Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,328   Posts: 1,537,159   Online: 836
      
Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 85
  1. #21
    gainer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    3,726
    Images
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    I ask this question politely again:

    Is there any proof of the image structure yielded by this developer formulation? Any sharpness, grain or speed comparisons? If not, then it is just a developer, and may be no better than using Dektol for your film.

    Sorry Patrick, but the question must be asked and asked politely and with respect. But to date, I have seen no proof that this and your other developers are anything but developers, some with long shelf lives.

    PE
    Don't be sorry. My only demonstration so far was in the Borax article. It is very difficult to show sharpness and grain by digital transmissions, especially when there are limitations on the size packet one can send. I can, and have on occasion, digitized a small part of a darkroom print. Anyway, there is no financial motive for me to "sell" any formula I propose. I only propose one to demonstrate some experiment or to help someone I think may be helped by it.

    If I were trying to sell a bill of goods, the buyer would certainly be entitled to a valid demonstration of its value. If you want only to show that Gadget Gainer is just a nut with nothing to give, then mix up a batch and test it. It's cheap and easilly made. I did not claim it to be good for stand development, so if it fails there, don't hold it against me. I have not tried it as a stand developer myself, and do not plan to.

    So, don't be sorry, but do test it for yourself as you would any commercial developer before telling others it cannot be any good.

    I will say that the grain from Arista 400 Supreme in a super B digital print made from a scan of a darkroom 8x10 print is not visible at 12" viewing distance. Resolution is as good as the 50 mm Canon 1.8 lens provides. I used 0.5 f-stop exposure bracketting with my test rolls and could see very little difference in exposure scale from one shot to the next when each frame was of normal contrast.

    I'm going to try to illustrate some of this by a photograph in my next post.
    Gadget Gainer

  2. #22
    gainer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    3,726
    Images
    2

    Sharpness, grain, gradation of SPF-3 PCB

    These have had no digital modification except cropping.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails SPF full.jpg   SPF Partial.jpg  
    Gadget Gainer

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    982
    Quote Originally Posted by Murray Kelly View Post
    .........John-S - I think you are right and I will chase it up - it costs almost $100/4 L. Someone else has 25L for $200 but even if I live to be as old as my father I couldn't justify it for the next 20 years! Maybe some Oz folk might like to help part it out?
    .........
    Murray
    Actrol in Moorabbin (Vic) today quoted $52 for a 5Litre tin. Three in stock. Actrol in Queensland should be able to do the same, one would think!

    25L would take a while to use, like my 25kg of potassium carbonate!
    Last edited by john_s; 06-25-2009 at 01:19 AM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: Irrelevant addition.

  4. #24
    Murray Kelly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Brisbane, QLD. Australia
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    418
    Quote Originally Posted by john_s View Post
    Actrol in Moorabbin (Vic) today quoted $52 for a 5Litre tin. Three in stock. Actrol in Queensland should be able to do the same, one would think!

    25L would take a while to use, like my 25kg of potassium carbonate!
    That sounds better. Do you supply your own container? I haven't rung up yet - tomorrow is Friday so will probably give them a go then.
    Don't want to part out a kilo of K2CO3?

    Patrick, that looks pretty good to my eye for a 400 ISO film. What's with the SPF-3 PCB label? Let me guess - it's the 3rd iteration? Or, the SPF-3 is the solvent?
    Looking at the MSDS of brake fluid leads me to think it might be a better substitute than anti-freeze because there is less by way of additives that will clash with our chemistry. I have some phenidone in BF and it's keeping fine.

    Oh Ron - thanks for the HU on the CuSO4/MgSO4 dehydration - it was just something that came up in Wiki with pictures to help, even, on dehydrating organics and I could see that there was some merit in the idea. Seems to me any water is ultimately going to give a headache with the metol. Pat's AA might protect it.
    I 'resurected' some quite brown metol with a hefty dose of ascorbic acid - returning it to a clear solution. Unscientific? Yes. Interesting, tho.

