Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,682   Posts: 1,548,527   Online: 865
      
Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 61
  1. #41
    Harry Lime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    467
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Cole View Post
    I've always used it with plastic reels and never had a problem.
    It was random with me. I never could trace it to something specific. I switched to steel reels a few years ago and haven't had the problem since.


    Why are you inverting only once half way through? Instructions say to agitate gently for 10 seconds (three inversions or so if done slowly) initially followed by 5 seconds each minute - which is what I do, two gentle inversions and tap the tank each minute including the last one, then pour. Never any problems with unevenness.
    I follow the instructions for bath A, but only invert once and very gently for bath B. I also run closer to 4+4, than 3+3. It's been a few years since I came up with that routine, but the thinking was to attempt to harness the maximum compensating action. I like low contrast negatives with plenty of highlight detail. Here is an example of Tri-X @ 1250 in Diafine. I'm pretty sure I shot this with the Voigtlander 2/28 on an M7. None of the backlight hair is clipped and the light behind his head rolls off gently.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	05072012_R08.0001.jpg 
Views:	67 
Size:	126.7 KB 
ID:	61758
    Last edited by Harry Lime; 12-27-2012 at 02:07 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  2. #42
    ParkerSmithPhoto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    821
    Images
    6
    Diafine works best with strong, directional lighting, or even some crazy, unpredictable indoor lighting like Harry showed. If you like to shoot in flatter lighting, you will have trouble getting enough contrast for a good silver print. (The negs do scan beautifully - if you see the Rodeo project on my website, those were all Diafine and either HP5 or TMAX 400, scanned and then printed with Eboni-6 inks).

    Most of the time for silver you will be in the Grade 4 range with a diffusion enlarger. The negs don't look thin, there's lots of detail there, they just have a very low gradient/contrast. That, in fact, may be the biggest knock against Diafine. So again, make sure you have some strong or interesting lighting. I have another series of beach portraits (not ready to show, alas) that are all done in that early morning Equatorial light where it's so bright you can barely keep your eyes open. Diafine worked wonders on those Acros negs.
    Parker Smith Photography, Inc.
    Atlanta, GA

    Commercial & Fine Art Photography
    Portrait Photography

  3. #43

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,055
    Quote Originally Posted by ntenny View Post
    (using Diafine twice for more speed)



    I think it was Donald Qualls, who also cooked up a developer that gets a very respectable 6400 and an arguably-usable 12800 from HP5+ or TX400. He seems to have wandered away from APUG in the last few years, which is a shame as he contributed some very good mad-scientist darkroom ideas.

    I never tried this particular trick myself, but clearly you'd have to rinse the holy hell out of it after the first B bath to avoid any contamination of the A bath. If you only needed to do it once in a blue moon, I suppose you could throw away the second A bath rather than putting it back in the stock bottle. Even then, it seems like the emulsion wouldn't absorb too much of the A bath due to being already wet---might it work even better to let it *dry* in the tank, at least partially, before doing the second round?

    The approach makes sense, but of course you'd lose a certain amount of the compensating effect in the highlights. Reduced agitation might bring back some of that compensation, I guess, but maybe at the cost of unevenness. IMHO, some experiments are justified to find out what does and doesn't work well in practice.

    -NT
    It was indeed Donald Qualls. You have a good memory and he is missed. I happended to print out the page from this thread. Here's what it says:

    Give the film a thorough water rinse after the B bath, you can then put the film back in A for another 3 min, followed by another 3 in B. Fix and wash as normal.

    Shadow detail will surley be compromised--that's already a given, based on how you shot the film, and the results will be fairly grainy, but you'll get good midtones and quite printable negs if you didn't cheat on the metering even at 3200.

    He goes on to get EI 5000 from a mixture of HC-110 and Dektol. WOW!

  4. #44
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,916
    Quote Originally Posted by ParkerSmithPhoto View Post
    Diafine works best with strong, directional lighting, or even some crazy, unpredictable indoor lighting like Harry showed. If you like to shoot in flatter lighting, you will have trouble getting enough contrast for a good silver print. (The negs do scan beautifully - if you see the Rodeo project on my website, those were all Diafine and either HP5 or TMAX 400, scanned and then printed with Eboni-6 inks).

    Most of the time for silver you will be in the Grade 4 range with a diffusion enlarger. The negs don't look thin, there's lots of detail there, they just have a very low gradient/contrast. That, in fact, may be the biggest knock against Diafine. So again, make sure you have some strong or interesting lighting. I have another series of beach portraits (not ready to show, alas) that are all done in that early morning Equatorial light where it's so bright you can barely keep your eyes open. Diafine worked wonders on those Acros negs.
    I agree that it's great for harsh lighting, but I've never had a problem printing Diafine negs shot in even flat lighting. But the difference may, in part, be that I have always printed on a condenser enlarger. With a condenser enlarger I still end up printing negs from flat lighting on grade 3.5 or sometimes 4, but I've always been able to get good prints.

