My PC-512 Borax Developer

OP
OP

relistan

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2013
Messages
1,533
Location
Dublin, Ireland
Format
Multi Format
A solid result, @Alan Johnson . Looks good for such expired film. Looks like fog was acceptably low?
 

Sidd

Subscriber
Joined
Oct 18, 2023
Messages
92
Location
Kolkata
Format
35mm
Andrew O'Neill said:
I developed a roll of Pan F in two year old PC-512...

Click to expand...

Please do try 6 minutes, Relistan told me to try Panf for 6 minutes and the results are good.

Seen and commented on your video in YT, thank you for the video.
 

John Wiegerink

Subscriber
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
3,468
Location
Lake Station, MI
Format
Multi Format
Andy,
This is perfect timing for me since I'm getting ready to develop a short roll of Adox HR-50 in Karl's 2B-4 two bath, which is pretty much two bath PC-512. I have used PC-512 for other films and really thought it did a very good job. I really like developers with looooong keeping qualities. I have already developed two short rolls of HR-50, one in dilute Pyrocat-HDC and the other in ID-11 1+3. I'll compare all these and pick the one I like best. I'll then test that one to a short roll developed in a POTA developer.
 

John Wiegerink

Subscriber
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
3,468
Location
Lake Station, MI
Format
Multi Format
Andrew O'Neill said:
@Sidd I'll try it, thanks! Thanks for commenting on the video!
@John Wiegerink do let us know how it goes with the 2B-4 and HR-50!
Click to expand...

Yes, I'll post results, hopefully before Christmas. My Nikon Coolscan 8000 is not working at the moment, but I dug out an old Microtek M1 flatbed to scan with until the Nikon Coolscan is repaired. I hate the M1 since it never seems to want to play nice with my version of VueScan, but I'll do the best I can.
 
OP
OP

relistan

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2013
Messages
1,533
Location
Dublin, Ireland
Format
Multi Format

It's not quite 2B-4, he's trying PC-512 Borax with a second bath of carbonate. Definitely interested to see the results, though. Thanks John!

2B-4 has sulfite in both baths and was intended to have a reusable second bath. John is going to try a throwaway second bath, as a follow on to a shortened PC-512 Borax development, because a PC-type divided developer doesn't work with a reusable second bath. PC-512 was the main component of 2B-4's first bath. Hence the confusion.
 

John Wiegerink

Subscriber
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
3,468
Location
Lake Station, MI
Format
Multi Format

Karl,
I was dealt a little (time-wise) setback on developing with the throw-away B bath PC-512. I packed up a box of things I would need for developing film and headed south to my home from our cottage two days ago. Instead of grabbing my 500ml brown bottle of PC-512 I mistook it for a brown bottle of Rodinal. I won't be going back to the cottage until after the New Year. So, I just used the Rodinal at 1+100 “full stand” not semi-stand, for 1 hour. Those negatives are now drying, and I plan on scanning them later tonight. If the goofy Microtek M1 cooperates, that is.
Oh, I also had a hiccup with my Canon QL-17 and HR-50 film. The little Canons QL (quick-load) system does not like the thin base of HR-50 film. It will advance a few frames and then act as if it's stripping out sprocket holes, but when you open the back the sprocket holes on the HR-50 film are fine. I think it's the register distance of the tension plate and rollers of the QL system is set for a slightly thicker film base. The film sprocket holes seem to be riding over the cameras sprockets and the sprocket gears can't engage the holes. I'm curious if anyone else has ran into that problem or if it's just Canons QL (quick-load) system at fault.
 

NedL

Subscriber
Joined
Aug 23, 2012
Messages
3,367
Location
Sonoma County, California
Format
Multi Format
I went through this whole thread ( lots of good information, especially thanks to Alan and others for trying metaborate in a single solution... we can learn from your experiences without having to do it ourselves! )

I'm surprised nobody has tried to make a print developer from this yet. I'm going to try, after an unhappy experience with LPD. I ordered the ingredients I don't already have this morning ( I ordered dimezone S from Freestyle as my phenidone component )

If you make up part B as:

12g sodium sulfite
30g sodium carbonate
5ml TEA
0.5g salicylic acid
1g KBr
with water to 950ml

Then 1+19 would be pretty close to DS-15.

It would have some PG instead of water and it would have an excess of 0.5g of dimezone per liter. Reading the old threads about PC-glycol and PC-TEA, it doesn't sound like a little excess phenidone is going to change much. Leave out the KBr and it's replenisher.

There's something kind of neat about having one concentrate to make film and print developer... ( like people used to use dektol, or how HC110 can be used for paper in a pinch... ) Anyway, we'll see what happens.
 
OP
OP

relistan

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2013
Messages
1,533
Location
Dublin, Ireland
Format
Multi Format

Interesting idea. Ryuji used TEA and salicylic acid as chelating agents to preserve his water based PC developers. For use in a few hours in a tray, I don’t think you need those. I’m suspicious that that small amount of sulfite will have much effect on a print, and suspect it was also for preservative properties, but it may be just enough to give a slight speed boost vs without. It is in small enough quantity that I think the pH change it would make will be over powered by the carbonate anyway.

Given the concentrate in glycol is the preservative and that the Fenton reaction is unlikely to destroy the developer during a single print run, I suggest that part B can probably be just the 30g carbonate and 1g KBr. In fact I’m unsure you’ll need the KBr, but it may be that this is beneficial in paper emulsions. 1g is about what D-72 has diluted 1+1. If you use the concentrate at 1+19 as you suggest, this should work as a paper dev. So I’d try:

Part A
PC-512 concentrate 1+19

Part B
1g KBr
30g sodium carbonate
Water to 1L

If that should prove to have too short a life in the tray then it’s likely aerial oxidation would be the cause and the sulfite might help.
 