    Murray

  5. #25
    eclarke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    New Berlin, Wi
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    1,949
    Images
    71
    "I 'resurected' some quite brown metol with a hefty dose of ascorbic acid - returning it to a clear solution. Unscientific? Yes. Interesting, tho."
    Yes, interesting..how much in how much in what exact solution?..Evan Clarke

  6. #26
    Murray Kelly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Brisbane, QLD. Australia
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    418
    Evan! I was making the point that the AA could easily be protecting the metol in pyrocat-MC as Patrick suggested. He even made the comment that it might be able to reverse its oxidation. So, I tried a little of this and that and it lost the brown and went back to clear, prompting my comment that this was an interesting phenomenon. No more. I even extended the idea to the glycol stock but to no avail. It steadfastly stayed horrible brown.
    Anyway you use Germain's brew! Glycin forever. Remember?
    Murray

  7. #27
    eclarke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    New Berlin, Wi
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    1,949
    Images
    71
    Quote Originally Posted by Murray Kelly View Post
    Evan! I was making the point that the AA could easily be protecting the metol in pyrocat-MC as Patrick suggested. He even made the comment that it might be able to reverse its oxidation. So, I tried a little of this and that and it lost the brown and went back to clear, prompting my comment that this was an interesting phenomenon. No more. I even extended the idea to the glycol stock but to no avail. It steadfastly stayed horrible brown.
    Anyway you use Germain's brew! Glycin forever. Remember?
    Murray
    I got excited that it might be the glycol stock which was reversed. I use the Germain but I always expose 2 sheets of the same photo so I have lots of developing options, the chemistry is almost more fun than the photography. And yes, Glycin forever, hopefully. I get the shakes when worrying that PF could quit making it....Evan

  8. #28
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,972
    Images
    65
    Patrick;

    While the examples "look" fine, there is no reference. I have nothing to compare your results to. This is my continuing problem with this ad hoc developer design.

    At the present time, I face a long arduous walk to design a new HA developer maximizing grain, speed and sharpness. I cannot do it without making a valid comparison to something like D76 and Microdol X as an example, or Xtol. So, I hope you see my point. You prove nothing, but the fact that the developer develops.

    Dektol might do as good as what you have shown, but without an exact comparison who would know?

    Sorry.

    PE

  9. #29
    Murray Kelly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Brisbane, QLD. Australia
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    418
    Quote Originally Posted by eclarke View Post
    I got excited that it might be the glycol stock which was reversed. I use the Germain but I always expose 2 sheets of the same photo so I have lots of developing options, the chemistry is almost more fun than the photography. And yes, Glycin forever, hopefully. I get the shakes when worrying that PF could quit making it....Evan
    It was a little of the stock I used. And I emphasise the 'little'. It cleared as I dropped and watched some go into the AA solution. No more than that. Patrick has said before that one needs something like (IIRC) 40 times the amount of AA to metol to regenerate it predictably in a developer. Or was that phenidone? Sorry to be so vague.
    But yes, I repeat, it was the brown stock metol.
    Murray

  10. #30
    gainer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    3,726
    Images
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    Patrick;

    While the examples "look" fine, there is no reference. I have nothing to compare your results to. This is my continuing problem with this ad hoc developer design.

    At the present time, I face a long arduous walk to design a new HA developer maximizing grain, speed and sharpness. I cannot do it without making a valid comparison to something like D76 and Microdol X as an example, or Xtol. So, I hope you see my point. You prove nothing, but the fact that the developer develops.

    Dektol might do as good as what you have shown, but without an exact comparison who would know?

    Sorry.

    PE
    Dektol, purchased or home made, is more expensive. I'm sure it is a close relative to, if not the same as the MQ I used to do my first Verichrome when I was 12.

    I don't see any point to your argument. If you don't like the results you get with a particular formula for anything, you can compare it with anything you want and show it to the public. If I didn't like the results I got, I would not have presented it to others to begin with. If I did make a comparison, it would be with one of the variants of D-76, or better yet, to XTOL, but not to Dektol.

    So now you have a possible competitor in S(ave)P(hotographers)F(ormulary)-3,is that it? And you call it "ad hoc" because you think there was no theory involved? You really should compare it with your HA developer when it's ready. (I hope the HA means "High Acutance".)
    Gadget Gainer



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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