Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,694   Posts: 1,482,487   Online: 971
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 16 of 16
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,730

    GEVAERT G.33 Soft Developer

    Soft-working film developer with extended shadow detail

    Mixing instructions: Add chemicals in specified sequence.

    Dilution: Use undiluted

    Starting point development time: 8 mins (tray), 14 mins (tank)

    Just mixed a liter tonight, going to try it tomorrow with Arista EDU Ultra 120 in 100 and 400 ASA and try 14 minutes for roll tanks.
    Last edited by Kino; 06-27-2007 at 06:24 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  2. #11
    titrisol's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Rotterdam
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,671
    Images
    8
    Thanks a lot!
    conundrum resolved
    Those Focal Press books were good, I gave mine away a couple of years ago.
    Mama took my APX away.....

  3. #12

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,730
    Quote Originally Posted by titrisol View Post
    I think there is something wrong in the numbering, film developers had numbering 210-230s, paper developers 250-260s. So it maybe 233?
    The only one I've found that is close is G212
    * Water, 125F/52C 750 ml
    * Metol 2 g
    * Sodium Sulfite (anhydrous) 25 g
    * Hydroquinone 1.5 g
    * Sodium Carbonate (monohydrate*) 35 g
    * Potassium Bromide 0.5 g
    * Cold water to make 1L

    Given the amount of Metol, this should be quite vigorous? or am I wrong?
    Sorry, Tom; I did't see this posting for some reason...

    The experiences I have had (admittedly few) so far, are that it does produced denser than normal negatives, but the detail doesn't block up as much as say D76.

    I haven't had time to do a real controlled comparison, or to even print the negatives I have developed so far, so I am afraid I am not much help in this regard, Sorry!

    However, what I have seen from neg scans looks promising for subjects that can profit from a longer gray scale and diffuse grain structure.

  4. #13
    titrisol's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Rotterdam
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,671
    Images
    8
    Well the amounts of metol and HQ are very low, and the re is more M than HQ so me was wrong in the initial asusmption.

    yes this shoul dbe very soft acing, with nice detail in shadows and highlights that do not block
    Mama took my APX away.....

  5. #14
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    15,948
    Images
    148
    I agree with Titrisol, there's definitely something wrong here. It needs checking in the Gevaert manual of photography.

    Kino, I think the books you are referring to are by Jacobson. I have them in the UK.

  6. #15
    eclarke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    New Berlin, Wi
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    1,916
    Images
    71
    I have seen Germain ridiculed at times, don't know why, but his little book is one of my favorites..Evan Clarke

  7. #16
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    15,948
    Images
    148
    There is 33 Gevaert Developer as Kino states in the first edition of Jacobson , Developing (1940). It's in table XV and is a fine grain developer roughly equivalent to D76 but it uses Rescorcin as well as Metol & Hydroquinon.

    Jacobson's number just means it's the 33rd formulae lised in the book, he doesn'y actually give the Gevaert formula number.

    Developing was the earliest Focal Press book to list any formulae, the company was only founded a year or so before and like the founder the two major writers Jacobson and L.A. Mannheim were all emigres from Nazi Germany.

    One problem is that prior to the 1930's formulae many were often published without a reference number by all companies.

    Ian

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin