Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,535   Posts: 1,544,067   Online: 1116
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 24
  1. #11
    Vaughn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Humboldt Co.
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    4,647
    Images
    40
    Quote Originally Posted by Keith Tapscott. View Post
    Ilford PQ-Universal was originally designed for films and papers and Champion Suprol is similar.

    I have not tried either for film developing....
    I use it for film -- but for contact printing. Ilford does not recommend it for roll films due to the larger grain size, I believe.

    Terry King of the Royal Photographic Society recommended it for extending the contrast while keeping good tonal values in the mid-tones for platinum printing.
    At least with LF landscape, a bad day of photography can still be a good day of exercise.

  2. #12
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,270
    Images
    148
    Many so called printdevelopers like D72 (Dektol) started life as negative developers

    Ilford used to recommend PQ Universal for roll film development and if used more dilute still it's also good with 35mm as well.

    One problem is these developers need to be used when they are quite fresh with negatives as any oxidation has a more marked effect, most modern film developers have a higher sulphite level which tends to help prevent deterioration.

    Back in the 70's and 80's we used PQ Universal or Suprol a lot for film processing (at work), the negatives are far cleaner, much less base fog, than ID-11 or D76. Suprol was used in the B&W D&P trade in processing lines giving good fine grain, sharpness and an excellent range of tones.

    Around 1986 I tested PQ Universal (at 1+29) as well as Rodinal, ID-11/D76, Adox borax MQ nad one or tywo other dvelopers with APX100. Of all of them Rodinal and Adox Borax MQ gave the best overall balance, finest grain, sharpness along woth excellent tonality (best tonal rendering). PQ Universal gave slightly less effective EI than ID-11 and both were a good half stop behind Rodinal and Adox Borax MQ. I switched to Rodinal for convenience and found it also brought the best out of Tmax 100.

    The late Peter Glodfield came to similar conclusions and was a great advaocate of Rodinal and T grain (and similar) films.

    My tests with PQ Universal showed that diluted as per M&B Suprol recommendations it was a developer that gave excellent fine grain. It's still recommended for Ilford's Ortho films. At work we were using 5-10 litres of concentrate a week so it was always fresh. However like many low sulphite developers it goes of slightly once opened, not enough to be serious for a print developer but significant enough when used Time/temperature with films.

    As an aside one Agfa Ansco 103 started life as a packaged Film and Universal developer then Agfa dropped the sulphite level (around 1940) and sold it as a Paper developer no longer recommending it for films.

    Ian

  3. #13
    Jim Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Rural NW Missouri
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,816
    I used Tech Pan only when high contrast was desired, as in photographing clouds, and routinely developed it in Polymax with a prewash.

  4. #14
    X. Phot.
    If I didn't have so much D76, I wouldn't hesitate using just Dektol. One of my favorite portrait prints was made using a TRI-X negative that was developed for several minutes in warm Dektol (working solution). Working "outside-of-the-box" can produce some of the most interesting results. Last week I had two 4x5 sheets whose compositions I regarded as "wanting", even before development. So, knowing they were destined for the trash bin, I gave them two minutes in Dektol. I'd say the results have usually been a bit more grain & contrast, but nothing outrageous. I can't recall making a D76 vs Dektol comparison, but I really should. If not just for grins.
    Last edited by X. Phot.; 01-11-2012 at 10:53 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  5. #15
    BradS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    S.F. Bay Area, California
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    4,055
    Images
    1
    I did a few rolls of Tri-X in Dektol (1+9) just to see how it looked. It didn't suit my taste and so went back to D-23 and D-76 for films.

  6. #16
    Vaughn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Humboldt Co.
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    4,647
    Images
    40
    Ian -- I take my 5 liters of PQ Universal and as soon as I open it, divide it up into smaller (1 liter) bottles (filled to the very top).

    What would be the effect of a oxidized PQ developer like this on the negative?

    Thanks, Vaughn
    At least with LF landscape, a bad day of photography can still be a good day of exercise.

  7. #17
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,270
    Images
    148
    Quote Originally Posted by Vaughn View Post
    What would be the effect of a oxidized PQ developer like this on the negative?
    If a developer's used highly dilute then any oxidation of a PQ (or MQ) developer will just mean a corresponding amount under-development. In reality this degree of oxidation is over months rather than weeks and in partially full bottles and splitting a developer into smaller containers helps enormously.

    Ian

  8. #18
    eclarke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    New Berlin, Wi
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    1,951
    Images
    71
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Carnie View Post
    I have been solarizing some negatives lately in my paper solarol develeoper formulation, need to underexpose neg by 1 stop and works nicely for me, but I do not think this is what you are looking for.
    Hi Bob,
    Could you share a few details about how you're doing it?? Thanks, Evan Clarke

  9. #19
    cmacd123's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Stittsville, Ontario
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,026
    The old "Tri-Chem-Packs" siad you could use the developer for Prints or FIlm. Forget if it wanted more dilution. back in those days you could buy 4 oz size sachets of Microdol-X - mix it for 16 oz and use the 1+3 time.
    Charles MacDonald
    aa508@ncf.ca
    I still live just beyond the fringe in Stittsville

  10. #20
    AgCl4ever's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Canada
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    66
    Back in my the-more-grain-the-better days, tri-x in Dektol 1:20 worked well. I do not recall the exact times, but my memory suggests they were not that far off from D-76 1:1 times.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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