Last edited:

NedL

Subscriber
Joined
Aug 23, 2012
Messages
3,367
Location
Sonoma County, California
Format
Multi Format
Thanks! I did think along the same lines as you.. if the paper developer is used as a 1-shot, then the "recipe" could be much simpler. I might end up there if DS-15 does not store as well as I hope. I've seen a few comments here that suggest it is DS-14 that has good keeping qualities and that DS-15 doesn't keep all that well.

I was planning to try DS-15 anyway and I like using replenished paper developer. So ideally, the glycol concentrate for me would be used to make replenisher as needed and as occasional film developer too. If it turns out that replenished DS-15 goes off after a couple months, an easy-to-make 1-shot makes better sense. I'll try both!
 

Alan Johnson

Subscriber
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Messages
3,220
With the higher contrast Aviphot 80 derivative film Adox HR-50 I found that negatives of normal contrast could be obtained by developing to a lower maximum density in PC-512 Borax 5min 20C.


This suggests diluting the PC-512 Borax to give a more practical development time for warmer conditions.
 

John Wiegerink

Subscriber
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
3,468
Location
Lake Station, MI
Format
Multi Format

Alan,
That looks pretty darn good for an EI 0f 50. The weather here in north central Michigan is starting to break from the below zero temps so I'll be getting out to test HR-50 and developer combos fairly soon. PC-512 is on the list. I want to try it as a divided developer also.
 

Alan Johnson

Subscriber
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Messages
3,220
In case a longer development time is more convenient with Adox HR-50 in PC-512 Borax, I found that for EI=50, a time of 10m 20C works with the PC-512 Borax solution added to an equal volume of water.
EG, 245ml Borax solution +5ml PC concentrate +250ml water to make 500ml for development 10m 20C,agitate 10x start then 2x on each minute.
As with the 5 min time for PC-512 Borax 1+0 ,the negatives are of reduced density to lower contrast.

 
OP
OP

relistan

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2013
Messages
1,533
Location
Dublin, Ireland
Format
Multi Format

Thanks for sharing there, @Alan Johnson . Looks pretty good. I don't have the time to experiment at the moment, but previously saw an interesting effect with this film where overall contrast seemed to reduce with denser-than-normal negatives. Not so dense as to be over-developed, but denser than you might ordinarily target as ideal. If you are still in experimental mode, that might be worth a shot.
 

Alan Johnson

Subscriber
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Messages
3,220
See the curve of HR-50 at about 3min 30s.
If HR-50 was overexposed to provide an image on the shoulder of the curve it might be lower contrast than exposure at EI=50.
I cannot figure out how overdevelopment might decrease contrast so long as Dmax is reached.. Any views?
 
OP
OP

relistan

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2013
Messages
1,533
Location
Dublin, Ireland
Format
Multi Format
Alan Johnson said:
I cannot figure out how overdevelopment might decrease contrast so long as Dmax is reached.. Any views?
Click to expand...
Thinking through this some more, I suspect that the cases where I observed that may also have been over-exposed. It was a casual observation and not something I've tested.
 

Donald Qualls

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 19, 2005
Messages
12,049
Location
North Carolina
Format
Multi Format
relistan said:
Thinking through this some more, I suspect that the cases where I observed that may also have been over-exposed. It was a casual observation and not something I've tested.
Click to expand...

In general, reducing contrast requires reducing development from the established "normal" -- which often requires increasing exposure to restore a desired mid-tone density (bringing up shadow detail with it). This is behind the old "oversimplified Zone System" that said to "overexpose and underdevelop."
 

Alan Johnson

Subscriber
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Messages
3,220
Using the diluted PC-512 Borax 1+1 for 10m 20C, HR50 was exposed at EIs from 3 to 50 (pic).
Scans of individual negatives at EI=50 and EI=3 were made, the histograms are shown (pics).
This shows that as the exposure is increased (EI 3) to the shoulder of the H&D curve where it starts to curve lower the range of tones captured is reduced (the histogram gets narrower).
The contrast is reduced as discussed above. Presumably is could be increased again by overdevelopment. A good film for the Ralph Gibson technique.
 

Attachments

  • HR-50 PC-512 Borax 1+1.jpg
    97.8 KB · Views: 27
  • HR50 EI =50.jpg
    246.2 KB · Views: 27
  • HR50 EI=3.jpg
    236.5 KB · Views: 27
OP
OP

relistan

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2013
Messages
1,533
Location
Dublin, Ireland
Format
Multi Format
Alan Johnson said:
PC-512 Borax 1:50 7m 20C works well for FP4+ Cine Film (post 456).

Click to expand...

Very nice result @Alan Johnson . We may want to compile a set of dev times that are working for various films. I'd be happy to add those on my blog post if you'd be interested to contribute the times you have found to work. Or we could make a page here in the Resources and I could link it from there.
 

Alan Johnson

Subscriber
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Messages
3,220
Here are my start times times for PC-512 Borax at 20C (with 5 inversions at start and 2 inversions on each minute ,not that critical):
FP4+ EI=125.................................7m
FP4 cine film 517..EI=100........7m..........low cost film UK only, see post above Oct 18 2024, still available.
FP4 cine film 517..EI=200........9.7m
400 T-Max..EI=400.....................6.7m.......full film speed 400
Adox HR50.....EI=50....................5m
Adox HR50.....EI=50 in half strength PC-512 Borax.......10m (post Jan 28 2025)-highest resolution ex microfilms, but slow for hand holding on dull days.
I agree that PC-512 Borax provides sharp fine grain at box speed ,good project.
 
OP
OP

relistan

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2013
Messages
1,533
Location
Dublin, Ireland
Format
Multi Format

Thanks @Alan Johnson I'll get those into a Resource page with my times
 
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…