1. Mustafa Umut Sarac

    Mustafa Umut Sarac Member

    Messages:
    4,589
    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2006
    Location:
    İstanbul
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    I read that 777 developer do smooth the edges of silver clusters. Is this a special case or do D76 , HC110 , D23 do this ?

    Umut
     
  2. michael_r

    michael_r Subscriber

    Messages:
    6,614
    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2010
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    Typically the more sulfite solvent action, the less sharp the edges of the silver grains are. It depends on quite a few variables, including developer activity, sulfite content etc. D76 and D23 are of this type of developer (solvent developer). D76 is more active than D23 so the solvent effect is not quite as great. HC110 is a solvent developer but a little different. The dilution can have a significant effect though. If you dilute D76 or D23 you get less solvent effect.

    Regarding 777, well, it is a special case only in the sense nobody is 100% sure what the formula is, and, at least partially because of that, some people believe it to have magical powers.
     
  3. Mustafa Umut Sarac

    Mustafa Umut Sarac Member

    Messages:
    4,589
    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2006
    Location:
    İstanbul
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    Is it still possible to find 777 ?
     
  4. Thomas Bertilsson

    Thomas Bertilsson Subscriber

    Messages:
    15,256
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2003
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    You order it from Bluegrass in Kentucky. No online ordering.

    I think there's a sort of waiting list at this time. They're probably waiting to get enough orders to mix fresh.
     
  5. Mustafa Umut Sarac

    Mustafa Umut Sarac Member

    Messages:
    4,589
    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2006
    Location:
    İstanbul
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    Thank you Michael and Thomas.
     
  6. Gerald C Koch

    Gerald C Koch Member

    Messages:
    6,462
    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2010
    Location:
    Southern USA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    A few things you should know about this developer.

    1. It is used as a deep tank replenished developer.
    2. It is expensive and the minumum size makes several gallons.
    3. It contains paraphenylenediamine which is toxic and a known carcinogen. At the very least this chemical can cause severe dermatitis and is a cross-sensitizer.
    4. AFAIK, there is no known MSDS for it and so you are operating blind as to its health risks.
    5. You may have truble getting it shipped internationally.

    You may ask why without a MSDS people know it contains PPD. The give away is the very distinctive smell of the developer.
     
  7. k_jupiter

    k_jupiter Member

    Messages:
    2,578
    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2004
    Location:
    san jose, ca
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
  8. Steve Smith

    Steve Smith Member

    Messages:
    9,066
    Joined:
    May 3, 2006
    Location:
    Ryde, Isle o
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I would ask how they are allowed to sell it without an MSDS. It wouldn't be allowed here.


    Steve.
     
  9. Thomas Bertilsson

    Thomas Bertilsson Subscriber

    Messages:
    15,256
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2003
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Isn't PPD mostly dangerous in powder form? Is it dangerous in liquid form also? From what I understand it's also used in hair dye.

    When you buy the kits From Bluegrass, it comes in powder form, so you must use extreme caution and care when you mix it, so that NO dust of PPD is inhaled.
     
  10. eclarke

    eclarke Member

    Messages:
    1,972
    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2004
    Location:
    New Berlin,
    Shooter:
    ULarge Format
    My quest for info about 777 led me to a tiny little book by Morris Germain and his formula for Germain Finegrain, which had 7g Metol,7g PPD,70g Sodium Sulfite and 7g of Glycin.. It's been my first choice for all films for about six years now.
     
  11. michael_r

    michael_r Subscriber

    Messages:
    6,614
    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2010
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    777 proponents will argue it is not the same as Germain. It is also purportedly quite close in formulation to Edwal 12 (another Metol/PPD/Glycin sulfite formula). But again, people argue 777 is superior to Edwal 12. In what way specifically, it is never clear. It's one of those myth-status developers.
     
  12. c6h6o3

    c6h6o3 Member

    Messages:
    3,219
    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2002
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    Bluegrass swears on a mile high stack of Bibles that there's no glycin in 777. I don't believe them. I believe it's glycin that gives it its unique qualities. As regards Mustafa's original question, the metol in any of the developers you mention tends to soften the edges, yielding smoothness and apparent grainlessness at the expense of accutance. That's why I've gone back to ABC pyro for most of my work. For portraits, though, you can't beat 777 for making the skin glow. Just look at Fred's portrait of Natalie in that Unblinkingeye article.
     
  13. jnanian

    jnanian Advertiser Advertiser

    Messages:
    20,228
    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2003
    Location:
    local
    Shooter:
    Multi Format

    you can say that again !
     
  14. Sponsored Ad
  15. Mustafa Umut Sarac

    Mustafa Umut Sarac Member

    Messages:
    4,589
    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2006
    Location:
    İstanbul
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    Is it possible to order an chemical analysis for 777 ? Who can do it and to what cost ?
     
  16. c6h6o3

    c6h6o3 Member

    Messages:
    3,219
    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2002
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    I keep hoping that demand for 777 will dwindle to such an extent that Bluegrass will give up making it and release the formula. I don't know why they guard it so jealously. They can't be making any money out of it.

    Having said that, let me make a standing offer to anyone qualified to make a chemical analysis of it that I will contribute a gallon of 777 to that effort. I have both unmixed powders and a seasoned gallon of liquid.
     
  17. jnanian

    jnanian Advertiser Advertiser

    Messages:
    20,228
    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2003
    Location:
    local
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    hi jim

    this is only a guess but maybe they guard the formula because it is a piece of photographic history
    that if it becomes public domain people will forget it, or it just becomes another "one of those formulas"
    everyone knows ... instead of having the mystique of defender/harvey's panthermic 777, only purchased at
    bluegrass packaging in kentucky :smile:

    john
     
  18. michael_r

    michael_r Subscriber

    Messages:
    6,614
    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2010
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    The fine grain/lower acutance effect in a developer like undiluted D23 has to do with the sulfite, relatively low level of activity, and high concentration of developing agent, not Metol per se. Metol can be a very high acutance developing agent, in part because of its sensitivity to bromide. In fact some of the sharpest non-staining developers are Metol formulas (see FX1/FX2 and others). It's also worth repeating the dilution (and development procedures) can have a significant impact on sharpness. For example, D76 at 1+3 is a sharp developer.

    I didn't know that about Bluegrass claiming there is no Glycin in 777. That's interesting.
     
  19. Gerald C Koch

    Gerald C Koch Member

    Messages:
    6,462
    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2010
    Location:
    Southern USA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I experienced dermatitis from one of the early color developing agents, a derivative of PPD. This was from a color print developer solution. Itching was INTENSE and I had blisters the size of peas on my fingers for about 10 days. I was forced to give up color printing. It was curious that the developing agent I had been using was said to be safer than other color developing agents and PPD.
     
  20. Thomas Bertilsson

    Thomas Bertilsson Subscriber

    Messages:
    15,256
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2003
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Wow, while wearing gloves?
     
  21. Gerald C Koch

    Gerald C Koch Member

    Messages:
    6,462
    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2010
    Location:
    Southern USA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    No, but I was using tongs and a barrier cream..
     
  22. MaximusM3

    MaximusM3 Member

    Messages:
    756
    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2010
    Location:
    NY
    Shooter:
    35mm RF

    AND...called them again last week, spoke to Laura, she said she would check with the higher powers, after she told me two months ago that they were entering production again, she said she would call me right back...and of course she didn't. Just sell me one kit, Jim! :smile:
     
  23. Paul Howell

    Paul Howell Member

    Messages:
    2,806
    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2004
    Location:
    Phoeinx Ariz
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Is Photogapher's Formulary's 777 the same as 777 from Bluefire? I have used Formulary's clone of Edwal 12 and Bluefire's 777 but liked Edwal much better. I kept a tank of Edwal 12 going for 4 or 5 years before moving on use my existing stock of develoeprs but plan to return to Edwal 12 as soon as clean out my old stock. I used gloves and mask when using both developers, never exeprianced any reactions.
     
  24. Thomas Bertilsson

    Thomas Bertilsson Subscriber

    Messages:
    15,256
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2003
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Dr Lowe published his formula for Developer 12.

    Panthermic 777 formula has not been published, as far as I know, so there's no way of telling if they are the same. But, I seem to remember someone simply weighing the two kits, coming up with rather different weights, indicating they are actually fairly dissimilar in their composition.
     
  25. dr5chrome

    dr5chrome Member

    Messages:
    463
    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2006
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    ISGO in LA was known for using this developer at their lab back when i 1st started in the 80s.

    As I know it, it had a dedicated following, a love/hate developer.
    It is not a small-take developer, and is very difficult to use.

    dw
     
  26. c6h6o3

    c6h6o3 Member

    Messages:
    3,219
    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2002
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    It's not difficult to use but once you figure out what works for you, don't change anything. You must be completely consistent with it. I use it in trays. You don't have to have a deep tank. I do, however, use the entire gallon when developing 8x10s and I do no more than 2 at a time. It likes a lot of solution per sq. in. of film area.

    @MaximusM3: I want to keep what I have (around 3 gallons worth of powders) as I don't know for sure that Bluegrass will make any more. However, I know someone who has some (and replenisher, too). I will be seeing this person in a couple of weeks so I will ask if he'll part with a gallon. I'll let you know.

    Where are you located?