 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Film Photography / Darkroom / December 2004just in case... Iford...
Hi. for some stage shots during jazz & blues concerts I use Fuji Neopan 1600 (35mm) developped in Ilford DD-X, with results that please me. Although with some loss of shadow detail (shooting @ IE1600), but with nice contrasts (slightly extended dev.times) and grain to my taste. Here's my question: suppose Ilford stops producing DD-X (and yes, I find it a rather expensive soup), what developper would you recommend if my criteria are (in this order): - speed - tonal range - grain? TIA! Jan ------------------------------------ non scholae sed vitae discimus ------------------------------------ Paterson Acutol or Paterson FX-39. Acutol gives somewhat better shadow speed and less dense highlights than FX-39, which gives bolder contrast and VERY slightly finer grain than Acutol, with somewhat less shadow detail. | Paterson Acutol or Paterson FX-39. | | Acutol gives somewhat better shadow speed and less dense highlights | than FX-39, which gives bolder contrast and VERY slightly finer grain | than Acutol, with somewhat less shadow detail. Acutol looks nice to me, as I read descriptions here and there. I'd like to give it a try. Maybe you can give a suggestion for dev. times (starting times)? The Massive Dev. Chart doesn't have any indication for Acutol :-( does this mean Paterson doesn't mention (or recommend using) it for Neopan 1600? Jan See my times that I contributed to them. http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.html Paterson's times are completely useless. For Neopan 1600, I suggest Acutol 1+ 16.5 (yes, precisely 16.5! One part Acutol to 16.5 parts of water.) at 7,5-8 minutes. This is later info than what's on my contributed chart. Rate the Neopan 1600 at about 800. define "bolder contrast" mark Paterson Acutol or Paterson FX-39. Acutol gives somewhat better shadow speed and less dense highlights than FX-39, which gives bolder contrast and VERY slightly finer grain than Acutol, with somewhat less shadow detail. U?ytkownik "Jan T" <jant@TAKETHISAWAYBEFOREYOUMAILtiscali.be> napisa? w wiadomo?ci > Here's my question: > suppose Ilford stops producing DD-X (and yes, I find it a rather expensive > soup), what developper would you recommend if my criteria are - Ilfotec HC - D23 stock Regards, Magdalena > - D23 stock cze?? ;-) could you write something more about using d-23 for high-speed? I`m already familiar with tri-x 400@1600 - after your and baz posts in the archive - and it's quite OK. I'm interesded in higher EI and Ilford PAN 400 (or tri-X) best regards marcin D-23 does NOT deliver high speed. It is a FINE-GRAIN developer, not a HIGH-SPEED developer. > D-23 does NOT deliver high speed. It is a FINE-GRAIN developer, not a > HIGH-SPEED developer. I_KNOW_IT ;-) don't shout and read all post's carefully. best regards marcin Uzytkownik <uraniumcommittee@yahoo.com> napisal w wiadomosci > D-23 does NOT deliver high speed. It is a FINE-GRAIN developer, not a > HIGH-SPEED developer. It so happens that I DO HAVE Neopan 1600, shot at a concert, AND developed in D23 stock. Rgds, Magdalena But YOU'RE not the one who asked the question, are you? D23 DOES NOT give high speed on ANY film. That's not what it was designed for. > D23 DOES NOT give high speed on ANY film. That's not what it was > designed for. I know. Tell that my tri-x 400@1600 . I'm not saying that D23 is a high-speed developer, but you can use it with high-speed film. Why do this? It's my problem ;-) best regards marcin I am now completely at a loss to understand what you are asking. The measure of speed is SHADOW DETAIL. D-23 will give you LESS shadow detail than a developer like DD-X or Microphen. The developer most similar to DD-X is Paterson FX-39. It is a liquid. Of course you can use a fine-grain developer with fast film, but you will get less speed. I have a lot of experience with Neopan 1600. One developer that works VERY WELL