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 / April 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Film Sharpness --> Developer Dilution Ratios

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Alan Smithee - 07 Apr 2005 06:16 GMT
Does diluting any given developer generally increase sharpness in all films
regardless? Is there a general rule for increasing development time when
diluting 1:1, 1:2, 1:3 etc.? I'm currently using XTOL at 1:1 but am
wondering will I gain much by trying dilutions of 1:2 or higher. What's the
point of diminishing returns with regards to dilution? Thx.
Martin Jangowski - 07 Apr 2005 07:47 GMT
> Does diluting any given developer generally increase sharpness in all films
> regardless? Is there a general rule for increasing development time when
> diluting 1:1, 1:2, 1:3 etc.? I'm currently using XTOL at 1:1 but am
> wondering will I gain much by trying dilutions of 1:2 or higher. What's the
> point of diminishing returns with regards to dilution? Thx.

Just try it. You will find that the differences are miniscule. Please
don't believe me, try it and judge it yourself.

Martin
Rod Smith - 07 Apr 2005 15:58 GMT
>> Does diluting any given developer generally increase sharpness in all films
>> regardless? Is there a general rule for increasing development time when
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> Just try it. You will find that the differences are miniscule. Please
> don't believe me, try it and judge it yourself.

One other thing to keep in mind is that you need a certain amount of
developer to fully develop a roll of film. For XTOL, Kodak recommends at
least 100ml of stock solution per roll. Depending on your tank, that means
you might not be able to go beyond a 1:1 dilution without violating this
recommendation. This is one of several factors that have been blamed for
the "XTOL sudden failure" problem, so if you try experimenting with higher
dilutions, be aware you could completely ruin a roll.

That said, I get the impression that Kodak set this limit fairly
conservatively, and based on the needs of its T-Max films. You're more
likely to be able to get away with higher dilutions using other films, and
even with T-Max, you might succeed with higher dilutions. Using a big tank
would be likely to help, I'd imagine. For instance, with one roll in a
500ml tank, you'd be able to go to a 1:4 dilution and still have 100ml of
stock solution.

Signature

Rod Smith, rodsmith@rodsbooks.com
http://www.rodsbooks.com
Author of books on Linux, FreeBSD, and networking

UC - 07 Apr 2005 14:57 GMT
> Does diluting any given developer generally increase sharpness in all films
> regardless? Is there a general rule for increasing development time when
> diluting 1:1, 1:2, 1:3 etc.? I'm currently using XTOL at 1:1 but am
> wondering will I gain much by trying dilutions of 1:2 or higher. What's the
> point of diminishing returns with regards to dilution? Thx.

Generally speaking, solvent developers (D-76, Microdol-X) reduce
sharpness. Diluting such developers diminishes the solvent effect,
restoring some of the sharpness lost. In other words, diluting does not
'increase' sharpness so much as reduce the sharpness-reducing effects
of the solvent.
Nicholas O. Lindan - 07 Apr 2005 15:27 GMT
> Does diluting any given developer generally increase sharpness [?]

IMO, YMWV:

No.

That said:

o Developers with a lot of solvent will produce what looks like sharper
  grain when diluted, due to decreasing sulfite conentration.  I only see
  it in 11x14's and larger that are made from 35mm.  After 1:2 or so
  this effect stops.

o Claims are made for 'actuance': a thing that increases as the
  developer is diluted.  Some see it, some don't.  I don't.

> I'm currently using XTOL at 1:1 but am wondering will I gain
> much by trying dilutions of 1:2 or higher.

I dilute film developer (D-76 1:1 and M-X 1:3) because:  I am cheap;
The development is 1-shot and very consistent; I pour less goop
going down the drain.

> What's the point of diminishing returns with regards to dilution?

How cheap do you want to be?

Signature

Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Consulting Engineer:  Electronics; Informatics; Photonics.
To reply, remove spaces: n o lindan at ix  . netcom . com
psst.. want to buy an f-stop timer? nolindan.com/da/fstop/

Lloyd Erlick - 15 Apr 2005 13:06 GMT
...

>I dilute film developer (D-76 1:1 and M-X 1:3) because:  I am cheap;
>The development is 1-shot and very consistent; I pour less goop
>going down the drain.
...

apr1505 from Lloyd Erlick,

Another consideration is convenience.

I use Xtol diluted 1+2, because one liter of stock dilutes to three
liters of working solution, which very conveniently covers ten rolls
of 120 format film (which are spooled onto five Jobo 1501 reels, two
rolls per reel).

