Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,208   Posts: 1,531,933   Online: 1111
      
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 26 of 26
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Düsseldorf, Germany
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    1,021
    Images
    1
    I have developed and printed close to 75 sheets of JC 400 (Classic 400/Fortepan 400) using Pyrocat HD and minimal agitation and the apparent sharpness gains from adjancey effects are startling (I made same scene, same exposure comparisons with gentle but continuous agitation). The results are not as pronounced as with Efke PL100 but nonetheless the gains are there.
    Francesco

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,879
    Images
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by jdef
    Fransesco, your results seem to be quite a departure from Sandy's. Sandy looked at his film under a high power microscope, how have you evaluated your results?

    Jay
    Jay, I can not speak for Sandy, but I have made similar comparative tests to the ones described by Francesco with similar results. Paraphrasing Francesco: Not as dramatic an improvement as one sees with Efke 100 but a a significant improvement nonetheless.

    I have several optical microscopes and I typically optically inspect these negs at magnifications of 3x to 60x. I would not call 3x to 60x high powered, but certainly adequate, since I can see the differences in the negatives and contact prints without magnification .
    Tom Hoskinson
    ______________________________

    Everything is analog - even digital :D

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,879
    Images
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by jdef
    ...As I've noted, this developer is producing extremely sharp negatives, undiluted, in less than two minutes development time.
    Jay
    Jay, basic sharpness is manufactured into the film. Adjacency effects and microcontrast effects (which are what I am talking about) are a function of the developer/developing process.
    Tom Hoskinson
    ______________________________

    Everything is analog - even digital :D

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Omaha, Nebraska
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,512
    Images
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by Ed Sukach
    Why use "short" times - less than 5 minutes?

    Different dilutions of a given developer will, in my experience, have a different effect on the film.
    A certain film in a certain developer at a given strength will "look" different (bear with me gang - I'm trying to keep it simple) than it would with the same developer at another strength. We may find an "improvement" - depending on what we are trying to do - with "R" developer at 1:50, 10 minutes - instead of 1:100 for 30 minutes (this whole thing depends on aesthetics ...), and a still greater improvement at 1:15 for 7. Extrapolating, the times for a still greater concentration could well decrease to something under 5 minutes with "X" dilution - and the idea of following the "Not less than 5 minutes" rule would limit that course of action.

    Developing time itself is of little concern to me - the characteristics of the negative ARE.

    I have a copy of an old Camera and Darkroom that contains an article about the differences that can be achieved in a negative through various dillutions of HC110. I'll have to find the article but the main point was that at least for HC 110 a better control of the negative was achieved through controlling dillutions rather then relying on increase/decrease of developing time to control expansion/contraction.
    "Fundamentally I think we need to rediscover a non-ironic world"
    Robert Adams

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Omaha, Nebraska
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,512
    Images
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by jdef
    Maybe I misinterpreted what you wrote:

    Sandy King-


    "1) Medium and high speed films (BPF, JandC Classic 200 and 400, TRI-X 320, HP5+, etc.) Very little if any adjacency effects with rotary processing, and only very slight adjacency effects with minimal and extreme minimal agitation.

    2) Slow fine grain films such as Efke PL 100, Ilford FP4+, Tmax-100, Efke 25. Very little if any adjacency effects with rotary processing, but considerable adjacency effects with minimal agitation, and very pronounced adjacency effects with extreme minimal agitation."

    I guess I interpreted "only very slight adjacency effects" with fast films, and "considerable/ very pronounced adjacency effects" with slow films to be a recommendation of slow films for that technique. My appologies.

    Jay
    Number 2 above is right on. I use HD with Delta 100 (35mm) and minimal agitation. I always found Delta 100 in XTOL 1-2 to make very sharp negs but I saw a noticable increase in sharpness with HD. I also found the JOBO processing with HD makes an inferior neg to Delta 100 in a JOBO.

    For sheets I have begun to go retro and experiment with HC110 and work at higher dillutions.
    "Fundamentally I think we need to rediscover a non-ironic world"
    Robert Adams

  6. #26
    Ed Sukach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Ipswich, Massachusetts, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    4,520
    Images
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Chinn
    I have a copy of an old Camera and Darkroom that contains an article about the differences that can be achieved in a negative through various dillutions of HC110. I'll have to find the article but the main point was that at least for HC 110 a better control of the negative was achieved through controlling dillutions rather then relying on increase/decrease of developing time to control expansion/contraction.
    I never meant to say anything else. I thought the "developing time being of no concern" statement covered that.

    All things being equal - here I would submit that they are not - it would be better to use a weaker strength and extend times - BUT!! a higher concentration - emphasizing concentration itself and forgetting about time - might be desirable for a certain effect.
    Carpe erratum!!

    Ed Sukach, FFP.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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