| HC-110 | |||
| Film (EI) |
Dilution |
Time (at 20° C) | Agitation Interval |
| (old) Tri-X (400) |
1+79 |
15 |
3 |
| (old) Tri-X (800) |
1+119 | 28 |
3 |
| (old) Tri-X Professional (320) |
1+79 |
12 |
3 |
| APX 400 |
1+79 | 15 |
3 |
| 400TMY |
1+79 | 15 |
3 |
| Classic 400 |
1+79 |
19 |
3 |
| Foma/Ultra 400 |
1+79 |
21 |
3 |
| Neopan 100 SS |
1+79 |
13 |
3 |
| Fomapan 100 |
1+79 | 15 |
3 |
| Delta 100 |
1+79 |
10 |
3 |
| Efke R100 |
1+79 |
16 |
3 |
| Imagelink HQ (25, pictorial) |
1+119 |
25 |
5 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
| Film (EI) |
Dilution |
Time (at 20° C) | Agitation Interval |
||||||||||||||||||
| Neopan 100 SS | 1:50 |
21 |
3 |
||||||||||||||||||
| Acros 100 |
1:50 |
19 |
3 |
||||||||||||||||||
| Fomapan 100/.EDU Ultra 100 |
1:50 |
11 |
3 |
||||||||||||||||||
| Classic 400 |
1:50 |
16 |
3 |
||||||||||||||||||
| Copex Rapid (40) |
1:100 |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
| Film (EI) | Dilution | Time (at 20° C) | Agitation Interval | ||||||||||||||||||
| Plus-X Negative (cine) (125) |
1:50 |
13 |
3 |
||||||||||||||||||
| Fomapan 100/.EDU Ultra 100 (100) |
1:50 |
11 |
3 |
||||||||||||||||||
| Fortepan/Classic/.EDU 400 (400) |
1:50 |
16 |
3 |
||||||||||||||||||
| Fomapan 400/.EDU Ultra 400 (400) |
1:50 |
16.5 |
3 |
||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
| Film (EI) |
Dilution |
Time (at 20° C) |
Agitation Interval |
||||||||||||||||||
| Foma/Ultra 100 (400) |
1:50 |
16.5 |
3 |
||||||||||||||||||
| Foma/Ultra 400 (400) |
1:50 |
16.5 |
3 |
||||||||||||||||||
| Foma/Ultra 100 (100) |
1:50 |
11 |
3 |
||||||||||||||||||
| .EDU (Forte) 400 (400) -- in
trays |
1:25 |
5 |
1 |
||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Film (IE) |
Dilution |
Time (at 20° C) |
Agitation Interval |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| .EDU (Fortepan) 400 (400) |
Stock |
13 |
3 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| .EDU Ultra (Fomapan) 100 (100) |
Stock |
15 |
3 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| .EDU Ultra (Fomapan) 400 (400) |
Stock |
22.5 |
3 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| Film (EI) |
Time (at 20° C) |
Agitation Interval |
||||||||||
| (old) Tri-X (400) |
30 |
1 |
||||||||||
| Fomapan 100 |
30 |
1 |
||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
| Film (EI) |
Time (at 20° C) | Agitation Interval |
||||||||||||
| (old) Tri-X (400) |
12 |
31 |
||||||||||||
| Fomapan 400/Ultra 400 |
12 |
12 |
||||||||||||
| HP5+ |
12 |
13 |
||||||||||||
| Note 1: Flow marks;
adjustment still required. Note 2: Very heavy fog, may be untenable combination. Note 3: Considerable fog, but contrast looks okay. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| Film (EI) | Time (at 20° C) | Agitation Interval | ||||||||||
| Imagelink HQ (25, pictorial) |
25 |
1 |
||||||||||
| Copex Rapid (50, pictorial) |
30 |
1 |
||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
| Film (EI) | Time (at 20° C) | Agitation Interval | ||||||||||||
| Copex Rapid (64, pictorial) |
15 |
3 |
||||||||||||
| ADOX CMS 20 (EI 20, pictorial) |
15 |
3 |
||||||||||||
| H&W
Control H&W Control dates back to the late 1960s and a patent issued in 1973, which is long expired. Its major drawback is that, in modern usage for microfilm in subminiature cameras, even 100 ml of concentrate is likely to expire due to oxidation in a partly full container before it can be used up -- my subminiature developing tank requires only sixty milliliters of working solution for a roll of Minolta 16 (60 cm by 16 mm width) or similar size film, which means 100 ml will process twenty-five rolls; that's more than I shoot (in this format) in a year, but the shelf life is listed as, at most, six months in a completely full glass or PET bottle. My formula is an attempt to create a longer life version by adding the phenidone to the solution at dilution time. Unlike the original formula, because I'm not attempting to dissolve the phenidone in the stock solution, I don't need to start with hot water. The commercial Bluefire Police developer, available from Frugal Photographer, is said (by the proprietor of that business) to be a long life reformulation of H&W Control, also, though his method is clearly different from mine, since his concentrate simply needs to be diluted and used. It's recommended in my sources to avoid acid stop bath because the sodium carbonate forms carbon dioxide in contact with acid, and can cause pinholes in the emulsion from bubble formation. The amount of carbonate in the diluted developer is so low, and the emulsions of microfilms so thin, that I doubt this is actually a problem, but no harm is done by using one or two rinses in plain water in place of acid stop bath.
|
||||||||||||||||||
| Film (EI) |
Time (at 20° C) |
Agitation Interval |
||||||||||||||||
| Copex Rapid (80) |
14 |
3 |
||||||||||||||||
| Super
Soup This developer was created in an
attempt to salvage some Tri-X sheet film negatives that were loaded
backward and exposed through the base, approximately five stops of
antihalation between the lens and the emulsion. It works very
well, and with the recommended process prints at near-normal contrast
rather than showing the extreme contrast you'd get with a conventional
push (which, in any case, can't come anywhere near this level).
It seems to get literally everything possible out of any film on which
I've treid it -- and given what's in it, is most likely developing to
completion, which is what controls the contrast.
6 ounces water 24 ml Dektol stock solution 8 ml HC-110 syrup (or 32 ml stock solution) 1 g ascorbic acid 1/2 tsp washing soda (sodium carbonate monohydrate) 2 g potassium bromide (optional) Water to make eight ounces Develop for fifteen minutes, agitating very vigorously every thirty seconds. Stop and fix normally. Some fog is normal, and can be printed through. You will (of course) see an increase in grain, but it's not as much as you might expect; with large format and even the larger medium format negatives the grain increase may be barely noticeable (and isn't objectionable in comparison to super-fast films in 35 mm). |
|
| Film |
Effective EI |
| Tri-X (ISO 400), 400TX |
6400 |
| Tri-X (ISO 320), 320TXP, TXT |
5000 |
| Forte 200/Classic 200 |
1000 |
|
B&W Reversal -- first
attempt, 26 May 2006
Please note: potassium dichromate (used in the bleach) is quite toxic and is considered a hazardous material; the hexavalent chromium is both a very serious pollutant and a suspected carcinogen. Potassium dichromate can also cause skin injury from contact, as well as being very bad to breathe or get in your eyes. It's best mixed under a chemical fume hood or outdoors with the wind at your back, using disposable gloves and a dust filter that will be discarded after use, as well as a face shield or safety goggles designed to protect against splashes. Sulfuric acid is also hazardous, causing skin burns on contact and potentially causing blindness or other serious injury -- even death. Always add acid to water, never water to acid; this is to prevent a water drop from boiling as it mixes with the acid and spattering acid drops. Please familiarize youself with the safe handling of these chemicals before attempting to mix bleach bath. There are alternates, using potassium permanganate or copper sulfate, which are less chemically hazardous but tend to soften the emulsion and make it prone to damage; potassium dichromate hardens the emulsion (and, by all reports, makes a better bleach), so I've chosen to use it for this process (also, I have it on hand, obtained for alt-process printing, and don't have any permanganate). Other than the bleach bath, the chemicals used in reversal processing B&W films are hardly different from those used in conventional B&W processing and no more (or less) hazardous.
Though reversal processes are often listed as not requiring it, I don't see how it can hurt to fix the film following the second developer, and can easily see how it could hurt *not* to do so; fix and wash are as normal for the film used. Since I use my fixer one-shot, however, I don't usually bother with a stop bath or rinse step between developer and fixer. My initial attempt is with 35 mm Tri-X, expired in early 2001 (this would be TX, not the very slightly reformulated 400TX now available). I've chosen to use light exposure to fog the remaining halide after bleaching and clearing, though in the future I might buy some "Iron Out", a commercial laundry product based on sodium hydrosulfite (aka sodium dithionite), which is an effective foggant. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| First Developer |
12 minutes (increased from 10 on
first attempt), 5 inversions each minute |
|||||||||||||||||||||
| Water Rinse |
3 changes, with agitation |
|||||||||||||||||||||
| Bleach |
5 minutes, constant agitation |
|||||||||||||||||||||
| Water Rinse |
3 changes, with agitation |
|||||||||||||||||||||
| Clearing Bath |
2 minutes, 5 inversions each
minute |
|||||||||||||||||||||
| Water Rinse |
30 seconds |
|||||||||||||||||||||
| Reversal Exposure |
2 minutes each side (equivalent
to the Ilford recommendation w/ my lights) |
|||||||||||||||||||||
| Second Developer |
7 minutes, 5 inversions each
minute |
|||||||||||||||||||||
| Fixer |
2 minutes (rapid fixer), 5
inversions each minute |
|||||||||||||||||||||
| Wash |
3 changes, with agitation
(Ilford method) |
|||||||||||||||||||||
Preliminary results were promising: all the frames had positive images in them! Even better, all had detail in shadows, though those that include sky appeared, to my eyeball, to have burned that out. This was a short test roll, only about 15 frames, but I did bracket a few shots one stop under, and where I did, those look better in terms of detail at the ends of the range (though even darker) than the ones that were exposed at EI 400. This first roll was quite grainy, almost certainly due to use of Dektol (a very active developer with less fine-grain character than common film developers like D-76 or HC-110) as the second developer. For the second attempt, I shot the film at EI 640 (to improve rendition of highlights at the cost of shadows, which were *too* good), increased first developer time from 10 minutes to 12 (to lighten the slides and compensate the reduced exposures), and changed from 5 minutes in Dektol 1+1 to 