Harvey's 777

[Colin Graham]

That would be Vienna, mein Freund.
;-)


Harry Lime

Vienna, of course! I thought Berlin sounded wrong. Thanks

[Harry Lime]

Thanks everyone for your input. I ordered the two tanks this morning and hope to mix up my first batch as soon as they get here.


Cheers,

Harry Lime

[c6h6o3]

Thanks everyone for your input. I ordered the two tanks this morning and hope to mix up my first batch as soon as they get here.


Cheers,

Harry Lime

PM me and I'll give you some tips on mixing it, which I do a little differently than the method in the packaged instructions.

[Gerald Koch]

777 contains paraphenylenediamine which can cause severe dermatitis. Be sure to wear nitrile (not latex) rubber gloves when working with it. I've had a reaction to a color developing agent (a substituted paraphenylenediamine) and it is VERY unpleasant! Intense itching for 2 weeks and blisters the size of peas.

[Harry Lime]

>

777 contains paraphenylenediamine which can cause >severe dermatitis. Be sure to wear nitrile (not latex) rubber gloves when >working with it. I've had a reaction to a color developing agent (a substituted >paraphenylenediamine) and it is VERY unpleasant! Intense itching for 2 weeks >and blisters the size of peas.

Thanks for the heads up.

Now, here is a question for thsoe who actually use this stuff. Is this developer really worth all of the extra trouble? It's more toxic than the average soup, needs to be used at 75F etc.

I'm not expecting a miracle, but what is the incentive, advantage or look it delivers, that makes it worthwhile?

What motivated me to give it a try was it's implied ability to deliver delicate highlights and a very long tonal scale, along with fine grain and a unique glow.



Thanks

Harry Lime

[Gerald Koch]

Published photographs made with this developer look very, very nice and do seem to have a certain glow. But I'm not sure that this couldn't be done with another developer.

[df cardwell]

It does not need to be used at 75 degrees

Glycin's signature is a long, unblocked curve which makes infinite highlights possible, in other words, glow

There are a few glycin developers, they share this characteristic

The fine grain, and note it is the CLASSIC fine grain: small, distinct, and regular as opposed to both clumpy grain and mushy grain, is a result of the very low pH the developer works at. This is possible due to the energizing effect of PPD on Glycin.

D23 works at a similar pH, but the grain is quite mushy my comparison.

PPD + Glycin, used in the replenishment method, with intermittent agitation, makes a unique landscape of local contrast. Crawley has written a great deal about this, Troop acknowledges it in his Cookbook. Yet Crawley acknowledges that it is "Speculative Sensitometry", meaning the process is very complex and while it is dependable and pleasing, hard to explain with 100% certainty is going on.

I disagree it is more toxic than an average soup. But I don't drink Rodinal, don't develop color in my bare hands, and I wipe up spills.

Most developers common today are very similar and were made to be used in a similar fashion, and to meet today's fashion in sensitometric standards. To get results different from D-76, you don't try D23, HC110, or even Xtol. Get away from a high sulfite developer and you can get different results. But to get the most from a film and developer combination, you have to use it correctly.

Glycin/PPD developers want to make a higher density negative than we assume is natural and correct. If you are willing to see what happens, than you may very well be overjoyed with the results. If you are terrified of letting your densitometer know you are cheating on it, maybe you better not.

My experience and taste convince me there is more 'magic' in this type of developer than in Pyro. But I'm not much of a follower.

.

[jim appleyard]

Published photographs made with this developer look very, very nice and do seem to have a certain glow. But I'm not sure that this couldn't be done with another developer.

Agreed. I think we tend to forget sometimes that there is also lighting and composition that go into the making of a good photo.

[c6h6o3]

It does not need to be used at 75 degrees

It does need, however, to be used at at least 72 degrees F or it will dump the shadows unmercifully. 75 - 78 degrees is optimal. I've used it at 82 degrees with splendid results, but the difference between 72 and 70 degrees is the difference between fine negatives and throwaways.

[MMfoto]

For God's sake. All this speculation is killing me. Can anyone identify a "bit" of Glycin under a microscope. Or is there a test that can be run to determine if there is indeed Glycin in 777?