Dignan NCF-41 Divided Color Negative Developer
In the NOV/DEC 1995 issure of Darkroom and Creative Camera Techniques
Patrick Dignan wrote an article on a divided color negative developer. Everything in this article comes from that source.
Patrick Dignan, sadly now deceased, was a pioneer in the formulation of color chemistry for the home darkroom worker in the United States. As such he had earned the respect of an extensive following of home darkroom workers in compounding their own color chemistry. This article is the result of work that he did...thank him not me.
Of course as a divided developer there is al lteast two baths: Developing agent etc in bath A and the alkali etc in bath B. The reason for having two baths is that when the baths are combined oxidation starts with the predictable effect one must expect on shelf life. This type of developing practice of two...or more..baths has been long practiced in b&w for the same reasons. In the case present it is to provide a divided alternative to C-41 (Flexicolor) developer.
Water (distilled) 300milliliters
Sodium Bisulphite .5 (1/2) gram I added (1/2) to prevent reading as 5 grams.
CD-4 (Kodak developing agent) 5.5 grams
Sodium Sulphite (anhy.) 4.5 grams
Water (distilled) to make 500 milliliters
ph at up to 75║F: up to 6.5
Time in A bath (including drain time): 3 min.
Water (distilled): 500 milliliters
Potassium Carbonate 53 grams
Potassium Bromide .5 (1/2) gram
Water (distilled) to make 1 liter.
optional: Benzoitriazole (Kodak anti fog #2) 2 milligrams
Ph at 75║F: 11.8
Time in B bath 6 minutes
As you can see not a difficult formula to put together. There is no need to be able to measure any closer than 1/10th gram
Shelf life has exceeded 1 year. Use an acetic acid stop bath. I, in lieu of anything else, I would recommend 20% vinegar to water
Coventional bleach and fix or blix as otherwise used. 75║F can be used with extended time.
Since there is some carry over every time film is developed you will eventually find your self with insufficient stock to cover your film. That is when you will need to make more. The amount of time elasped from compounding should not matter. NEVER GET ANY B BATH INTO A BATH OR YOU WILL CAUSE THE A BATH TO START OXIDIZING.
THIS DEVELOPER IS DESIGNED TO WORK WITHOUT A PREWET BATH
Since the time in A bath is used only to absorb developing agent and because the agent will be fully utilized in B bath you can not over develop your color film.
This is designed for tank processing. I do not see a method for use with a JOBO unless you reclaim your ingredients.
Try this as it is aseasy and as economical as you will ever find.
Comments from the previous system:
By titrisol - 05:10 PM, 07-13-2005 Rating: None
Is this for C41 films???
Shouldn;t this be in the recipes section?
By Tom Hoskinson - 08:40 PM, 07-17-2005 Rating: None
Yes, this is for developing C41 films.
Yes, this should be posted in the Apug Chemical Recipes.
I have used an earlier incarnation of Dignan's Divided Color Negative Developer and it worked fine. As I recall, it was the same recipe as the one Claire posted and I used it at 75 deg. F. I got the recipe and the CD-4 directly from Pat Dignan.
FWIW, I've used this formula with variable results. It sometimes works quite well, yielding good density and color. Sometimes, though, it produces poor results -- most often taking the form of thin (low-density) negatives. I haven't figured out exactly what the problem is, although I think it's at least partly a matter of the brand and type of film. (The two worst rolls I ever pulled from the tank when using this developer were both Ilford XP2 Super. Fuji and Ferrania films usually seem to do well.) This is a pity, really, since the (claimed) long shelf life and 75F operation are both great features. Elsewhere on APUG, Photo Engineer has posted reasons why divided developers may not work optimally when emulsions change, so perhaps it's not surprising that a developer designed for the films of over a decade ago isn't working well with today's films.
This formula was never really suitable for C41 films. It was probably tested with one film over 10 years ago and gave usable results, but it cannot hope to compare with the 'real' developer from Fuji or Kodak.
It lacks one ingredient I can see, right off the bat, and has an ingredient that can harm proper imaging.
I doubt if anyone should use this for valuable pictures.
Kodak Flexicolor developer is $26.95 for a 5 gallon kit: I mix 2.5 gallons at a time, use what I need, and freeze the rest.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Interesting - I too mix up partial batches of flexicolor - I wasn't aware you could freeze it - do you mean you freeze the remaining working solution, or the stock solutions remaining in the bottles? How long will it last like this and how many freeze/thaw cycles can it go through? Are there any caveats to doing this?
Originally Posted by Discpad
I keep about a gallon to a gallon & half of working tank soultion at room temperature; and defrost 1 liter soda bottles of replenisher of C-41 developer.
I also do the same for E6 color developer and; depending on my forecast volume for the month, E6 first dev.
Originally Posted by dslater
Resurecting a 'very' old thread I am intrigued by PE's comment that something important is missing from Dignan's formula. Is it Hydroxylamine Sulphate?
What function does this have in C-41 developer and if one should be so bold as to add it to the Dignan formula, would it go into the 1st or 2nd bath or maybe both?
I am not in the professional business and therefore can accept 'acceptible' results and the idea of a home brew appeals greatly. Amazing what color correction in PS can do to slightly 'off' CN negatives! :-) From the local lab, that is. Haven't done any myself, yet.
Could Ron explain further?
Originally Posted by Photo Engineer
There are actually two ingredients missing. I missed one. In any event, the method and temperatures are not usable for all films due to thickness variations among the various films and the diffusion problems that creates.
Hydroxyl Amine Sulfate is a powerful developer preservative. Leaving it out will have some effect, but I can't tell as I have not tested this developer.
I have tested other 2 part developers and processing at low temperatures and I argued this point with Pat Dignan many years ago. He and I exchanged quite a few notes many years ago.
OK. Accepted. What is the other ingredient omitted? Apart from the Hydroxylamine Sulphate? The film thickness can be a problem w B&W 2 baths. Agreed.
Some seem quite happy with the 2 bath. I am using a bunch of Fuji 200 here.
The question still applies - would I be better advised to add it to bath 1 or not? (or bath 2?) From your comment it sounds a bit of a non-issue in a 2 bath. (going by other's experience) I want to get out of the 1-hour lab loop as it it takes 1 1/2 hours to get there with 110 film. The only game in town!
Any pointers to your online exchanges?
I really DO appreciate your input. :-)
Originally Posted by Photo Engineer