Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,228   Posts: 1,532,697   Online: 762
      
Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Winnipeg, MB, Canada
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    830

    pushing with Caffenol C

    Just wondering if it's possible to do a 2 or 3 stop push using Caffenol C (with Tri-X) - it looks like an interesting developer, and some searching seems to indicate there is a slight push with it.

    However, I can't find any info one way or the other on deliberate pushing, so any info is appreciated (times, good/bad sample results, etc).

    (I'm new to b/w developing, so I apologize if this is a stupid question - I also searched for pushing info with staining developers generally, but didn't come up with much.)

    Thanks!

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Sydney
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,344
    Images
    84
    I'd be surprised if you got any push from Caffenol devs based on my admittedly limited experience. My first attempt with Era 100 & basic caffenol was underexposed & underdeveloped, although done according to instructions. Based on the results I did a second roll rated at 25, added 25% extra each of the coffee & washing soda & developed for 30% more time. Results were excellent, well exposed & developed with good tonal range.
    However this indicates to me that Caffenol is a speed reducing developer. I know that adding ascorbic acid is meant to boost speed, but I heard it's only about 1 stop. So I reckon you'd be lucky to get box speed, let alone a push. Still, I look forward to hearing from those with more experience.

  3. #3
    htmlguru4242's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Sandy Hook, CT
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    973
    If memory serves, Donald Qualls was talking about it increasing speed in some of his tests. I believe that he was specifically using it with AGFA Copex, though.

    I don't believe it was deliberate, but check for his posts on it to find out.

    From my (also limited) experience, it doesn't seem like this is going to be great for pushing films. I don't really have any chemical or photographic explaination, it just seems this way. If anything, you'd have issues keeping the temperature in the right place. After the ~15 minutes needed for some films, its already cooled down significantly; for pushes, it'll be even colder and work slower.

    Try it (maybe with a water bath to keep it around its original temperature), and see what happens.

    Tri-X is a good choice for this experiment, as it handles a two or three stop push very well in certain developers.

  4. #4
    rwyoung's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Lawrence, KS
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    704
    Images
    40
    In my experience, Folgerol in a small tank, minimal agitation cost me about -2 1/2 stops (maybe a little less like -2 1/3). Seems to oxidize quickly and didn't work well in the Jobo with constant agitation.

    Next, Vit-C (not Folgerol-C) gave me about the same speed as D76 with Tri-X, or -1/3 stop. However that was in a Jobo and I have a feeling the constant agitation is speeding up the oxidation/exhaustion.

    I have not gone beyone one try of Folgerol-C as my reason for playing with Folgerol in the first place is its staining (sorta) properties. Folgerol-C leaves less stain.
    Don't sweat the petty things and don't pet the sweaty things! http://rwyoung.wordpress.com

  5. #5

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Vermont
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    29
    I know this thread is a little outdated, but I recently played a little with this subject and felt I might be able to contribute.

    I rolled a short roll of Tri-X and exposed the same scene at different EI's (100, 200, 400, 800) then developed it in caffenol-c (Price Chopper instant coffee 4 tsp, Arm & Hammer Washing soda 2.25 tsp, vitamin c 1 gram, 10 oz./300ml water at 67.5 F) for 15 minutes with continuous agitation for first 30 seconds and then 10 sec agitation every 4 minutes. The negatives actually look pretty good to the naked eye, but are somewhat fogged. My scanner can't seem to figure out where one exposure ends and the next begins. The 800 exposure appears to be the best of the lot. Previous to this test, I tried a few shots with HP5 at 200 and developed x 30 minutes and the negatives looked very over-developed.
    Roger

  6. #6

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Vermont
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    29

    caffenol-c and HP5

    Here's some examples of HP-5 rated at 200, 400, and 800 and developed in Caffenol-c for 15 minutes. Low resolution scans, flatbed, no post processing.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	cafc200.JPG 
Views:	70 
Size:	15.1 KB 
ID:	9232
    exposed as if ASA 200

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	cafc400.JPG 
Views:	66 
Size:	14.8 KB 
ID:	9233
    exposed as if ASA 400

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	cafc801.JPG 
Views:	84 
Size:	23.4 KB 
ID:	9234
    exposed as if ASA 800
    Roger

  7. #7
    Murray@uptowngallery's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Holland, MI
    Shooter
    Pinhole
    Posts
    1,028
    Those look good , Roger.
    Murray



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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