Developer for Acros?

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Mark in Maine - 30 Mar 2004 16:49 GMT

OK - Phase II in my search for a new film to replace the now
discontinued Plus-X. I'm going to try out a variety of new films - I
have some FP4+, I am going to try TMAX-100 Again, and I have ordered a
box of Acros quickloads. Given the cost of Acros quickloads, I am
reluctant to burn a lot of film testing - and am wondering if I can
get the opinions of the group on what developers I should try.

I was always a big fan of HC-110 - and it is one of the staples in my
darkroom, I also use a fair amount of D-76. - Any reasons that I
shouldn't consider those for the Acros - or are there compelling
reasons to try a new developer as well?

Mark

Reply to this Message

F?dor Pavlovic' - 30 Mar 2004 18:36 GMT

> OK - Phase II in my search for a new film to replace the now
> discontinued Plus-X. I'm going to try out a variety of new films - I
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> shouldn't consider those for the Acros - or are there compelling
> reasons to try a new developer as well?

I use acros and HC110, exposed at 80 iso, HC110 1+47 20 C? for condenser print developed time is 7'.

ciao

Reply to this Message

David Nebenzahl - 30 Mar 2004 18:41 GMT

On 3/30/2004 9:36 AM Fëdor Pavlovic' spake thus:

>> OK - Phase II in my search for a new film to replace the now
>> discontinued Plus-X. I'm going to try out a variety of new films - I
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> I use acros and HC110, exposed at 80 iso, HC110 1+47 20 C° for condenser
> print developed time is 7'.

OK; how does HC-110 compare, grain-wise, with, say, D-76? (Assume Dilution B
for the HC-110).

Signature

... but never have I encountered a guy who could not be bothered
to make his own case on his own show.

- Eric Alterman on his appearance on Dennis Miller's bomb of a show
on CNBC (3/17/04)

Reply to this Message

Gregory W Blank - 30 Mar 2004 20:01 GMT

> OK; how does HC-110 compare, grain-wise, with, say, D-76? (Assume Dilution B
> for the HC-110).

Well then it depends on the dilution of the D76, straight D76 I think will give more grain,...
especially if you are using Tri X to compare the two. HC110B will give you more contrast
especially if you are following mfgr's data. 1to1 D76 may be on par or perhaps a little finer.

But HC110 "E" compared against D76 (1to1) is the clear winner.

Signature

LF website http://members.bellatlantic.net/~gblank

Reply to this Message

F?dor Pavlovic' - 30 Mar 2004 20:11 GMT

> On 3/30/2004 9:36 AM F?dor Pavlovic' spake thus:
>
[quoted text clipped - 18 lines]
> OK; how does HC-110 compare, grain-wise, with, say, D-76? (Assume Dilution B
> for the HC-110).

I don't know, I do not used D-76.

Reply to this Message

John - 31 Mar 2004 04:49 GMT

>OK; how does HC-110 compare, grain-wise, with, say, D-76? (Assume Dilution B
>for the HC-110).

Try it and let us know your opinions ?

Regards,

John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.darkroompro.com
Please remove the "_" when replying via email

Reply to this Message

Dennis O'Connor - 30 Mar 2004 19:17 GMT

Acros looks good in both D-76 and Xtol, in my darkroom...
denny in michigan

> OK - Phase II in my search for a new film to replace the now
> discontinued Plus-X. I'm going to try out a variety of new films - I
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>
> Mark

Reply to this Message

Gregory W Blank - 30 Mar 2004 19:54 GMT

> OK - Phase II in my search for a new film to replace the now
> discontinued Plus-X. I'm going to try out a variety of new films - I
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> Mark
>

I would test ( you can always cut a 4x5 sheet into sections) !!!!
As my first experience with Acros I used D76 according
to the Acros spec sheet, I got a pretty contrasty negative with
more grain than I typically like.

Not a big fan of either of those two developers. HC110B was one of the
tests I ran in View Camera. I would try HC110 "E" for personal
use as opposed to the standard "B". B stands for boyz,..... as in lazy
Boyz that feel compelled to use short development times,....
give me ten minutes in the soup any day !!!!

I opt for D23 instead of D76 as you get better highlight seperation
used 1+1.

That stated; its all about personal tastes.

Signature

LF website http://members.bellatlantic.net/~gblank

Reply to this Message

Magdalena W. - 31 Mar 2004 12:03 GMT

U?ytkownik "Gregory W Blank" <gblank@despamit.net> napisa? w wiadomo?ci

> I opt for D23 instead of D76 as you get better highlight seperation
> used 1+1.

Can you give the time for D23?
I have one 35 mm roll of Acros waiting to be developed, can ruin it for
testing as no works of art there, and I've got some D23 ... I could not find
it on digitaltruth.

Regards,
Magdalena

Reply to this Message

moda - 01 Apr 2004 10:13 GMT

Hi

I use Acros with D-23 and develop it for 12-13 minutes (1:1).

Moda

> U?ytkownik "Gregory W Blank" <gblank@despamit.net> napisa? w wiadomo?ci
>
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> Regards,
> Magdalena

Reply to this Message

Gregory W Blank - 01 Apr 2004 19:17 GMT

> Can you give the time for D23?
> I have one 35 mm roll of Acros waiting to be developed, can ruin it for
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> Regards,
> Magdalena

I can only give an approximate, I use continous agitation
as in a Jobo. I also processed Acros sheet film , my time came out to
10.30 minutes, for more information check out the View Camera
magazine issue, July/August 2003

Signature

LF website http://members.bellatlantic.net/~gblank

<<<For best results expand this window at least 6" at 1152 x 768 resolution

Reply to this Message

Sherman - 30 Mar 2004 20:05 GMT

> OK - Phase II in my search for a new film to replace the now
> discontinued Plus-X. I'm going to try out a variety of new films - I
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>
> Mark

I usually shoot 4x5 but recently shot a couple of rolls of Acros in 120. I
didn't do any testing before hand (no irreplaceable images on those rolls).
I developed one roll in TMax RS diluted 1:9 (sort of my standard developer)
and one in Diafine. The other is in queue in my darkroom now.

The TMax RS 1:9 at 75 degrees F at 9 minutes did a good job but I think it
would have been better at 8 minutes and maybe even a little less.

The Diafine produced really excellent negatives. They have a full range of
contrast and extremely fine grain. The film was exposed in normal to
slightly higher than normal contrast conditions which is where I find
Diafine does the best job, regardless of film.

I don't have any experience with Acros except for these two rolls so take my
results with a truck load of salt but I think you could use your favorite
developer and use your Plus-X times as a starting point and not be too far
off.

Sherman

Reply to this Message

Ming - 31 Mar 2004 04:54 GMT

I don't like Acros. I tried 2 rolls of it and it doesn't stay flat under
the enlarger and change shape DURING it is exposured. I am going to make a
try on Tmax or Delta.

Ming.

¦b Tue, 30 Mar 2004 15:49:25 GMT, Mark in Maine
<msauerwadoesntlikespam@maine.rr.com> ¼g¹D:

> OK - Phase II in my search for a new film to replace the now
> discontinued Plus-X. I'm going to try out a variety of new films - I
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>
> Mark

Signature

Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/

Reply to this Message

ericm1600@yahoo.com - 31 Mar 2004 12:40 GMT

>Any reasons that I
>shouldn't consider those for the Acros - or are there compelling
>reasons to try a new developer as well?

I develop Acros, along with Neopan 400 and Neopan 1600, all in Xtol
1:3. I like getting the full speed of the film, combined with lower
grain.

--
Eric
http://canid.com/

Reply to this Message