Ilford FP4+ and Fomadon LQR: Good slides?
Fist of all, a little presentation: I'm a filmmaker from Spain, and I've been reading this forum for a long time, so finally I decided to register and post. The knowledge in this place really amazes me.
99% of my processing activities are super-8 films, mostly E-6 and D94 for Fomapan R100 and Tri-X.
The problem I'm facing is that I've shot a roll of 35mm Ilford FP4+ this summer that I want to process as reversal. Can I use pure and simple Fomadon LQR as first and second developer or do I have to add some potassium thiocyanate? If that's the case, in what quantity? As this is (probably) going to be my unique roll of Ilford for B&W slides -Fomapan R100 is my preferred option- I don't want to invest in another developer or chemicals that I'm not going to use anymore...
Thanks in advance!
I've been experimenting with reversal processing this summer using great information from this and other other boards. I made many test strips of a few film types to ascertain the best concentration of developer, time and so on. I was intending to purchase some LQR as I understand it is the developer used by Foma in their kits but I will not be able to do any processing for a while. Also there is a problem with current batch of Foma R100 for still film.
What I did with any new film was clip a short test strip and develop it with a known film and developing process to see how it compared then made further adjustments if necessary with more strips or just develop the whole roll with if it was close and looked like it only needed a change in time. I did this with R100 when I had found a good combination using Suprol developer with Foma 100. I didn't use any thiocyanate or sodium thiosulphate in those instances. My understanding is that if you do use it, it is another film specific parameter so more testing would be necessary. Did you use any with R100 and LQR?
Welcome here on Apug.
The question you posted is a tricky one. It's actually impossible for anyone to tell if Foma is adding a little silver halide solvent in his first developer (I'm referring to the developer in the Foma inversion kit).
I even don't know if it's LQR.
However Foma itself in its leaflet suggests to use LQR as a first and second developer.
Without any silver halide solvent any films will yield muddy highlights imho so using the first developer also in the second stage is taking risks. YMMV of course.
I haven't processed any Foma R100 yet so I can't comment on them but FP4+ is a delicate emulsion. It yeilds fabulous slides but watch for emulsion damage caused by the permanganic acid bleach. Too much a concentrated bleach and you'll find a black mess inside your tank at the end of the process.
My advice is to lower the temperature to 18░C and halve the permanganate in the bleach.
I would not use the same developer in the first and second stage.
Last edited by Alessandro Serrao; 09-18-2012 at 03:53 PM. Click to view previous post history.
Thanks for the responses!
Richyd, Foma is great in Fomadon LQR, and also in Agfa Neutol, without any halide solvent. I didn't tested Suprol, but perhaps I'll give it a try in the future... Thanks!
Alessandro, my bleach is based on dichromate, so no problem with gelatin melting. By the way, I've studied seriously your reversal B&W guidelines in "doc" format.
Thanks a lot!
I tried using the same developer for stage I and II but when I tried adding some silver halide solvents the differences became visible.
It's like to judge something when you have not a comparison to make: you tend to judge that thing good, up until you have something really better, then you reconsider that first thing.
Maybe Foma R100 is tailored made to use the same developer, I dunno.
It's a lot to experiment, and the fun is there.
Lemme say you've got some guts to handle dichromate!
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Mmmh... Perhaps I should try the halide solvent the next time. I'll make some tests with cine film this autumm. Do you recommend to add the solvent on the second developer too?
The Ilford shots I want to process are 3-d images of the Aveiro cemetery, in Portugal. I can't repeat those shots and any inconsistence in processing will be more noticiable than in single slides...
About the dichromate: A friend of mine told me that if you disolve it in water for storage, there's no real danger. Unless you drink it, of course...
In any case, he changed to permanganate a long time ago...
Dichromate is dangerous when you mix it (airborne dust), when you handle it (contact with your skin).
If you drink it you're crazy
Your friend has changed to permanganate not without a reason.
The safest way to deal with dichromate is to wear a FFP3 mask, an apron, goggles and nitrile gloves under a vent hood...
Do not use a silver halide solvent in your second developer.
However if you have precious shots and want them to be developed as a slide, I'd recommend you Dr5.com
Thanks again, Alessandro.
I use protective equipment during all the process, but specially mixing the bleach. Hydroquinone is specially toxic too, as well as the E-6 stabilizer bath.
Sometimes I'm very worried about my health, but I think that with good care nothing should happen. The sulfuric acid scares me a lot too!
Thanks for the recommendations about the second developer. About Dr5 you're right, but I won't skip the pleasure of DIY. You know it's a big part of the enjoyment ;-)
By the way, I promise not to keep the dichromate mix in a Fanta bottle...
..round & round. haven't we had this dichromate ~ permanganate debate before? All chem can be harmful. Just do right be each. permanganate is a much more dangerous agent - fyi. Ron Mowrey should have the old study that kodak did years ago about, if any of the photo-lab guys got sick from the photo-chems over the years. I don't think any of them did..
BTW - you don't need to use solvent in your developers at all, for any reason. What ever theory there is behind using one, Ive proven you don't need one 1000x over. The image quality is better without it.
Everyone is free to do whatever he/she wants, of course.
But saying that permanganate is more dangerous than dichromate is simply not true. I don't wanna restart the debate here.
To each his own: you make the photographer/chemist I make the biologist.