7 minutes with HC-110 Dilution F for the second developer. These slides are a little light, but otherwise excellent; grain is about like the best I get with this film as negatives. Third roll has been shot at EI 800 (to darken the slides a little), but hasn't yet been processed. I found it interesting that although Ilford recommends against using HP5+ because its "inherent contrast" is too low, the contrast of these Tri-X slides looks just fine -- though I've seen conflicting information on whether increasing first development will increase contrast or just push the image up the curve, making it lighter and boosting the effective film speed. In my scans, it seemed that my 20% boost in first dev time did increase contrast a little, giving a significantly wider histogram, though the non-linear scale makes it hard to be certain this isn't just an artifact of lightening the image. |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| Dignan
NCF-41 -- Two-Bath C-41 Color Developer This developer was originally published by Patrick D. Dignan in the November-December 1995 issue of Phototechniques magazine. I've modified the Bath B very slightly to use more readily available chemicals and to reflect my own experience. Like most two-bath developers, little or no development takes place in Bath A; the developer permeates the emulsion, however, and the chemical thus carried over into Bath B does the work, developing essentially to exhaustion in the time allotted for Bath B. This makes the process relatively insensitive to temperature variations; Dignan recommends 75° F, but my experience shows that, because it develops to exhaustion, the developer works effectively the same over a range of temperature from about 70° F up to at least 85° F. Also like most two-bath systems, the Bath A has a very long life; I made up a liter initially, and have processed equivalent of about ten rolls over two months with no change in results (though I'm about to make up some more Bath A to use in replenishing the working solution, much as I'd use fresh Diafine to replenish the solutions in use). The Bath A solution does tend to discolor over time with dyes washed out of the film, but this doesn't seem to cause any change in working characteristics. Bath B is to be used one-shot -- it contains no preservative, and in fact is essentially just an alkaline solution of the proper pH with some restrainer added to control fog. Dignan originally called out both potassium bromide and benzotriazole, but since I didn't have any benzotriazole (and the notes I found with the formula suggested Dignan had used the developer without it), I doubled his level of potassium bromide and found the developer worked fine that way. This B bath is very cheap, so it's not painful to toss it down the drain after use. I calculate that despite paying $24 for 100 grams of CD-4 to make the Bath A, this developer costs me around a nickel a roll to use because of the long life of Bath A and low cost of Bath B -- as was always the case, it's the bleach that's expensive (commercial bleach is $26 a gallon and is used as it comes, undiluted, a gallon good for about 32 rolls), but I'll soon be testing a homemade ferricyanide bleach. C-41 fixer and final rinse are so cheap I doubt I'll ever bother trying to make up substitutes -- the fixer is similarly priced to B&W rapid fixer, and if you can find no-starter-needed third party C-41 fixers, they're typically even cheaper than the Kodak Flexicolor Fixer, while Flexicolor Final Rinse is similarly priced and used at similar dilution to PhotoFlo (1+110, or 9 ml to make a liter of working solution) -- again, not really worth seeking a substitute. It is strongly recommended to increase bleach and fixing times over those given in the usual C-41 documentation; due to lower temperature, these baths will work slower than they would at the canonical 100° F. I've found that Flexicolor Bleach III gets the job done in ten minutes, even so, and I've been giving ten minutes in fixer as well. However, you can neither overbleach nor overfix C-41; both processes should be carried to completion, and no harm can be done by leaving the film in these baths longer (within reason).
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Bath | Time |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Bath A |
3 minutes, return to storage
container |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Bath B |
6 minutes, pour down drain |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Times as
originally given include 15 seconds pour-out and drain time, i.e. start
pouring off when fifteen seconds remain. In practice, like all
two-bath systems, Bath A time is grossly non-critical as long as a
minimum of three minutes is given; one needs only to ensure enough time
for the developer to completely saturate the emulsion. Further,
Bath B cannot overdevelop because the developer carried over in the
emulsion exhausts in the six minutes given (proved by lack of change in
development over a fifteen degree temperature range). I recommend use of a weak acid stop bath between Bath B and the bleach bath; Flexicolor Bleach, at least, is acidic enough to generate significant gas by reaction with the carbonate alkali (enough to pop the inversion cap off my stainless tanks), and stop bath leaks are far less worrisome than the same with either Flexicolor or ferricyanide bleach (plus, if you use ferricyanide bleach, it can't be significantly acidic, so a separate stop bath might be prudent to ensure development is stopped before bleaching begins). |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||