with it is Acutol. This film develops very fast and it is difficult to keep it from getting too contrasty. That's why I advise Acutol diluted 1 + 16.5 for 8 minutes @ 20C/68F. > Uzytkownik <uraniumcommittee@yahoo.com> napisal w wiadomosci > > D-23 does NOT deliver high speed. It is a FINE-GRAIN developer, not > a > > HIGH-SPEED developer. > It so happens that I DO HAVE Neopan 1600, shot at a concert, AND > developed in D23 stock. And what about results? (especially shadows?) > D-23 does NOT deliver high speed. It is a FINE-GRAIN > developer, not a > HIGH-SPEED developer. You are confusing D-23 with D-25. D-25 is a medium-fine-grain developer which delivers full film speed in comparison to D-76. D-25 is D-23 with the addition of a buffer to lower the pH to neutral. At this pH the developer is inactive enough to deliver very fine grain but at about a 3/4 stop speed loss.  Signature--- Richard Knoppow Los Angeles, CA, USA dickburk@ix.netcom.com D-23 is just metol and sodium sulphite, without any borax or other alkali. As such, its development potential is somewhat reduced, and even though the sodium sulphite does provide some small energy, D-23 still offers less speed than D-76 (about 1/2 stop). It certainly would not be my first choice for developing Neopan 1600. D-23 is normally considered a speed-reducing developer. I'm curious also... >> - D23 stock > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > best regards > marcin >D-23 is normally considered a speed-reducing developer. I'm curious also... Actually it's on par with D-76 1:1. Regards, John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.puresilver.org Please remove the "_" when replying via email You asked, if I read your post correctly: "..could you write something more about using d-23 for high-speed?" What I'm pointing out is that it is not a good choice for that property. D-23 is a low-speed, fine-grain developer. I strongly recommend Acutol and FX-39 by Paterson. PC-TEA >Hi. >for some stage shots during jazz & blues concerts I use Fuji Neopan 1600 [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >non scholae sed vitae discimus >------------------------------------ >PC-TEA Interesting. Got a scan ? Regards, John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.puresilver.org Please remove the "_" when replying via email > - speed > - tonal range > - grain? > > TIA! with the Neopan 1600 I got outstanding results with HC110 diluition B. Also very good results with D76/ID11 1:1 in nominal developing time buta at 21,5?C IMO. Ciao. SignatureEd io imparo. - speed: Acutol - tonal range: Acutol - grain: FX-39 Try Neopan 1600 in Acutol 1 + 16.5 for 7,5-8 minutes @ 20C/68F In FX-39 1+19 for 7,5-8 minutes @ 20C/68F Speed with Acutol is about 800. Speed with FX-39 is about 650. That is the true speed of this film. It is NOT a true 1600 speed film. Any idea of speed with DD-X...? | - speed: Acutol | - tonal range: Acutol [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] | Speed with FX-39 is about 650. | That is the true speed of this film. It is NOT a true 1600 speed film. About the same (800). > Hi. > for some stage shots during jazz & blues concerts I use Fuji Neopan 1600 [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Jan Ilford DDX is a liquid concentrate version of Ilford Microphen, which in turn is a Phenidone version of a buffered D-76 type formula. Microphen is essentially identical to Ilford's published formula ID-68 Ilford ID-68 Fine Grain Phenidone-Hydroquinone-Borax Developer Water (at 125F or 52C) 750.0 ml Sodium Sulfite, dessicated 85.0 grams Hydroquinone 5.0 grams Borax 7.0 grams Boric Acid, crystaline 2.0 grams Potassium Bromide 1.0 gram Phenidone 0.13 grams Water to make 1.0 liter This should give you the same results as DDX. Richard Knoppow Los Angeles, CA, USA dickburk@ix.netcom.com Measuring 0.13 g of phenidone is the problem. Multiplying it by 4 makes it much easier (0.5) |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.