Quite right. The picture is a credit to your metering skills especially. And I completely agree with the rest of what you say here.
Hear, hear!
Quite right. The picture is a credit to your metering skills especially. And I completely agree with the rest of what you say here.I had taken this as a compliment of my photography and not really a statement about the developer. The developer needs to support whatever artistic expression you are trying to achieve, and to that extent some credit is due, but you could achieve similar results by other means. It's fun with B&W that you have some control over the image produced by messing with chemistry. Finding an expression you like by starting from film and raw materials and getting images out at the end is rewarding, and that is enough for me.
Hear, hear!Of course, it's very difficult to formulate such a solid all-around developer, and I feel I need to congratulate @relistan on succeeding to do so.
I am really enjoying this thread, the information, and your photographs. It seems you've created a great developer. I might actually give it a try. I have all the ingredients. Thank you for sharing your knowledge!
Yes, a very good effort.
Relistan, how would you compare your developer to the Barry Thornton's 2-bath developer? I'm also looking for a good tonality of photos, simplicity and shelf life of developers.
This is my experience with Thornton Two Bath, too, but @aparat's testing shows he is able to reach over box speed at least with some films. So YMMV depending on your film choices and technique.It does not really give box speed by Zone System standards - it usually needs down rating by up to a stop. I typically use it with roll and sheet film for Delta 100, Delta 400, and HP5+. I live in N. California (38 deg. N.), and landscape light is typically 5-7 stops SBR.
Yes, I do know the basics of both developers. In my amateur opinion I just thought that they are still quite similar.PC-512 Borax and Thornton's Two Bath are rather different developers, though they are both cheap simple mixes.
No worries on my part. Appreciate you asking. It's reasonable to think that, but one of the more surprising outcomes of developer formulation is that the same few ingredients can be mixed and remixed in many different ways that give either drastically or subtly different results. You should definitely try a few and see what you like.Yes, I do know the basics of both developers. In my amateur opinion I just thought that they are still quite similar
However, the most important thing is the final look. Somehow the images that were shown by Relistan reminded me some images from the use of the BT2B developer. Especially, how the highlights came out (not blown out). But I can be wrong that's why I asked my question.
Thank you for your reply! How would you describe this impact?... ascorbic acid has a noticeable impact on the look IMO...
Thank you for your reply! How would you describe this impact?
It's a totally subjective thing, people feel strongly about these things in various opposing directions. But I would describe it as a sort of mild "glow". YMMV
I developed a roll of Fomapan 200 shot in my Kiev 4a at box speed with Helios-103 in PC-512 Borax 1+50 for 5.5 mins @ 20C. I need to cut the time, this is over developed. However, it still looks pretty nice, so in the interest of showing how different film stocks look, I'm posting it here.
Hey everyone, I went mostly silent here for a year... life caught up. But early last year while working on two bath developers I ended up with a formula that I liked a lot for a single bath developer. It's not revolutionary at all, but I have been using it a lot and really like the results. You might, too, so I wrote up a post about it on my blog:
A Simple Phenidone/Vitamin C Concentrate Developer: PC-512 Borax
What follows is how I formulated a very nice developer that I have now used pretty much exclusively for the last year and a half. As it says in the title, I have called it “PC-512 Borax”. Creative name? No. But it is indicative of the formula. This nice developer is a secondary result of some...imager.ie
It's a developer in the family of PC-Glycol. I have used that developer a lot and this one gives me substantially better results. It also has a much better Dmin than PC-Glycol, about 0.3 for Delta 100.
Here are some photos I developed with it (Delta 100)
View attachment 321968View attachment 321967
This is from the roll I just developed, showing some different lighting conditions than the others I posted.
Leica M2 with Summarit-M 2.5/35mm on Ilford Delta 100 at box speed. PC-512 Borax 1+50 for 6.75 mins at 20C.
View attachment 322102
Dmin on this roll was 0.38 and Dmax was 2.26
You say it's overdeveloped, but to me it looks great.
Of course, it's all personal preference, but to me it has the contrast and range of a well exposed cinema B&W negative for making projection prints.
( at least the scan represents this; the actual densities, may be a bit much!)
Very nice!
Very cool! Looks like its something I could give a try to if I get a more accurate scale for 0.5 grams.
What are you using for a stop bath and fixer?
Are for others members missing dark to black too?
I have checked your Flickr album. Other photos are nice composed and well balanced. I have also seen some landscape example without shades exposed in the bright sun, so there was no enough dark and black tonality to capture.If you aren't seeing dark black that's just your monitor adjustment.
Thanks for the kind words. Regarding the rest, I'm not sure what you are asking. Are you trying to analyze a scan of a particular photo or understand how the developer works? You can see from the test that @aparat posted above that with Delta 100 it delivers box speed and is capable of correct contrast. This is also true in my experience of the other films I have tested. If you see a particular photo you don't like the look of, I suggest to just ignore that since your taste in contrast may differ from mine and scanning of negatives is applying subjective values to the output just like when printing.I have checked your Flickr album. Other photos are nice composed and well balanced. I have also seen some landscape example without shades exposed in the bright sun, so there was no enough dark and black tonality to capture.
Have you set exposure over 500?
The darkest patch may be small in certain bright photos with not much shadow area, but it is there
Thank you! I really appreciate that. Yeah, I say it's over developed because it's definitely too dense for the exposure, but it doesn't seem to have hurt the output, which is interesting. I do not know what speed I should be shooting it at yet in this developer, it's the first set of photos for this film, but seems to be box speed-ish.
Thanks! If you have a scale that is pretty accurate at 1 gram, you can visually divide the pile of phenidone in half and get pretty darn close. Close enough that, when the difference is spread over 20 rolls, you won't notice.
I have, for years and years, used a water stop. I use either Ilford Rapid Fixer or @Rudeofus's neutral fixer from the resources section. Please nobody debate about stop baths on this thread.
If you aren't seeing dark black that's just your monitor adjustment.
Thank you! I really appreciate that. Yeah, I say it's over developed because it's definitely too dense for the exposure, but it doesn't seem to have hurt the output, which is interesting. I do not know what speed I should be shooting it at yet in this developer, it's the first set of photos for this film, but seems to be box speed-ish.
Thanks! If you have a scale that is pretty accurate at 1 gram, you can visually divide the pile of phenidone in half and get pretty darn close. Close enough that, when the difference is spread over 20 rolls, you won't notice.
I have, for years and years, used a water stop. I use either Ilford Rapid Fixer or @Rudeofus's neutral fixer from the resources section. Please nobody debate about stop baths on this thread.
If you aren't seeing dark black that's just your monitor adjustment.
I mean exactly that and asked for the value of exposure if you remember settings. Some emulsions combined with specific developer may need longer exposure to capture darkest tonality. But our compositions need to have inherent light balance as a first step in order to have it on the negatives and prints that are properly exposed and processed.
Thank you, especially for the DIY fixer link!
Regards,
Erik
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?