Digital BW, The Print

I have several rolls that I have accumulated for development, pending
finding a developer that gives a good result.  I have tried Xtol with
no success beyond ei400.  Recently, someone (Steve Anchell)
recommended that I try Ilford's DD-X.  Has anyone done this, and found
times that work?  Other push developers with good results?

Here is the test I've devised to reach a time for an EI with a
particular developer:

I photographed a gray piece of fabric with a moderate texture at both
3 stop over exposuse and 3 stop under exposure (with the film rated at
1600).  I then cut a small piece, develop it at 20C for x minutes,
scan it, and am looking for a balance in the texture with the two
exposures.  Make sense?

I use Ilford DD in my dip and dunk. ISO 1600 12mins @75 degrees F  
works, but keep in mind that is with nitro agitation every 10 seconds


On May 19, 2005, at 7:30 PM, Bob Smith wrote:

> I have several rolls that I have accumulated for development, pending
> finding a developer that gives a good result.  I have tried Xtol with
> no success beyond ei400.  Recently, someone (Steve Anchell)
> recommended that I try Ilford's DD-X.  Has anyone done this, and found
> times that work?  Other push developers with good results?
>
> Here is the test I've devised to reach a time for an EI with a
> particular developer:
>
> I photographed a gray piece of fabric with a moderate texture at both
> 3 stop over exposuse and 3 stop under exposure (with the film rated at
> 1600).  I then cut a small piece, develop it at 20C for x minutes,
> scan it, and am looking for a balance in the texture with the two
> exposures.  Make sense?
>
>
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other  
> resources as they are often being updated.
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you  
> wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by  
> visiting this same page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages  
> to keep them short.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or  
> flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed  
> from the membership without notice.
> - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital  
> B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be  
> removed from the membership.
> - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules  
> and guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the  
> group Owner and Moderators. See �Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines�  
> in the Files section:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
>
> BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE  
> PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE  
> �OWNER� AND �MODERATORS� OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL  
> NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL,  
> CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO,  
> DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER  
> INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  �OWNER� AND �MODERATORS� OF DIGITAL  
> BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF  
> SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE  
> THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO  
> OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR  
> CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO  
> GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE  
> PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Bob,

Diafine gives good results with Tri-X at 1600 but you're pretty 
much "locked" into that speed. Otherwise I would go for DD-X as 
Anchell recommends or other chemically similar developers like 
HC-110 or Microphen.

You may also want to have a look at photo.net archives or the 
pure-silver mailing list for more info.

Jordan

Bob Smith wrote:
> I have several rolls that I have accumulated for development, pending
> finding a developer that gives a good result.  I have tried Xtol with
> no success beyond ei400.  Recently, someone (Steve Anchell)
> recommended that I try Ilford's DD-X.  Has anyone done this, and found
> times that work?  Other push developers with good results?
> 
> Here is the test I've devised to reach a time for an EI with a
> particular developer:
> 
> I photographed a gray piece of fabric with a moderate texture at both
> 3 stop over exposuse and 3 stop under exposure (with the film rated at
> 1600).  I then cut a small piece, develop it at 20C for x minutes,
> scan it, and am looking for a balance in the texture with the two
> exposures.  Make sense?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as they are often being updated.
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> 
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same page.
> 
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the membership without notice.
> - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from the membership.
> - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and Moderators. See \ufffdGroup Topic, Rules and Guidelines\ufffd in the Files section:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
> 
> BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE \ufffdOWNER\ufffd AND \ufffdMODERATORS\ufffd OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  \ufffdOWNER\ufffd AND \ufffdMODERATORS\ufffd OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 

-- 


Jordan Wosnick
jwosnick@...

In a message dated 5/19/05 7:38:04 PM, Bob Smith writes:


> I have several rolls that I have accumulated for development, pending
> finding a developer that gives a good result.  I have tried Xtol with
> no success beyond ei400.  Recently, someone (Steve Anchell)
> recommended that I try Ilford's DD-X.  Has anyone done this, and found
> times that work?  Other push developers with good results?
> 
> 

Try Diafine.   It's a two-bath developer that allows you to expose Tri-X at 
1600.   It's like no other developer you've ever used.   The stuff keeps 
forever, and it is not time or temperature sensitive.   The resulting negative is a 
bit contrasty, fine-grained, and a bit of blockage in the shadows.   But if 
you need to shoot TX at 1600, it's a worthwhile option.   I've posted a TXP 320 
image, exposed at EI 1000 and developed in Diafine, at this URL:

http://www.pbase.com/sandersm/image/43603536

Hope this helps.

