Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,685   Posts: 1,482,255   Online: 1043
      
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 59

Thread: D76

  1. #21

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Ogden, Utah USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    864
    Quote Originally Posted by Gerald C Koch View Post
    If D-76 is so good then why do so many people seek the holy grail of developers?
    for the same reason they're never happy with their partner (well, some aren't) or their car, or their camera -- chronic "grass is always greener" syndrome -- you try a different developer you think it's look is better, you use it for a while and try another and think THAT one is better --as I said, I've found -- for me, your results may differ -- that excellence in photography comes from eliminating variables whenever you can and using those you can control most easily to get your results.

    When Mary Ellen Mark spoke at Weber State University a bunch of years ago, back before she was into hassies and ginormous polaroids, she said she always used Tri-X and nothing else because she had learned, through practice, to get the best from it. I dunno what she developed it in, but I bet she stuck to one or two developers.

  2. #22
    artonpaper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    325
    Images
    135
    I never cared for the grain structure with Tri-X. I like HC-110B for its grain better. Rodinol can really handle a long brightness range well. The old DK-50 had better acutance. IMHO

  3. #23
    trojancast's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    24
    A tough question to answer. I use D76, because it is a good all round developer. But is it the best ever? I doubt it, but I don't have an answer for which one is. I might be persuaded to go with Rodinal however.
    Canon EOS-1V | Canon 5D2 | 17-40/4L | 24-105/4L | 14/2.8L | 24/1.4L | 35/1.4L | 50/1.2L | 85/1.2L | 200-400/4L | 580EX

    “For me, the camera is a sketch book, an instrument of intuition and spontaneity.”
    ― Henri Cartier-Bresson

  4. #24

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    235
    Caffenol or GTFO.

  5. #25
    cliveh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    2,721
    Images
    335
    Quote Originally Posted by summicron1 View Post
    depends on what you mean by "best." A friend of mine likes to cite some magazine article he saw years ago that went on and on about some mystery developer that was super fine grain, good for all film, could be diluted easily, worked consistently, stored well and was generally all around wonderful and it was, you guessed it, plain ol' D-76. I've toyed with Microdol, but D-76 diluted 1:1 is my standard. In photography I've found the fewer variables you have, the more control you have over the ones that matter, and using the same developer is my "best" solution to that.
    Couldn't agree more.

    “The contemplation of things as they are, without error or confusion, without substitution or imposture, is in itself a nobler thing than a whole harvest of invention”

    Francis Bacon

  6. #26
    John Austin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Southern Forest Region, Western Australia
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    520
    Blog Entries
    3
    What was meant by best? - To me D76d is the best because of the balance of its properties of grain, emulsion speed, tonail range etc

    The other best reason is that I made the most recent deep tank line of D76d in May 1985 and have been replenishing it ever since - Like me, it is improving with age, but it never got grumpy - I am tempted to ask if mine is some of the oldest still going, which I presume it must be, but I wonder

    Back to the first paragraph, for me D76d is best because of its balance of qualities, not any particular one

    John

  7. #27
    Jesper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Lund in the south of Sweden
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    605
    Most any developer that you learn to use for different situations and films will be a good one when you know exactly how it will behave and how to get what you want from it.
    Personally I use Rodinal with three different films and have been doing so for many years, but it could just as well have been D76.
    The point is, know your tools and they will provide good results. Don't go chasing silver bullets (too often).

  8. #28
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,708
    Images
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by spoolman View Post
    If I remember I believe Mr. Troop in The Darkroom Cookbook stated that the Original formulation for D-76 that the ph of the Metol component began to rise during storage and that Kodak had to do re-formulations over the years to counter act this problem. He also stated that is why ID-11 is in two parts,one part is the Metol alone and the other packet contains the other ingredients. If I am wrong, someone in the know please correct me. I don't have my copy of this book and I am just going from memory.

    Doug
    Doug;

    The buffering capacity of the original D-76 was adjusted in later formulas. For the chemistry involved with the ingredient that changed the pH (HQ, not Metol) see Haist. However, the reason for 1 or 2 packages is explained in my earlier post. Kodak has a method which allows the mixing of two ingredients that would otherwise have to be packed in two packages. In fact, the original D-76 and several later generations were packed in two packages until the method was invented which allowed them both to be placed in one pakage.

    Bill Troop also has the explanation for the pH change in his book.

    PE

  9. #29
    Richard Sintchak (rich815)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    San Francisco area
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,567
    Images
    1
    It is the best. Along with Rodinal, HC-110 and Pyrocat-HD which are the best too.
    -----------------------

    "Well, my photos are actually much better than they look..."

    Richard S.
    Albany, CA (San Francisco bay area)

    My Flickr River of photographs
    http://flickriver.com/photos/rich815...r-interesting/

    My Photography Website
    http://www.lightshadowandtone.com

  10. #30
    Shawn Dougherty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,115
    Images
    277
    Quote Originally Posted by rich815 View Post
    It is the best. Along with Rodinal, HC-110 and Pyrocat-HD which are the best too.
    pretty much. Rodinal is the best for my needs, and mostly because I know it the best...

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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