    Since I haven't had a problem with getting enough contrast I've never tried it, but I wonder if you could intensify flat Diafine negatives in selenium toner to get more contrast and print more easily on diffusion enlargers?

    In any case this seems very variable so I'd suggest anyone wanting to try it go ahead and do so and see if the results are good for your particular tastes and printing set up.

  5. #45

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,773
    In my experience Selenium can give you up to about a grade, but it really depends on how much density there is to begin with. If the negative is thin, or if it doesn't have much contrast to begin with, you might not get much expansion with Selenium. Sometimes even a slight boost can help, though.

    Although I'm not a Diafine user, if anyone has tried it with Acros and has some characteristic curve data I'd be interested in seeing it. I've always thought for those who like Diafine Acros might be a good candidate for general use with it (and other two-baths or compensating developers) since Acros inherently has very high highlight contrast.

  6. #46
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,916
    Quote Originally Posted by jim appleyard View Post
    It was indeed Donald Qualls. You have a good memory and he is missed. I happended to print out the page from this thread. Here's what it says:

    Give the film a thorough water rinse after the B bath, you can then put the film back in A for another 3 min, followed by another 3 in B. Fix and wash as normal.

    Shadow detail will surley be compromised--that's already a given, based on how you shot the film, and the results will be fairly grainy, but you'll get good midtones and quite printable negs if you didn't cheat on the metering even at 3200.

    He goes on to get EI 5000 from a mixture of HC-110 and Dektol. WOW!
    That was his "Super Soup" :

    http://silent1.home.netcom.com/Photo...tml#Super_Soup

    I've been meaning to try it with TMZ and Delta 3200 and see what it will do.

    Here's a recommendation for pushing Tri-X to 12500 by developing first in Diafine, then stand developing in Rodinal, and finally following up with Super Soup:

    http://www.digitaltruth.com/articles/pushing-tri-x.php

  7. #47
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,293
    Images
    302
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael R 1974 View Post
    In my experience Selenium can give you up to about a grade, but it really depends on how much density there is to begin with. If the negative is thin, or if it doesn't have much contrast to begin with, you might not get much expansion with Selenium. Sometimes even a slight boost can help, though.

    Although I'm not a Diafine user, if anyone has tried it with Acros and has some characteristic curve data I'd be interested in seeing it. I've always thought for those who like Diafine Acros might be a good candidate for general use with it (and other two-baths or compensating developers) since Acros inherently has very high highlight contrast.
    While I don't have any curves to show, my friend Andrew Moxom used Acros 35mm with Diafine and had some really great results with it. Good call on the combination of that film and Diafine.
    "Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank

    "Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman

    "...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh

  8. #48

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    mid-Missouri
    Shooter
    Pinhole
    Posts
    160
    Here's a question. Rollei and Maco IR film instructions indicate a pre-soak to remove the halation backing. What effect do you think this would have using Diafine as the developer? It seems to me the pre-soak would inhibit maximum A absorption. Develop longer or pass on the pre-soak and develop normally in Diafine? What are your thoughts? My experience so far with this developer is with Retro 80s, no pre-soak needed there.
    Steve

  9. #49
    ParkerSmithPhoto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    821
    Images
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Cole View Post
    Since I haven't had a problem with getting enough contrast I've never tried it, but I wonder if you could intensify flat Diafine negatives in selenium toner to get more contrast and print more easily on diffusion enlargers?
    Hey Rog,

    I have done selenium intensification just recently on some test negatives, and the results looked pretty good. Maybe closer to a 1/2 grade, though. These were HP5 in Diafine negs. TMY400 is supposed to intensify quite well in selenium, according to Mr. Sexton.
    Parker Smith Photography, Inc.
    Atlanta, GA

    Commercial & Fine Art Photography
    Portrait Photography

  10. #50
    Worker 11811's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,620
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Cole View Post
    ...I have always printed on a condenser enlarger. With a condenser enlarger I still end up printing negs from flat lighting on grade 3.5 or sometimes 4, but I've always been able to get good prints.
    Both my enlargers are condensers. (Beseler 23C & Omega D-II)

    I mixed it up last night. I've got my camera all loaded up with some Pan F+ (Set to 80.)
    We had a big snowstorm last night.

    I'm just waiting for the sky to clear up so I can go out and shoot!

    I'm pretty psyched to try this Diafine out!
    Randy S.

    In girum imus nocte et consumimur igni.

    -----

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

Page 5 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