Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
PhotoKB Home
Discussion Groups
Digital Photography
Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot Cameras
Film Photography
35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther Equipment
Photo Technique
Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique General
General Photo Topics
General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK Photography
DirectoryPhoto Clubs

Photo Forum / Film Photography / Darkroom / December 2004

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

FX-39 too strong

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
uraniumcommittee@yahoo.com - 19 Dec 2004 22:58 GMT
I find times with Paterson FX-39 too short for Pan-F, Neopan 1600, and
Delta 100. I wanted to see whether I could add a bit of boric acid to
slow down the developing action without diluting so much. For instance,
Delta 100 in FX-39 diluted 1+19 is too contrasty even at 7.5 minutes. I
like to get to at least 8 minutes (preferably 10-12) to get the most
uniform results. It seemed imprudent to go beyond the 1+19 dilution to
get a longer time. So today I ran some Delta 100, but instead of
diluting beyond 1+19 or developing for less than 7 minutes, I added 1
gram of boric acid to the solution, which was 40ml of FX-39 in 600ml of
water (1+14). Not knowing exactly what the effect would be, I tried 8
minutes for the first film. It was under-developed. I went outside and
quickly shot another roll to have something to run. I gave the second
roll 12 minutes and it looks very close to what I want. I may cut it
back a little to 0.5 gram of boric acid for every 40 or 50ml of stock
and see how that looks.
I got the boric acide from Photographer's Formulary.
Richard Knoppow - 21 Dec 2004 14:44 GMT
The problem with heavily modifying a formula is that it isn't that
formula anymore.
I don't know what is in FX-39 so its difficult to predicet the
effect of Boric acid. I've never seen it used in another formula.
In general lowering the pH of a developer will reduce its activity
but it may also affect other properties. In the case of D-76, in its
buffered form, or other buffered developers like Microphen, the
buffering is adjusted to about the same activity as an unbuffered
formula. In some older developers, like Kodak D-61a, an acid is added
to adjust pH as well as to add some buffering.
If your developing times are very short I suggest using another
developer of less activity. Delta 100 in D-76 1:1 or in Xtol 1:1 should
give you times long enough to shorten them for contrast adjustment. As
a rule of thumb standard emulsion films cnange about one paper grade
with about 33% change in development time but core shell films like
Delta or T-Max need only about 20% to 25% time changehe same contrast
change. I think, in fact, this is why many photographers have problems
with these films.
There are even less active developers. For instance D-25 requires
substantially longer time than most other developers. It is an
extra-fine-grain developer with very little edge/border effects so does
not produce "acutance" effects but diluted 1:3 it becomes an acutance
developer with quite long development times. At 1:3 it looses its
extra-fine-grain property and is about the same as D-76 but produces
full film speed.
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com
uraniumcommittee@yahoo.com - 21 Dec 2004 17:23 GMT
The problem is simply that FX-39 is very good as it is, but dilutions
of beyond 1+17 are required to get the times long enough for my
satisfaction (at least 8 minutes, preferably 10-12).

Having tried numerous other developers, I can with assurance say that
FX-39 is one of the best. It certainly is the sharpest! Acutol offers a
bit more shadow detail and a little less highlight density, but I can
use Acutol in the range of dilutions from 1+14 to 1+17, at which it
seems to be optimum.

Why FX-39 is more active than Acutol is beyond me, but it is. The
Health & Safety (COSSH) Data Sheets show a higher ph for FX-39 (ph
10-10.5) than for Acutol (ph 9.0-10.0), so I'm not crazy for thinking
that the activity of FX-39 is higher.

http://www.patersonphotographic.com/safetydata/Cossh-Tol.pdf

http://www.patersonphotographic.com/safetydata/Cossh-FX39.pdf

The question for me is how to get FX-39's ph down to give 10-minute
developing times on the fast-developing films such as Pan-F, Neopan
1600, and Delta 100, while affecting the other properties as little as
possible.

Adding a mild acid such as sodium bisulphite or boric acid is the usual
route to adjusting the ph in a photographic developer. I have both
acids in my chemical stocks.

I must admit the negatives look fine, so I shall continue to experiment
to titrate the amount of acid to be used. I'm going to prepare a 1%
solution of boric acid (10g in 1000ml water) and work with a 1:1 ratio
of that solution to the FX-39 in the next round of trials. That's about
half the ratio of boric acid I used this past weekend.
Richard Knoppow - 22 Dec 2004 05:37 GMT
> The problem is simply that FX-39 is very good as it is,
> but dilutions
[quoted text clipped - 47 lines]
> That's about
> half the ratio of boric acid I used this past weekend.

   The problem is that neither MSDS gives even a hint about
the actual ingredients. Without knowing at least what
reducing agents are being used its pretty difficult to guess
at what a modification will do. I really don't like using
"secret" formulas.

Signature

---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@ix.netcom.com

Mark Rabiner - 22 Dec 2004 10:40 GMT
>     The problem is that neither MSDS gives even a hint about
> the actual ingredients. Without knowing at least what
> reducing agents are being used its pretty difficult to guess
> at what a modification will do. I really don't like using
> "secret" formulas.

Me neither!

Mark
uraniumcommittee@yahoo.com - 22 Dec 2004 14:46 GMT
It has hydroquinone, that's for sure; says so on the bottle.
What I wanted to say is that this boric acid seems to work quite well.
 
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.