Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,849   Posts: 1,582,846   Online: 713
      
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 32
  1. #21
    Poohblah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    433
    I used to use D76 1+0 as my school provided until I found it was contaminated on 2 successive developments. I bought my own chemicals and I now use HC110. D76 was a bombproof developer; it tolerated variations in temp and time very well. I have found HC110 to be more finicky and it's taken me far more practice to get consistently printable negs from HC110 than from D76.

  2. #22
    Michel Hardy-Vallée's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Montréal (QC)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,351
    Images
    132
    As far as I could tell from my own experience, HC-110 depresses the midtones a little bit, which has for effect of giving a more punchy look (more contrast in the highlights, deeper shadows). XTOL has the opposite effect, of enhancing midtones. D-76 is midway.

    In 35mm, I don't like HC-110, because I find my photos "run out" of greys, so I use XTOL instead, but in MF with films such as Tri-X 320 or Plus-X, it works really well, as it enhances the natural character of these films.
    Using film since before it was hip.


    "One of the most singular characters of the hyposulphites, is the property their solutions possess of dissolving muriate of silver and retaining it in considerable quantity in permanent solution" — Sir John Frederick William Herschel, "On the Hyposulphurous Acid and its Compounds." The Edinburgh Philosophical Journal, Vol. 1 (8 Jan. 1819): 8-29. p. 11

    My APUG Portfolio

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Denver, Colorado
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    28
    BetterSense,
    Why don't you try Neofin Blue (Buetler's modified formula)? It is cheap to make, easy to mix, and lasts for a long time. If you want to make it yourself here is the formula:

    Solution A
    Metol 10 gr
    Sodium Sulfite 50 gr
    Water 750 cc
    Water to make 1000 cc

    Solution B
    Sodium Carbonate 50 gr
    Water 750 cc
    Water to make 1000 cc

    I shoot with 35 mm Arista EDU.Ultra 400 (Foma) at EI 200 with great resuts (personal preference)
    Developing time (personal testing): 9 minutes
    Dilution: 1 part of Solution A, 1 part of Solution B in 8 parts of water (1:1:8)

    For slower films, less developing time. Testing and patience, of course.
    I, personally, don't like the results on 120 and 4X5.

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Denver, Colorado
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    28
    Ooops, forgot something else, use water instead of stop bath

  5. #25
    Anscojohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,727
    Images
    13
    I shoot with 35 mm Arista EDU.Ultra 400 (Foma) at EI 200 with great resuts (personal preference)
    Developing time (personal testing): 9 minutes
    Dilution: 1 part of Solution A, 1 part of Solution B in 8 parts of water (1:1:8)

    For slower films, less developing time. Testing and patience, of course.
    I, personally, don't like the results on 120 and 4X5.[/QUOTE]
    *******
    The modified Beutler has always be considered an acutance developer. It sure is "grainy." But, if BetterSense is interested in trying D23 replenished with Dk25R, and wishes to try a Beutler-type developer, just use Dk25R exactly as stated above. It works, just fine, that way. How's that for convenience?
    John, Mount Vernon, Virginia USA

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Denver, Colorado
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    28
    Agreed!
    Stupid me. I keep forgetting about the wonderful and old D-23 and DK-25R replenisher. Great point!
    You are right about the 'grainy' results.

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    532
    How about hc110 with fomapan 100? I read somewhere that it is not a recommended combination.

    I did a did some development and densitometry experiments with that combination developed in a rotary processer at 75 degrees F, and my impressions were as follows: Development times were a uncomfortably short. Dilution could fix the development time problem, but then there was a risk of insufficient developer solution. Film speed was a bit low. D-max was also a bit low if one wanted to do a development scheme that would tame contrast to a usable level.

    How does that compare with other people's observation for that combination?

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    532
    One other note about foma 100. T-max developer seemed to work better.

  9. #29
    nicefor88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Bruxelles, Belgique
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    250
    Started in the 80s and this debate about D76 vs. HC110 is still going on...
    :rolleyes:

  10. #30
    Anscojohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,727
    Images
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by nicefor88 View Post
    Started in the 80s and this debate about D76 vs. HC110 is still going on...
    :rolleyes:
    *****
    Started in the 1960s.......
    John, Mount Vernon, Virginia USA

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