Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,545   Posts: 1,544,473   Online: 1060
      
Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 79
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,055
    Jay, are there any time or temp changes if using carbonate instead of TEA?

    BTW, I hope you realize that I was only pulling your leg with the evil scientist/slow down stuff. I really do appreciate the time and effort you've put into your formulas and your generosity in sharing them. Jim

  2. #12
    Loose Gravel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Santa Barbara, CA
    Posts
    921
    Images
    14
    I've not used TEA before, but I guess I will be soon. Is its freezing point a problem? When the developer is mixed, what is the freezing point then?
    Watch for Loose Gravel

  3. #13
    Lee L's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,244
    Quote Originally Posted by jdef
    I can post times/curves for the following films over the next few days, if anyone is interested:

    HP5+
    Forte 100
    Efke 100
    Efke 25
    Tri-X 400
    TXP 320
    TP
    Orwo NP 15

    Jay
    Jay,

    I, for one would appreciate your posting all that info. I know your results are really just a starting point for any other given photographer, but a place to start is always nice.

    Thanks,
    Lee

  4. #14
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,023
    Images
    65
    Jay, ruling out reading error, the bumps in that curve you posted are indicative of an anomaly. It may be that the blended emulsions in the film are not developing properly or that there is a change in tone of the silver and / or the stained image.

    I would warrant that a piece of that film processed in a 'standard' developer such as HC110 or D-76 would not have that bump.

    Whether this is a problem or just plain unimportant should be determined by the user after careful examination of the prints. But, it just cannot be ignored. It would be nice if you posted a comparison with some standard.

    PE

  5. #15
    fhovie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Port Hueneme, California - USA
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    1,247
    Images
    92
    I am already using PC-TEA - Other than images stain, can I expect any other differences? I was hoping PC-TEA would be as smooth as XTOL and it was not. I guess the lack of Sodium Sulfite will do that. I am very pleased with the results of Pyrocat - and had many happy years with PMK (although the grain was too big) I am wondering if this replaces PC-TEA as an improvement and if This will maky XTOL unneccesary.
    My photos are always without all that distracting color ...

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    3,268
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer
    Jay, ruling out reading error, the bumps in that curve you posted are indicative of an anomaly.
    If all Jay's film show this kind of behaviour in the graphs, it may indicate that the step wedge that he is using is not evenly spaced, causing the point to be misgraphed. (Not that this is really a problem, it is just that he needs to take it into account in the graphing of the points.) It may be a reading error on the x-axis, not the y-axis...

    Maybe it is not so much a hump in the Zone V region as the dip at Zone IX that is causing the concern of PE? Again, it could be caused by a mismatch of the step wedge and the plotting software defaults.

    Jay, does that web app that you are plotting with let you input the values for your step wedge, or are you forced to use the Zone step points that it shows on the x-axis?

    Kirk - www.keyesphoto.com

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Greenville, SC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    4,813
    Images
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by jdef
    The 1:100 dilution of 510-Pyro is roughly equivalent to a 2:2:100 dilution of Pyrocat HD, or 1:2:100 dilution of PMK, but far more active than either of those developers.

    Jay

    You say that for roughly equivalent dilutions 510-Pyro is much more active than Pyrocat-HD. I don't see it.

    In the curve you show for the development of HP5+ you have a negative density range of .025 - 1.74 with the 1:100 dilution, at six minutes of develoment at 70ºF, with constant agitation.

    I just looked at my development of HP5+ in Pyrocat-HD. At the same development temperature and constant agitation here is what my tests gave with the 2:2:100.

    5 minutes .12 - 1.56
    7 minutes .12 - 1.87

    Adding the additional B+F of 0.13 that you are getting with your film/developer combination (which I assume is caused by the higher B+F of the film itelf?) these DRs would be .25 - 1.69 (five minutes) and .25 - 2.00 (seven minutes). In other words, based on these results it appears to me that Pyrocat-HD is at least as active as 510-Pyro, if not slightly more so.

    So where am I going wrong?


    Sandy
    Last edited by sanking; 05-14-2005 at 12:31 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    3,268
    Sandy - you're using sheet film, right? I think Jay said he was using 220 roll film. That's probably the difference where the differnce in base densities comes from.

    The Pyrocat and 510-Pyro look to be pretty close in "activity". His developer was at a 100 times dilution for his run, yours was at 25 times (2+2=4 parts in to 100). So Pyrocat used more stock solution to get to the same ballpark. Of course, we could go and calculate on total amounts of materials in the final dilution and not worry about dilution amounts.

    Or, maybe Jay should test it a 1+90 dilution to get the activity crown.

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Greenville, SC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    4,813
    Images
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Kirk Keyes
    Sandy - you're using sheet film, right? I think Jay said he was using 220 roll film. That's probably the difference where the difference in base densities comes from.

    The Pyrocat and 510-Pyro look to be pretty close in "activity". His developer was at a 100 times dilution for his run, yours was at 25 times (2+2=4 parts in to 100). So Pyrocat used more stock solution to get to the same ballpark. Of course, we could go and calculate on total amounts of materials in the final dilution and not worry about dilution amounts.

    Or, maybe Jay should test it a 1+90 dilution to get the activity crown.

    Yes, I gathered that Jay was using either 35mm or roll film to test and assume that accounts for the considerable difference in B+F in our tests.

    Regarding the second point, I normally am only interested in comparing the actual amount of reducer (s) in the working formula, and if memory serves Jay usually does it that way as well. So we would be looking first at the total amount of pyrogallol + ascorbic acid + phenidone in a liter of working 510-Pyro, against the total amount of pyrocatechin + phenidone in Pyrocat-HD. Comparison of the dilution itself by itself is meaningless since the stock solutions don't have equivalent amounts of reducers.

    I should also add that the addition of a very small amount of ascorbic acid to the Pyrocat-HD formula provides a significant boost in energy. In fact, I describe a formula called Pyrocat+ on the AZO forum that takes advantage of ascorbic acid to provide this extra boost. The amount is almost miniscule, amounting to about 10ml of a 1% solution of ascorbic acid per liter of working solution, which is 0.01 g of ascorbic acid per liter, if my calculations are right.

    However, I am also beginning to think that we may need to re-consider the description of a high-definition developer. Typically the description of a high definition developer is one that contains a very low amount of sulphite, so as to prevent grain solvent action, and around 1.0 g per liter or less of reducer. However, when talking about these high energy formulas that result from the additional synergism between two or more reducers that are super-additive I don't think that the concept of 1.0 g or less of reducer per liter is valid. These solutions re-generate so effectively that in essence they limit the production of adjacency effects because it becomes very hard to get any local exhaustion of the developer, at least with normal and constant agitation. What this means is that the method of development, i.e. type of agitation, becomes highly important with this class of developers if our objective is maximum apparent sharpness through adjacency effects.

    Sandy
    Last edited by sanking; 05-13-2005 at 01:50 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    3,268
    Quote Originally Posted by sanking
    Regarding the second point, I normally am only interested in comparing the actual amount of reducer (s) in the working formula [...]

    So we would be looking first at the total amount of pyrogallol + ascorbic acid + phenidone in a liter of working 510-Pyro, against the total amount of pyrocatechin + phenidone in Pyrocat-HD.

    I should also add that the addition of a very small amount of ascorbic acid to the Pyrocat-HD formula provides a significant boost in energy.
    Yes - the affect of superaditivity, and then the combinations of more than two developing agents makes this all kind of like a numbers game when trying to determine "activity" levels.

    Perhaps we should just compare $/L of developing agent instead of total grams/L would be more interesting.

Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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