Best,

Sanders McNew
www.mcnew.net


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Not an answer but more a question.

I used Rodinal (and Acufine and Promicrol) decades ago but there has 
been a long period without any B&W activities. Someone dropped a Jobo 
Autolab 1000 here that I repaired and I have done some MF B&W developing 
again. Ilford developer suited for the higher agitation of that machine. 
I would like to return to Rodinal though as I like the idea of one batch 
development and not having the fluids in large quantities around. Not 
likely that developing films becomes a weekly habit so to speak. I keep 
the machine as it is a compact thing with everything included. Rodinal 
isn't very suited to the higher agitation but there are some recipes 
with Rodinal + Vitamin C + Soda added that makes it a possibility again 
I think. Any experience with that combination ?  If it is an unwise idea 
please tell me.

Ernst

On 5/20/05 2:58 AM, "Ernst Dinkla" <E.Dinkla@...> typed:

> Not an answer but more a question.
> 
> I used Rodinal (and Acufine and Promicrol) decades ago but there has
> been a long period without any B&W activities. Someone dropped a Jobo
> Autolab 1000 here that I repaired and I have done some MF B&W developing
> again. Ilford developer suited for the higher agitation of that machine.
> I would like to return to Rodinal though as I like the idea of one batch
> development and not having the fluids in large quantities around. Not
> likely that developing films becomes a weekly habit so to speak. I keep
> the machine as it is a compact thing with everything included. Rodinal
> isn't very suited to the higher agitation but there are some recipes
> with Rodinal + Vitamin C + Soda added that makes it a possibility again
> I think. Any experience with that combination ?  If it is an unwise idea
> please tell me.
> 
> Ernst
> 
> 
I think with the continuous Jobo agitation in and out of solution like it
does you¹re going to get a slightly higher film base fog than you would if
the film were in solution the whole time but this would not show up in the
print at all. Or scan.
And also in the darkroom would be no problem to print traditionally.
Negatives looking like this is getting to be the fashion now anyway.
And to add vitamin C to it would be a pile of worms.
I just briefly Googled it by the way and found only negative comments on
this combination.
It ain't broke, Don¹t fix it is my call.

I¹m against adding sulfite to is as well which is what you may be thinking
of as it would give you a slightly cleaner looking neg. but your grain
pattern is not going to have that amazing Rodinal sharp regularity.
I look upon messing with Rodinal with Dis stain.   :)

Try different dilutions.
By the way the guy yesterday talking about using it 1:25 I strongly advise
trying it at at least 1:50.
Rodinal looks just like D76 1:1 bland vanilla at 1:25. Looses it¹s
Rodinal-ness And is expensive I think.
You can easily use it 1:75 or 1:100. There¹s a ³glow² you get a 1:100.
The added time developing will be will worth it IMO.




Mark Rabiner
Photography
Portland Oregon
http://rabinergroup.com/





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Mark and Ernst, greetings.

Ernst, I am processing 4x5 sheets of TXP 320 in JOBO tanks in Rodinal.  I've been using a 
1:25 solution for 8 minutes (68F/20C) after exposing the sheets at EI 160, and am very 
happy with the results.  

Like you, I worried about the constant agitation.  JOBO advises that presoaking the film in 
water for five minutes before processing offsets the constant agitation.  I don't know if 
that's true -- film development is black magic so far as I am concerned -- but I do 
presoak for five minutes and my results are delicious.

Mark, I used to develop my TX 400 roll film in a 1:100 solution and loved the look.  With 
the JOBO tanks, I was worried that the reduced volume of solution would risk exhaustion 
of the developer, so that fear, combined with the shorter processing time, led me to the 1:
25 solution instead.  Rodinal is so cheap that cost never moved me one way or another.  
Do you suppose that a 1:100 solution will contain enough Rodinal, at the reduced liquid 
volumes of the JOBO system, to do its job?

Again, I don't mean to be seeming to create trafffic for my humble web page, but if you go 
to it, all of the 4x5 sheets scanned and posted there were souped in a 1:25 Rodinal 
solution in JOBO tanks.