As it happens, a five liter package of Xtol divides neatly into five
one-liter containers, so I just have to take a bottle of stock and mix
it to three liters.

I process fifty rolls of film this way with each pack of Xtol. That
means nearly two hundred and fifty dollars worth of film are processed
by eleven dollars worth of Xtol. Pretty cheapskate going, even though
Kodak is involved ...

regards,
--le
Signature

________________________________
Lloyd Erlick Portraits, Toronto.
voice: 416-686-0326
email: portrait@heylloyd.com
net: www.heylloyd.com
________________________________

sidney puder - 12 Apr 2005 16:23 GMT
Image "sharpness" is a function of the lens.  "Acutance" is a function of
developer.  "contrast" is a function of both.  Don't get confused.
John - 12 Apr 2005 18:13 GMT
>Does diluting any given developer generally increase sharpness in all films
>regardless? Is there a general rule for increasing development time when
>diluting 1:1, 1:2, 1:3 etc.? I'm currently using XTOL at 1:1 but am
>wondering will I gain much by trying dilutions of 1:2 or higher. What's the
>point of diminishing returns with regards to dilution? Thx.

    Diluting developer does NOT enhance sharpness but does increase adjacency in the
microcontrasts of the image. In fact sharpness is actually decreased however the enhanced
adjacency may give the impression of a sharper image. Dr.Richard Henry discusses this
subject in depth in his book "Controls in Black and White Photography". I have a copy
around somewhere. I found mine at a book store near Princeton University in New Jersey.

    I doubt if you are going to see much effect with Xtol. It has a very high sulfite
content which will counter most adjacency effects until diluted significantly. By the time
you get to the point where this may start to happen (1:5 ?) you will have to little
developing agent to effectively develop the film to a usable density level.

JD - www.puresilver.org
UC - 13 Apr 2005 03:16 GMT
> >Does diluting any given developer generally increase sharpness in all films
> >regardless? Is there a general rule for increasing development time when
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
>
> JD - www.puresilver.org

I explained this earlier. Diluting more does increase sharpness if
you're diluting a solvent developer, because the solvent developer at
full strength reduces sharpness.
J.Scheimpflug - 13 Apr 2005 03:44 GMT
> I explained this earlier. Diluting more does increase sharpness if
> you're diluting a solvent developer, because the solvent developer at
> full strength reduces sharpness.

Do you have some specific developer, time/temp examples? And may I presume
you are addressing sodium-sulphite additive developers - possibly FG7
formulas?
UC - 13 Apr 2005 14:36 GMT
> > I explained this earlier. Diluting more does increase sharpness if
> > you're diluting a solvent developer, because the solvent developer at
> > full strength reduces sharpness.
>
> Do you have some specific developer, time/temp examples? And may I presume
> you are addressing sodium-sulphite additive developers - possibly FG7

> formulas?

No, I'm referring to developers like D-76/ID-11 or
Microdol-X/Perceptol. Diluting these developers does give better
sharpness than using them straight. The best sharpness, however, is
attained with developers like Acutol or FX-39, which are completely
different from D-76 or Microdol-X
Alan Smithee - 14 Apr 2005 22:24 GMT
>>> I explained this earlier. Diluting more does increase sharpness if
>>> you're diluting a solvent developer, because the solvent developer
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
> attained with developers like Acutol or FX-39, which are completely
> different from D-76 or Microdol-X

What's the downside to using FX-39 or Actutol?
UC - 15 Apr 2005 02:29 GMT
None of which I am aware. That's why i use them.

> >>> I explained this earlier. Diluting more does increase sharpness if
> >>> you're diluting a solvent developer, because the solvent developer
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
>
> What's the downside to using FX-39 or Actutol?
Martin Jangowski - 15 Apr 2005 08:28 GMT
>> No, I'm referring to developers like D-76/ID-11 or
>> Microdol-X/Perceptol. Diluting these developers does give better
>> sharpness than using them straight. The best sharpness, however, is
>> attained with developers like Acutol or FX-39, which are completely
>> different from D-76 or Microdol-X

> What's the downside to using FX-39 or Actutol?

The grain is larger. The negs are sharper, but a APX100 developed in
Acutol or Neofin Blau has about the same grain size like a Delta 400
developed in Xtol. I use it anyway (APX100 with DS-12), but only with
6x7 or larger.

Martin
 
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.