or asa takes the same amount of time ...

and in ansco130 1:6 or 1:10 @ 72º take about 8.5 mins no matter the film &c ...
dektol ( d-72 ) 1:7 7 mins @ 68º

you can always use a different developer

Roger Cole · Oct 4, 2013

Just goes to show...I develop in a Jobo so I just read a book until the timer goes off, and I standardized on 75F because my Jobo will heat but not cool and my ambient temperatures are near 75 in the summer anyway (occasionally more like 76.) So this would never have occurred to me.

When I saw the title of the thread I was wondering if it might be about pushability. One of the things I liked about Plus-X was how well it responded to Diafine. I liked Plus-X at 400 in Diafine better in some respects than Tri-X at box speed in normal developers.

semi-ambivalent · Oct 4, 2013

MattKrull said:
According to the Massive Dev Chart, Eastman Double X (the closest name I can find to "Super XX cine") takes 10 minutes at 1:1 for ISO250.

I can't say I've ever seen that for sale at B&H.

My recipe:
Eastman 5222
EI 250
HC-110 1:50
9 min. @ 68 degrees
30 seconds initial agitation followed by 2 inversions every 30 seconds.
Prints out at G 1.5 - 2.0 on a condenser enlarger.
I buy 400 foot cores from Kodak, 1-800-621-3456.

I like the look. Your likes are your own.

Bill Burk · Oct 4, 2013

MattKrull,

I understand your feeling. Part of my affinity for Panatomic-X is the recommended Fix time of 2-4 minutes, compared to 5-10 minutes for other film.

Completely trivial but adds to the pleasure of working in the darkroom.

Now that I am more results-oriented (develop to contrast index, fix twice the time to clear), the difference is even less meaningful.

And of course, now that I am hooked completely, a few minutes extra processing time has no bearing on anything.

hacked - sepiareverb · Oct 4, 2013

Orwo is around, not to worry. They sell out every shipment quickly.

bsdunek · Oct 4, 2013

erikg said:
+1

Seems like a strange priority.

My thoughts too. I think about the speed and quality of the film, and whatever it takes to develop, so be it.

Chrismat · Oct 4, 2013

I just processed a roll of expired 220 Plus-X shot at 100 asa with Rodinal 1:50. 13 minutes based on the Massive Development Chart. For Acros 100 shot at box speed with Rodinal 1:50, the time is 13.5 minutes. I think it's more to do with the developer being used than with Plus-X.

NB23 · Oct 4, 2013

Just go hc110 dilution A! I done it many times with extra marvelous results. You'll be around the 3,4,5 minutes mark with any film.

Colin Corneau · Oct 4, 2013

Pioneer said:
Move to a different developer. I believe that Rodinal will work quicker.

Ditto for Ilfotec DDX, and a host of other developers. Or D76 straight?

I can understand wanting to stick with a developer you're familiar with...no fault there. But a few minutes in an hour long process is...well, kind of trifling, to be frank.

Bill Burk · Oct 4, 2013

My favorite second developer (my first will always be D-76) is Dektol.

Develop for as many minutes as you added parts of water. (Rule of thumb taught to me by PE).

So if you want to develop for 4 minutes, dilute 1 part Dektol stock to 4 parts water.

NB23 · Oct 4, 2013

Is that good for any film?
How acurate can it possibly be?

Bill Burk said:
My favorite second developer (my first will always be D-76) is Dektol.

Develop for as many minutes as you added parts of water. (Rule of thumb taught to me by PE).

So if you want to develop for 4 minutes, dilute 1 part Dektol stock to 4 parts water.

Bill Burk · Oct 4, 2013

It's a rule of thumb, take it with a grain of salt.

I need to hire a teenager to help me with my paperwork...

Let's see... 7/27/2013 ... Giant's game, half-frame

Dektol 1:9 on fresh Tri-X 400 TX 135-36 12/2014 batch 1781

5 minutes 68-degrees F

Aim CI 0.4 - 0.5
Actual CI possibly 0.4 - 0.5 but didn't do sensitometry.

(I deliberately under-developed to aim to a Grade 3 paper instead of Grade 2, long story but I was going for maximum grain).

p.s. The photo is a flat-bed scan of a print. I mention that because so many grain examples are negative scans. Negative scanning can cause exaggeration or misrepresentation of actual grain. This is the grain on a print.

cmacd123 · Oct 5, 2013

MattKrull said:
Definitely learning stuff today.

The Orwo looks very interesting. Dev time is same as Plus-X. Price is right ($47/100'). Unfortunately the website says they are sold out of it and the ISO 400 equivalent.

Send them an e-mail, In the past they have offered to spool 100 ft rolls down from their stock of larger rolls, and they can also let you know when the next shipment is due from Wolfen.

Why was Plus-X so fast?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency