Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,685   Posts: 1,548,596   Online: 1288
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 27
  1. #11
    lee
    lee is offline
    lee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Fort Worth TX
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    2,913
    Images
    8
    not anymore. I use Kodak Rapid fix without the hardner and have never had a problem. I think you are correct with that statement about overall stain opposed to the image stain.

    lee\c

  2. #12
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,319
    Images
    20
    One issue, if you use PMK with 35mm at 1:2:100, you'll want to use 16 oz. of developer per roll (twice as much as you would normally use), or it might be exhausted before development is complete. You might be able to use the normal volume at 1:2:50, but I haven't tried it.
    flickr--http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidagoldfarb/
    Photography (not as up to date as the flickr site)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com/photo
    Academic (Slavic and Comparative Literature)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com

  3. #13
    Aggie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    So. Utah
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,925
    Images
    6
    ..

  4. #14
    Les McLean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Northern England on the Scottish border
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,610
    Jorge,

    I tried the two bath but I have heard that the single bath method produces decent results.
    "Digital circuits are made from analogue parts"
    Fourtune Cookie-Brooklyn May 2006

    Website: www.lesmcleanphotography.com

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    South Pasadena, CA USA
    Posts
    470
    I did an interesting little thing last night.

    I looked at an ABC negative Michael Smith made for me next to a PMK (rollo) negative I made of the same subject, and an Xtol negative I made of a similar subject a few years ago. All were HP5. Differences...

    1) The ABC negative is GRAINY. It's like looking at 1600 asa film. BUT, because it is only to be contact printed, the grain doesn't matter. It was also contrastier and held much more detail in highlights and shadows than the other two. Really amazing, except for the grain.

    2) The PMK negative...same film, same exposure...was less grainy and appeared to have much less contrast and range, although I think the green stain makes this hard to determine.

    3) The XTOL negative was correctly exposed and developed and looked thin compared to the other two. There was a pretty remarkable difference in the areas where negative density would begin to block up compared to the other two. In other words, the PMK and especially the ABC had much more detail holding in much more density, etc.

    I have to print these to really see, of course, but I think I will end up concluding that ABC really is best for contact printing, PMK really does hide grain while still outperforming Xtol and will be best for enlarging, and Xtol may be best for someone else.

    For what it's worth..
    dgh
    David G Hall

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Nuernberg, Germany
    Posts
    214
    Don't jump to any conclusions without making prints first David. After all, the print is the final product and not the negative, right?
    I've developed many HP5 negs in ABC, PMK, and Split D23. Interestingly enough, the split D23 negs appeared thin by comparision, but, when making enlargements from 120 roll film as well as some of my 8X10" contacts, those thin looking negs produced wonderful prints.
    - William Levitt

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    South Pasadena, CA USA
    Posts
    470
    William,

    ABSOLUTELY I will make prints before really coming to conclusions. I was intending only to reference grain, not much of anything else. Honestly I have never been good at reading negatives, and pyro stains make that worse.

    MY comment was a casual, non-scientific, "hmm" kind of comparison with a gifted phtographer who had also just finished the Michael and Paula workshop.

    dggh
    David G Hall

  8. #18
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,319
    Images
    20
    It's particularly important to judge from the print with pyro, because the effect of the stain on the paper is quite different from what one is used to looking at on the negative. Pyro negs are often contrastier than they look, and there can be detail that shows up in the print that isn't obvious on the neg.
    flickr--http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidagoldfarb/
    Photography (not as up to date as the flickr site)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com/photo
    Academic (Slavic and Comparative Literature)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Posts
    132
    I have been using staining developers of various sorts for over 10 years. PMK is my standard--it is reliable, keeps for a very long time, and I have my times figured out for every film I currently use. I have used ABC in the past with excellent results, but only with Tri-X sheet film in 8x10. I know that Gordon Hutchings has said that PMK negs should look a little thin, but I have gravitated toward very full development of all my negatives. This way I can use them for both historical processes and standard silver-gelatin printing.

    I'd like to put in a plug for Pyrocat-HD. I did some cost comparisons 3 years ago and found that Pyrocat-HD is the cheapest developer you can use, costing about half as much as PMK per liter of working solution. The results are hard to distinguish from PMK, when printing on VC papers. With graded papers, a Pyrocat neg will require less exposure than an equivalent PMK neg. Its only failing is that it does not have good keeping qualities compared to PMK, so you have to mix smaller quantities more often.

    I friend of mine formulated a metol/glycin/pyrocatechin developer similar to DiXactol, and he swears by it, claiming finer grain and beautiful gradation. But when I tried it the results were not nearly as good as I get with PMK. In my opinion, DiXactol is over-priced. The components are quite cheap, so you are paying a premium for the "secret" formula.

  10. #20
    lee
    lee is offline
    lee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Fort Worth TX
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    2,913
    Images
    8
    Hi Ed,
    Is the Pyrocat-HD the formula that Sandy King uses for his alternative processes i.e., carbon printing?


    lee\c

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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