Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,012   Posts: 1,524,694   Online: 732
      
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 34
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Fort Worth, Texas
    Posts
    229
    There may be something to that assertion, Sergio. The only two-bath type I use, Diafine, works very well with more traditional type films like Tri-X and FP4+ (despite the revisions) and not so well with T-Max films.

    I plan to try Diafine next with Efke R100 and APX 100.

    Some folks swear by the results from two-bath and divided developers, others swear at 'em. The tonal characteristics can sometimes be odd, especially lower tone and highlight separations. Midtones tend to be strong, shadow detail pretty good considering the speed boost Diafine gives some films, and compressed highlights. But the light has to be just right to get the most from films developed in Diafine. When it works the results are terrific.
    Three degrees of separation from Kevin Bacon.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    near Amsterdam, Holland
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    747
    Images
    9
    Hans,
    I am not sure, but I think it is prohibited in Holland to send chemicals by post. Not sure if this only applies to liquid chemicals, or also to powder chemicals, but maybe you could ask TPG.
    Good luck.
    Anne Marieke

  3. #23
    martinhughesireland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Ireland
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    265
    Images
    33
    I bought two of these reels from www.thephotoshop.ie two weeks ago so they have them in stock. Worked perfectly in my paterson tank.

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Southern USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,769
    Quote Originally Posted by sergio caetano View Post
    According to Minor White/Zakia/Lorenz in Zone System Manual: "Compaction development by two-solution method can no longer be recommended for modern thin emulsion films, because they don't absorb sufficient developer solution to continue developing in the second bath."
    Any experiences about that?
    While convenient these developers distort the tonal scale of the negative. Despite what some people think they should not be used as a general method of development.
    A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral.

    ~Antoine de Saint-Exupery

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    86
    In addition to Anchell & Troop's Film Developing Cookbook, check the late Barry Thornton's book - I think the title is Edge of Darkness - and there's still a website up that gives his divided developer formula. It's the D-23 variant quoted above with 6.5 g of metol, 85 g. sodium sulfite for Bath A and 12 g of metaborate for Bath B. I've used it and found a slightly longer time - 5.5 to 6 minutes for 35 Tri-X at ISO 400 - works for me. I've also used the Stoeckler variant in A&T's book and that works very well with rotary processing. As in the old cereal commercial - try it, you'll like it. But don't try it with something important.

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Escondido, California, USA
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    653
    Quote Originally Posted by Jorge Oliveira View Post
    Hans
    Diafine has two solutions - A and B.
    ...
    If you care, I can post the formula I'm using.
    Jorge O
    Yes, I'm interested in your formula, and would appreciate it if you would post it.
    BTW, your posting shows a date of 2003. Odd.

    Thanks,

    Mark Overton

  7. #27
    clogz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Rotterdam, The Netherlands
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,836
    Images
    114
    Unfortunately I have not heard from Jorge Oliveira since that time, so I can't help you there. However, I have used Barry Thornton's formula...and I must say...I like it a lot.

    Hans
    Digital is best taken with a grain of silver.

  8. #28
    mr rusty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    lancashire, UK
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    610
    Images
    95
    Amazing how old threads revive!!!

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Berlin
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    383

    Two-bath developers

    For the past ten years I have only used Delta 400 developed in a two-bath developer rated at EI 200. I see no reason to change/
    D.S. Allen, fotograf.

    Neue 3D Ausstellung/New 3D exhibition: www.german-fine-arts.com/berlin.html
    Neue Fotos/New Photos: http://shop.german-fine-arts.com/d-s-allen.html
    Vita/CV: www.german-fine-arts.com/allen.php

  10. #30
    skahde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    425
    Images
    4
    I did extensive testing and densitometry on Stöckler's as two bath seemed as a magic bullet for me at the time. From the theory, leaving out the second bath should leave the negatives blank or at least very thin. Been there, done that and it just lowers shaddow-density a bit. Diafine, in contrast, behaves just as written in the book and produces only a very faint negative when you leave out the second bath.

    My conlusion after going throug Stöckler's, Barry Thornton's, Diafine aso. is that they are inferior to a well controlled development in a conventional developer. I found a single bath as D76 1+1 has better contrast in shaddows and highlights and better overall definition.

    Tri-X in Diafine under low ligth is the only combination I still use and like.

Page 3 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