I can not entirely answer your question. I haven't used the Silvermax developer. But I've used the film a fair amount with Rodinal (stand). It's my favorite combination when I can afford the speed. The shadow detail is remarkable. And very sharp, very wide tonal range. Really lovely film.
When I was researching it, I came across a post somewhere, in which someone had tried it with Rodinal and with the Silvermax dev. The results were blown up 100 percent and it was very difficult to see any difference between the two. Or rather, the difference was negligible / inconsequential, a matter of taste if anything.
In short, Silvermax with Rodinal is a tough combo to beat. I'm not sure why Adox decided to create a separate Dev. It would be interesting to learn their reasoning.
Last edited by pstake; 08-15-2013 at 03:06 PM. Click to view previous post history.
Silvermax has become my main small format film and it works very well with the Silvermax developer. I haven't tried it with any other developer, and don't think I will since the dedicated one works fine.
Just yesterday developed my first silvermax in HC-110 (dil. B, 7min @20°C). Looks like APX-100 (as mentioned above by piu58), consistent with the similarity in the HD curves. Really "shines" in scenes with high dynamic range, combining sunlit and open shadow parts. Presumably the character of the images is more correlated with the emulsion than with the developer. Strange statement found on the fotoimpex site: "SILVERMAX is only available as a 35mm film and will not be manufactured in other formats"; a pity, might change if sales reach sufficient volume.
Looking at the digitaltruth page cited by Ricardo above is educational in terms of Silvermax in SM vs Rodinal. But one thing that caught my eye is the general amount of detritus that we see on the images, for example, on the window screens and such. What are odd white spots, and the sort of fracturing that's visible? I've seen such before in some of my negatives and have wondered if I was seeing mild reticultation along with defective (i.e., not uniformly coated) emulsion. Is that the fundamental, basic structure of the film we're seeing there? I would have hoped for something much more uniform.