Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,531   Posts: 1,572,554   Online: 1139
      
Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 61
  1. #21
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,760
    Images
    225

    Is Diafine really that easy to use?

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Lime View Post
    Diafine truly is close to idiot proof in operation. I've used it for many years to push Tri-X and more recently TMY-2 400 to 1250 and 1600. 3-4 min Bath A and B and you're done. The biggest challenge is not to contaminate the two solutions with each other.

    With Tri-X you get very good classic looking results. But don't expect a miracle. You still are pushing a 400 asa film 2-3 stops.
    TMY-2 worked even better, due to its linear toe, so you'll see a little more shadow detail vs Tri-X.

    The best thing about Diafine is that as a two bath developer, it will go a long way towards not blowing out your highlights in high contrast situations.

    Diafine improves noticeable after you put a few rolls through it. Once it has 'ripened' a little your negatives will become noticeably smoother and take on a pearly appearance.
    So it ripens huh? Interesting, is that the B developer that ripens or the A?

    Also does this mean IN THEORY that if you took it and soaked in A... The. Developed in B till completion... Then soaked in A again and back to B, you could push it beyond the normal point as more developer could soak in?

    Sounds to me like more of a pain, I already dislike multiple steps without adding a 4th... Lol


    ~Stone

    The Noteworthy Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,064
    [QUOTE=StoneNYC;1437921

    Also does this mean IN THEORY that if you took it and soaked in A... The. Developed in B till completion... Then soaked in A again and back to B, you could push it beyond the normal point as more developer could soak in?

    Sounds to me like more of a pain, I already dislike multiple steps without adding a 4th... Lol

    [/QUOTE]

    Yup, it's been done. I can't remember who did this, but a longtime APUGer posted this trick here. I think he go EI 6400 from TX by doing this. If you search the archives, you may find it.

    Pain? Possibly. Everyone has a different pain threshold.

  3. #23
    Mark Fisher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Chicago
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,635
    Images
    152
    Two bath developers are that easy, but I tried it once and couldn't get results I was happy with. I found the results lacking in contrast for my taste. If you already have it, give it a shot and see whether it suits you.
    Your first 10,000 pictures are the worst - HCB

    www.markjamesfisher.com

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Southern USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,063
    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Lime View Post
    Diafine improves noticeable after you put a few rolls through it. Once it has 'ripened' a little your negatives will become noticeably smoother and take on a pearly appearance.
    Certainly if bath A changes with time it is not ripening in the traditional sense as would occur with replenished developers. Since bath A is acidic no development should occur in it. So just what would explain any ripening. This is the first mention of this phenomenon and runs against Diafine's claims that development remains uniform throughout the developers life.
    A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral.

    ~Antoine de Saint-Exupery

  5. #25
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,135
    Quote Originally Posted by Oren Grad View Post
    Stand development can be finicky. I've tried Diafine a few times over the years - still have a fairly ancient mix lurking in the back of my chemistry shelf - but always had trouble getting even development. Since I'm happy with D-76, it wasn't worth the time and hassle to keep testing to try to find an agitation technique that would make it behave for me.
    Diafine isn't for "stand" developing, and I've never, ever, had uneven results. Did you follow the instructions? It is sensitive to over agitation, but does need some - just what it says. I invert for ten seconds initially then two inversions every minute.

    3 minutes A plus 3 minutes B is standard but as folks have pointed out some films need 4+4 or 5+5. Within reason more time doesn't change anything so you can do 5+5 for all films if you want and develop different types together.

  6. #26
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,135
    Quote Originally Posted by Gerald C Koch View Post
    Certainly if bath A changes with time it is not ripening in the traditional sense as would occur with replenished developers. Since bath A is acidic no development should occur in it. So just what would explain any ripening. This is the first mention of this phenomenon and runs against Diafine's claims that development remains uniform throughout the developers life.
    This would also make me hesitate to try the multiple passes through both baths. They warn you about not getting any of B into the A bath. Maybe with a very thorough water bath.

    I did not get any "push" at all on old TMY, and in fact the box doesn't list any push. If anything I got less speed. I know some people like it but I did not like it at all with either TMX or TMY. Is TMY-2 different in this regard?

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Southern USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,063
    When Baumann owned Diafine it published very specific instructions concerning agitation for their developers Diafine, Acufine, and Acu-1. While two bath developers are convenient their use should not be taken as an opportunity for sloppy technique.
    A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral.

    ~Antoine de Saint-Exupery

  8. #28
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,135
    Also WRT contrast - my experience with it on traditional films is that a normal scene will print well with about grade 3, maybe 3.5 filtration with my condenser enlarger. Pan F+ seems to be an inherently contrasty film but I still end up printing those on grade 3 more often than not. But if you expose properly for your system you'll get shadow detail, and while you might need a little harder paper it isn't a problem getting a normal looking print. Maybe not the best choice for very flat lightling, but good for contrasty lighting for the same reason.

  9. #29
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,135
    Quote Originally Posted by Gerald C Koch View Post
    When Baumann owned Diafine it published very specific instructions concerning agitation for their developers Diafine, Acufine, and Acu-1. While two bath developers are convenient their use should not be taken as an opportunity for sloppy technique.
    +1. Follow their instructions, particularly with regard to contamination of A with B (don't), minimum time and agitation (agitate gently and don't over do it) and it really is very easy. You might or might not like the results, but if it sounds interesting to you it's worth a try. With its relative insensitivity to time and temperature as long as the minimum times and wide temperature range are complied with it's a lot easier in most ways than single bath developers.

  10. #30
    Worker 11811's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,620
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    Sounds to me like more of a pain, I already dislike multiple steps without adding a 4th... Lol
    The mfg. instructions say that a stop bath is not necessary and, in fact, recommend against it.

    Therefore, instead of Dev. > Stop > Fix > Wash, it becomes Dev.-A > Dev.-B > Fix > Wash. The same number of steps. You just trade Dev.-B for the Stop.

    They also recommend a rinse between Stop and Fix but I do that already. It prolongs the life of the fixer. Right?

    Bottom line: No more work than other workflows.
    Randy S.

    In girum imus nocte et consumimur igni.

    -----

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/randystankey/

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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