Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,741   Posts: 1,515,559   Online: 1032
      
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 37

Thread: 2-bath question

  1. #11
    Harry Lime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    465
    Thanks guys.

    el wacho, I'll look up fx4.

    John, how clear is the film base around the sprockets of your developed and dried negatives?
    Mine are looking a little dense at 4min (circa 20 C) in each bath. Maybe I should bump up the time in bath B a little?

    thanks

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    1,112
    Mine is now 12 months old, the 'A' kept in a sealed bottle topped up with inert gas. It still works OK. I get EI 64 sun/shade with Delta 100.
    www.awh-imaging.co.uk/barrythornton/2bath2.htm

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Florida
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Lime View Post

    John, how clear is the film base around the sprockets of your developed and dried negatives?
    Mine are looking a little dense at 4min (circa 20 C) in each bath. Maybe I should bump up the time in bath B a little?

    thanks
    There's very little base fog at all. They are about as clear as you get. I find the developer is very clean working.

    John
    pictorialplanet.com
    John
    www.pictorialplanet.com

  4. #14
    Harry Lime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    465
    Quote Originally Posted by el wacho View Post
    hi Harry,

    not really with metol alone as it loses anywhere between 1/2 - 1 stop of speed.

    for 400speed films i use mr crawley's fx4 modified - without the borax in bath A and sod. sulfite lowered to 80g/L. i agitate in bath A (B bath is 12g/L of borax ) 4min in A and 2min no agitation in B - i consistently get 2/3-1stop gain. since it's mostly handheld i use sunny f16 and don't make notes but have been always happy with shadows. fx4 recipe can be found at jackspcs.com

    hope this helps.
    Thanks for the answers, but a few more questions:

    If I read this correctly; are you saying that because Thornton's 2-Bath uses methol, that I won't get 400asa out of Tri-X?

    How do you then get a speed boost, if there is Metol in fx4? Probably because the amount is so small and it's mainly acting as a solvent?

    Crawley's fx4 (as a 2-bath)

    Bath A

    Metol 2.5g/l
    Hydroquinone 5g/l
    Phenidone .025g/l
    Sodium Sulfite 80g/l
    Potassium Bromide 1g/l

    Bath B
    12g/L Borax


    thanks for all the help. I'm just venturing in to mixing my own solutions. I like it.
    Last edited by Harry Lime; 02-23-2008 at 04:14 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    central anatolia, Turkey
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    411
    Images
    16
    hi Harry,

    i suspect that it's the phenidone/hydroquinone combination that yields the better than box speed results. there are other factors such as agitation ( from what i understand, shadows are established in the first minute or two of a development regime ) etc. as far as i know, the metol doesn't act as a solvent, not inthe sense that the sodium sulfite does. hope this helps.

  6. #16
    Harry Lime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    465
    thanks. I'll give fx4 a try

    cheers

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Willamette Valley, Oregon
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    3,684
    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Lime View Post
    thanks. I'll give fx4 a try cheers
    Ever consider 2-bath with water the second?
    Back and forth and back and forth. Perhaps a
    stock D-23 A-bath. Tempted myself. Dan

  8. #18
    Harry Lime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    465
    Interesting observation. I'm 8 rolls in to my second 1 liter batch and noticed that I get fuller developed negatives, if I only agitate once at the beginning of bath B for 3 seconds, followed by a very gentle second agitation halfway through development (3:30 min total).

    With more agitation (first 5 sec, 5 sec/minute) the negatives were coming out less developed.

    Over the past few days I read some where that too much agitation can literally rinse the absorbed developer out of the negative. There could be some truth to that.

    In any case I'm very impressed by the results. The Tri-X (400) negatives display good acutance, but are not overly grainy. Highlights and shadow detail are impressive. I did a test and deliberate exposed a sunset shot incorrectly by +/- 2 stops and got a useable negative from each exposure.

    Best of all the results are very consistent from roll to roll and the process is basically idiot proof. It's also nice to have a little more slack in terms of development temperature.

    I'm sold.

  9. #19

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    central anatolia, Turkey
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    411
    Images
    16
    great stuff Harry. glad to hear its going well.

    which A bath are you talking about?

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Sarasota, FL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    921

    Great work, Harry!

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Lime View Post
    Interesting observation. I'm 8 rolls in to my second 1 liter batch and noticed that I get fuller developed negatives, if I only agitate once at the beginning of bath B for 3 seconds, followed by a very gentle second agitation halfway through development (3:30 min total).

    With more agitation (first 5 sec, 5 sec/minute) the negatives were coming out less developed.

    Over the past few days I read some where that too much agitation can literally rinse the absorbed developer out of the negative. There could be some truth to that.

    In any case I'm very impressed by the results. The Tri-X (400) negatives display good acutance, but are not overly grainy. Highlights and shadow detail are impressive. I did a test and deliberate exposed a sunset shot incorrectly by +/- 2 stops and got a useable negative from each exposure.

    Best of all the results are very consistent from roll to roll and the process is basically idiot proof. It's also nice to have a little more slack in terms of development temperature.

    I'm sold.
    What did you determine was the best ISO for Tri-X?

    Great observation about loss of image with excessive agitation. I advocate just a hard rap or two on the countertop and then let it sit, unagitated for two baths. Anything else partially or completely negates what a two bath is for.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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