Best,

Sanders McNew
www.mcnew.net

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Mark Rabiner <mark@r...> wrote:

> On 5/20/05 2:58 AM, "Ernst Dinkla" <E.Dinkla@c...> typed:
> 
> > Not an answer but more a question.
> > 
> > I used Rodinal (and Acufine and Promicrol) decades ago but there has
> > been a long period without any B&W activities. Someone dropped a Jobo
> > Autolab 1000 here that I repaired and I have done some MF B&W developing
> > again. Ilford developer suited for the higher agitation of that machine.
> > I would like to return to Rodinal though as I like the idea of one batch
> > development and not having the fluids in large quantities around. Not
> > likely that developing films becomes a weekly habit so to speak. I keep
> > the machine as it is a compact thing with everything included. Rodinal
> > isn't very suited to the higher agitation but there are some recipes
> > with Rodinal + Vitamin C + Soda added that makes it a possibility again
> > I think. Any experience with that combination ?  If it is an unwise idea
> > please tell me.
> > 
> > Ernst
> > 
> > 
> I think with the continuous Jobo agitation in and out of solution like it
> does you¹re going to get a slightly higher film base fog than you would if
> the film were in solution the whole time but this would not show up in the
> print at all. Or scan.
> And also in the darkroom would be no problem to print traditionally.
> Negatives looking like this is getting to be the fashion now anyway.
> And to add vitamin C to it would be a pile of worms.
> I just briefly Googled it by the way and found only negative comments on
> this combination.
> It ain't broke, Don¹t fix it is my call.
> 
> I¹m against adding sulfite to is as well which is what you may be thinking
> of as it would give you a slightly cleaner looking neg. but your grain
> pattern is not going to have that amazing Rodinal sharp regularity.
> I look upon messing with Rodinal with Dis stain.   :)
> 
> Try different dilutions.
> By the way the guy yesterday talking about using it 1:25 I strongly advise
> trying it at at least 1:50.
> Rodinal looks just like D76 1:1 bland vanilla at 1:25. Looses it¹s
> Rodinal-ness And is expensive I think.
> You can easily use it 1:75 or 1:100. There¹s a ³glow² you get a 1:100.
> The added time developing will be will worth it IMO.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mark Rabiner
> Photography
> Portland Oregon
> http://rabinergroup.com/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Rodinal is SUPPOSED to exhaust itself a little as it works. That's the
ancient secret what accounts for its famous "look" at 1:50 and 1:100.
One loses that look at 1:25 and especially when using additives.

I use an 8 or 16oz Nikor tank unless I'm processing color, in which
case I use 32oz for 4 reels. IMO Nikor-type stainless tanks are better
than Patterson/JOBO et al in terms of even development. Just something
I've noticed :-)

Djon


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Ernst Dinkla
<E.Dinkla@c...> wrote:
> sandersnyc wrote:
> 
> >Mark, I used to develop my TX 400 roll film in a 1:100 solution and
loved the look.  With 
> >the JOBO tanks, I was worried that the reduced volume of solution
would risk exhaustion 
> >of the developer, so that fear, combined with the shorter
processing time, led me to the 1:
> >25 solution instead.

On 5/20/05 9:00 AM, "Djon" <westsidemaurice@...> wrote:

> I use an 8 or 16oz Nikor tank unless I'm processing color, in which
> case I use 32oz for 4 reels. IMO Nikor-type stainless tanks are better
> than Patterson/JOBO et al in terms of even development. Just something
> I've noticed :-)


Try the Jobo/Hewes stainless reels (35/120/220) that are loaded on a special
metal core for the Jobo tanks. They do offer even development and are far
easier to load.


rm

www.richardmurai.com
http://www.hawaii.edu/mjournal/text/issues/descriptions/cambodia04.html

sandersnyc wrote:

>Mark, I used to develop my TX 400 roll film in a 1:100 solution and loved the look.  With 
>the JOBO tanks, I was worried that the reduced volume of solution would risk exhaustion 
>of the developer, so that fear, combined with the shorter processing time, led me to the 1:
>25 solution instead.  Rodinal is so cheap that cost never moved me one way or another.  
>Do you suppose that a 1:100 solution will contain enough Rodinal, at the reduced liquid 
>volumes of the JOBO system, to do its job?
>
>  
>
Mark and Sander, thank you,

Will try to keep it as simple as possible with Rodinal so this 
information is welcome. I did see some variation what the minimum of 
pure Rodinal per 4x5 that should be in any mix, some think 5 gram is 
enough, Agfa says 10 gram.
I guess I can do the maths on the quantity needed in the Jobo tanks to 
get there.

I used to presoak in the past, even with the small Kindermann tanks and 
with little agitation later on. More as a precaution against air bells. 
At one time I did throw out all the equipment and the chemicals but not 
the development menu. The fact that I used formaline to harden the 35 mm 
films must have been the wisest decision then if I consider the less 
than archival treatment they got over the years. Don't think I can buy 
that as easy as it was possible then.


