Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,284   Posts: 1,535,066   Online: 1081
      
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 33
  1. #21
    David Allen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Berlin
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    398
    Convenience is such an imprecise word. For some this means not having to make up developers from scratch. For others it means using standard recommendations and following them. For others it means mixing stuff straight out of the bottle as per always. For others it means not having to think about stuff and just getting on with it.

    For me, testing is of great importance to pin down all the variables and then the 'convenience' is not having to do this again until a particular combination of technique, film, developer, processing and paper are no longer available.

    For a developer, I would never choose convenience over results but I would also never choose a developer that, to get repeatable results, was so difficult to use that it would be a pain in the proverbial backside.

    For the past 10 years my personal solution has been Delta 400 with an EI of 200 developed in two-bath developer. It is 'convenient' because I know exactly what results I will achieve before I press the shutter. It is 'inconvenient' because you have to mix it yourself from raw chemicals.

    Each to their own but, for me, 'convenience' is not the question but rather predictable consistency.

    Best,

    David
    www.dsallen.de

  2. #22
    cliveh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    3,220
    Images
    343
    Quote Originally Posted by hdeyong View Post
    I use D76, (or ID-11, they're identical), all the time.
    I agree, but I seem to remember reading some time ago that there is some slight difference and if not, did Ilford copy kodak or vice versa? Also, I would imagine D76 is more popular, why?

    “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

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Castle Rock, CO, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,349
    Images
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Lange View Post
    I base developer choice on the material decisions I made earlier on.

    Anything shot at box speed, or over exposed, from EI 400 and less, gets Rodinal, or D-76, depending on subject matter, and how I feel that day.

    Anything pushed gets Acufine or D-76, depending on the subject matter, and how I feel that day.

    Essentially, I stock 2 developers to account for extremes in my subject matter, and one that takes care of the in between.
    How does the the subject matter influence these decisions? I ask because I am ignorant of any developer other than DD-X and T-Max. I'm new to this and my decision has always been based on what is in stock locally.
    Last edited by pbromaghin; 08-03-2012 at 03:24 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  4. #24
    hdeyong's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Central Canada and Southern France
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    284
    D76 seems to have been around for ever, so I don't know who was first. I think Ilford substitutes one of the ingredients for something that does the same job, maybe to get around some patent situation. From everything I've heard, and from my own results, they seem to be identical in how the film turns out.
    D76 is usually a lot cheaper, for some reason.

  5. #25
    Leigh B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Maryland, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,035
    Images
    1
    I choose film developers based on how the negatives look, and pretty much nothing else.

    Based on my testing, I chose Rodinal as my standard developer more than 50 years ago, and see no reason to change.

    - Leigh

    NB - I do use Diafine for tray development, and find its results are comparable to Rodinal.
    “Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something.” - Plato

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Oxfordshire, UK.
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,184
    I switched from ID11 to HC-110 because it's more convenient. I had to play around with times and such to get it looking how I wanted it to and that was inconvenient, I suppose, but once nailed, it's nailed.
    Steve.

  7. #27
    PDH
    PDH is offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    493
    Quote Originally Posted by Andre Noble View Post
    Hello,

    I love this site because of the passion people have for traditional film processes. I imagine there are many people who have shot 10's to 100's times more film than myself.

    Nevertheless, I get the feeling based on reading many threads here and on photo.net over the years, and based on modest experience with various developers myself - that convienence is the number one factor that people use when selecting their developer for B&W film.

    I feel the pyro developers (Wimberly, Pyrocat, PMK, etc) are superior in what they do (with traditional silver emulsions, not with T Grain films) in normal to high contrast situations.

    But the liquid/syrup developers are very convienent (HC 100, Rodinal, Diafine) and that's why we use them instaed.

    agree or disagree?
    Yes and no, I mix a number of developers in bulk, currently the ANSCO version of D 76, when I plan on many rolls or sheets. But there are time when I dont have fresh developers and I have only a roll or 2 so I use HC 110, DDX, or Edwal FG 7. I would not say that a pyro developer is superior, problems with staining, too gainy for 35mm for my taste, but there are times that I need a compensating developer. One size does not fit all, and at times convienene wins.

  8. #28
    Pioneer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Elko, Nevada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    990
    Images
    4
    In the beginning I used Arista Premium products from Freestyle because it was inexpensive. I am now working almost exclusively with Rodinal for 3 reasons.
    1. I buy in bulk and Rodinal lasts for a very, very, very, very long time. Arista Premium will begin to lose potency after a year.
    2. I can find a Rodinal recipe for just about every film I use. This was not true for Arista Premium.
    3. Rodinal is pretty flexible and I can change the dilution and the times as I need.

    Now I'm pretty sure that there are other developers out there that are just as good, maybe even better, but I am just now getting to the point where I understand what Rodinal will do. I really do not want to start that whole process over again when I am beginning to learn what I am actually doing.

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    local
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,131
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    1
    i primarily use 1 developer
    caffenolc + a shot glass of ansco 130.
    it is the only developer i have used in the last 6 years
    and before that for 6+ years it was dilute ansco 130.
    the developer gives me film i am used to and it is easy to make.
    it processes all the film i use with ease, color and black /white
    works with prints, and my film prints ez and scans ez, i couldn't ask for anything better.

    i am not chasing magic bullets like most people.
    silver magnets, trickle tanks sold
    artwork often times sold for charity
    PM me for details

  10. #30
    RPC
    RPC is offline

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    369
    For convenience and quality, I would go with D-23 and Ansco 130.

    D-23 is easy to mix (two chemicals), is similar in quality to D-76, but does not suffer from activity changes, and is long lasting.

    Ansco 130 can be used for both film and paper, with great results for both, and is long lasting..

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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