Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,946   Posts: 1,585,862   Online: 1029
      
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 42
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Western Masstts. USA
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    273
    [QUOTE=Anscojohn;825823]
    Quote Originally Posted by Bruce Osgood View Post
    In the photo community there is mixed understanding regarding ratio ( and +. Some would say that 1:1 would be undiluted, raw, neat, whatever -- stock solution.
    *******
    This is bullwinkle.
    If 1+1=1:0, then you have the logical definition of bullwinkle. Quite elegant, but still bullwinkle.
    "Get over it."

  2. #22
    Mick Fagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Melbourne Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,850
    Images
    29
    Greg, D76 as I understand it, was originally developed for deep tank processing using a replenishing system. The replenishing system is quite simple really; you develop a film, and then add something like 20ml of replenisher.

    I worked in a place where we had deep tank and roller transport B&W baths with automatic replenishment systems. They were great if you were continuously developing film; say about 10 rolls or sheets an hour day in day out. If you developed 15 rolls/sheets in the first hour of the day, then nothing until late afternoon, the bath will have changed a bit and the next roll/sheet through will be developed to a different strength.

    Consistency is what it is all about and one way for the amateur or very small user to remain consistent, is to use one shot processing. This can become a little expensive so many people dilute the developer with equal parts stock solution and water, or as you now know, 1+1. Another dilution often used and quoted is 1+3, another dilution used but hardly ever quoted, is 1+2.

    With each different developing strength, you will notice a difference in your film. I prefer stock solution for portraits, especially if using very high contrast lenses. For most general work I prefer 1+1, with some landscape work and trying to get as much apparent sharpness as possible, I use 1+3.

    I have been using D76 almost exclusively for about 25 years now for all of the different films I develop, in that time I have come to know and understand pretty much what I will get when I fire the shutter. I do one thing different to you; I mix the developer from raw chemicals, which is something you may wish to think about further down the track.

    Doing this allows you to have control in ensuring you always have fresh stock solution in amounts that are compatible with your throughput. For instance, instead of mixing up 3.8 litres of stock solution you can mix up 1 litre or 1.5 litres or any amount deemed necessary for your throughput. The really good part though is that your costs per litre remain constant, you don’t have to juggle the possibility of buying the bigger kit to make it cheaper, then realise you are only able to utilise ½ of the kit before it starts to go off.

    To mix your own chemicals is easy, you only require a set of scales, a stirring rod and some washable plastic beakers, and then you’re off. You also require some stock of chemicals!

    One last thing, I would suggest that whatever you do, use metric all the way from start to finish.

    Mick.

  3. #23
    fotch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    SE WI- USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,230
    [quote=Bruce Osgood;825754]In the photo community there is mixed understanding regarding ratio ( and +. Some would say that 1:1 would be undiluted, raw, neat, whatever -- stock solution.

    How silly.
    Items for sale or trade at www.Camera35.com

  4. #24
    Greg Heath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Racine, Wisconsin, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    302
    Images
    64
    Thanks Mick for the long post and excellent descriptions. Many thanks for helping me understand. Gosh, I love this forum.

  5. #25
    Anscojohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,727
    Images
    13
    Gosh, I love this forum.[/QUOTE]

    ***********


    So do I.
    John, Mount Vernon, Virginia USA

  6. #26
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,439
    Images
    148
    This one's been discussed a few times:

    Quote Originally Posted by rternbach View Post
    Agreed. In discussing ratios: 1 to 1, is 1:1, is equal volumes, is 1 part A and one part b, is 1+1. 1:0 is what it says it is.
    In general 1:100 was traditionally always taken to be 1 part diluted to 100 or 1+99. or put more simply there's 1 part of chemical in 100 parts of final dilute solution. Unfortunately some small Photo companies started using 1:2.1:10 etc for dev & fix dilution which was ambiguous.

    Ilford dilutions are usually 1+4, 1+9, 1+19 etc following a logical 5, 10, 20 ratios.

    In practice most of us use developers like Rodinal at1:50 rather than 1+50 starting with say 20ml dev and diluting tat to a litre, effectively actually giving 1+49 and I suspect most do the same with devs like Pyrocat HD taking 10ml A, 10ml B and making up to 1 iltre with water, so although written as 1+1+100 in practice its actually 1+1+98, after all how many of us use accurate measure that will read 1020ml

    Ian

  7. #27
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    The ratio crud only comes in to play depending on what one is measuring the ratio OF.

    For instance, ratio of developer amount to OVERALL amount (USELESS).
    vs.
    Ratio of developer amount to water amount (USEFUL).

    Really, the first one I find to be totally useless and who really needs that measurement when we're always dealing with water? It's of no benefit to me or anyone else to have a ratio delivered as A:A+B. It's many times more intuitive to have it stated as A:B, that is A vs. B. Why the former got any use whatsoever in photography is a mystery to me, but I firmly support people dropping it's use altogether. The '+' sign was no doubt repurposed to convey A vs B (where B is almost always water) due to the ambiguity created earlier.
    Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.

    http://www.flickr.com/kediwah

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Western Masstts. USA
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    273
    Quote Originally Posted by Mick Fagan View Post
    ...To mix your own chemicals is easy, you only require a set of scales, a stirring rod and some washable plastic beakers, and then you’re off. You also require some stock of chemicals!...
    Mick, thanks for your expertise. Which chemicals go into your D76? I have read different descriptions of the formula.

    Best,

    Rudy
    "Get over it."

  9. #29
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.

    http://www.flickr.com/kediwah

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Western Masstts. USA
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    273
    Quote Originally Posted by clayne View Post
    clayne,

    Thanks for the url. It's great that there's so much information available on D76.

    Best,

    Rudy
    "Get over it."

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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