Ernst

Nikor reels are easy to load after you've done it for 35 years. 

I used to average 60 rolls a day on Nikor reels for my E4 Ektachrome
line...one client was Smithsonian (we did Smithsonian's bicentennial
multi-projector slide show...1976).

Besides,my personal Nikor reels and tanks have been with me since
1970, are going strong :-) 

btw, the JOBO system itself may not be fully appropriate for Rodinal
at high dilutions...but I'll want one if I decide to process my own E6.

Rip Van Djon.


IMO Nikor-type stainless tanks are better
> > than Patterson/JOBO et al in terms of even development. Just something
> > I've noticed :-)
> 
> 
> Try the Jobo/Hewes stainless reels (35/120/220) that are loaded on a
special
> metal core for the Jobo tanks. They do offer even development and
are far

> easier to load.
> 
> 
> rm
> 
> www.richardmurai.com
> http://www.hawaii.edu/mjournal/text/issues/descriptions/cambodia04.html

No info here - I have never tried Rodinal and TriX, and no Rodinal
modifications.  I will confess to looking for short-cuts - using the
experience of others.  All this testing is daunting, and starting from
scratch would be inconsistent with my actuarial probabilities.
Bob

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Ernst Dinkla
<E.Dinkla@c...> wrote:
> Not an answer but more a question.
> 
> I used Rodinal (and Acufine and Promicrol) decades ago but there has 
> been a long period without any B&W activities. Someone dropped a Jobo 
> Autolab 1000 here that I repaired and I have done some MF B&W
developing 
> again. Ilford developer suited for the higher agitation of that
machine. 
> I would like to return to Rodinal though as I like the idea of one
batch 
> development and not having the fluids in large quantities around. Not 
> likely that developing films becomes a weekly habit so to speak. I keep 
> the machine as it is a compact thing with everything included. Rodinal 
> isn't very suited to the higher agitation but there are some recipes 
> with Rodinal + Vitamin C + Soda added that makes it a possibility again 
> I think. Any experience with that combination ?  If it is an unwise
idea 

> please tell me.
> 
> Ernst

> 
> 
> Mark, I used to develop my TX 400 roll film in a 1:100 solution and loved the
> look.  With 
> the JOBO tanks, I was worried that the reduced volume of solution would risk
> exhaustion 
> of the developer, so that fear, combined with the shorter processing time, led
> me to the 1:
> 25 solution instead.  Rodinal is so cheap that cost never moved me one way or
> another.  
> Do you suppose that a 1:100 solution will contain enough Rodinal, at the
> reduced liquid 
> volumes of the JOBO system, to do its job?
> 
> Again, I don't mean to be seeming to create trafffic for my humble web page,
> but if you go 
> to it, all of the 4x5 sheets scanned and posted there were souped in a 1:25
> Rodinal 
> solution in JOBO tanks.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Sanders McNew
> www.mcnew.net
> 

There is no crime in developing flim in near exhausted soup.
I think if it as kind of a built in semi water bath in a way.
If you start getting too much diachronic fog which wont print out than
that¹s when it becomes a problem.
Or it¹s just not building up enough contrast and adding time doesn't help.
That means you¹re running your film in not near dead but dead dead soup.
So you¹ve got too much dilution going on.
I don¹t think you¹ll have that problem with Rodinal.
Or traditional MQ or Phenidone Q developers.
You get it with Xtol if you just go too far.
Pyro maybe I may have heard.

I presoak when I run my film in a traditional metal hand held tank with
agitation on the minute.
When I don¹t I get problems. Gremlins sneak in pretty quick.
Ever since I started doing E4 and then thought it made sense for black and
white as well.
But then could never go back to starting dry.
Kodak told you do so when Tmax came out but I learned to ignore them.
I presoak or soon regret it.

My feeling is with a Jobo you just set it and go do something else anyway so
why not have it be 20 30 minutes or more?
When I stand there agitating I forget why I¹m there.
I think I¹m in Star Wars zooming through some galaxy.
And can¹t remember if I¹m fixing or stopping going into hyper drive.
So I try to match my soup times with my attention span.
Which is about 18 minutes.

Sorry for intertwining star wars with star trek metaphors.
It¹s blasphemy I know but outer space is outer space at 3 AM.
Its the Kingons against the Wookies.

Mark Rabiner
Photography
Portland Oregon
http://rabinergroup.com/





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]