Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,901   Posts: 1,584,442   Online: 945
      
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    North Carolina
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    46

    FG 7 or other one shot developers

    Hello forum. I'm currently using Arista liquid developer to process my Arista or Tri X film. At the moment I'm wanting to stay with a liquid one shot developer and would like input from folks who have used FG 7. Any thoughts, likes and dislikes welcome. BTW, I do like Rodinal and plan on using it at times. Not that I don't like the Arista developer, just wanting input on other options. Other films I normally shoot are Tri X at box speed and iso 200, pulled. Thanks.
    "Fall Seven Times, Stand Up Eight"

  2. #2
    greybeard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Northern California
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    377
    Images
    6
    hovis,

    For some years, back in the late 60s, I used FG7 pretty much exclusively. If memory serves, when used as a one-shot, it was diluted with a sodium sulfite solution (for increased acutance, or prevention of fog, I'm not sure). It was a decent enough developer, but I have settled on HC-110 and like it just fine. (The stuff keeps practially forever, and a modest-sized bottle goes a long way; I use it as a one-shot for consistency and because I don't use a lot of film.)

    If you should find yourself doing any kind of controlled comparison between FG7 and anything else, please post the results. I'm a little surprised that a minor-brand, general-purpose, 40+ years old formula is still on the market, so it must have more to recommend it than I can remember!

  3. #3
    Anscojohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,727
    Images
    13
    I used FG-7 considerably in the early 1970s and found it flexible, versitle, and economical. I also used in through the 1980s for BW copy negs of vintage photographs, using it at 1:30, with sodium sulfite, on KB14, mostly.

    At present, I have two new (plastic) bottles and plan to revisit an old friend, but have not yet gotten around to it. Unfortunately, the data sheets I took from those neat glass bottles have long disappeared. Some may remember the charts with film groupings in roman numerals, with dilutions and times, both with and without sodium sulfite. I wrote to the current owner of FG-7 for their free data sheets, but they are not half as much fun as the old ones. It can be used as a non-solvent developer for greatest sharpness with fine grain films, and with 9 % sodium sulfite for faster films. Somewhere in my notes I have an article by Bill Pierce about using it with TRI-X.
    I always found it less "finicky" than Rodinal. Oh, yes, and you can process up to three batches of film in the same working soup, if done the same day, without sodium sulfite, and increase 10% for each batch.
    Last edited by Anscojohn; 07-28-2009 at 09:29 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    John, Mount Vernon, Virginia USA

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Cambridge, MA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    895
    I used FG-7 almost exclusively the first year I developed film and have processed at least 50 or 60 rolls of 135 and 120 with it.

    It's pretty good stuff, overall. A bit sharper than D-76 1:1, a bit grainier (I quickly dropped the practiice of using the 9% SS soluton), and the speed is maybe 1/2 stop better than D-76. And as PQ developers go, it's quite easy to control contrast with. It's not expensive, either.

    If it's got a weakness it's that it's shelf life is not purpoted to be very good. Nevertheless, if you are going to process a bunch of film rolls soon after opening it, it's a good choice.
    Digital Photography is just "why-tech" not "high tech"..

  5. #5
    Gim
    Gim is offline

    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    400
    I have the Falcon Scientific sheet from years ago showing the dilutions etc for different films with the roman numerals and all that stuff. My sheet is a photo copy from Falcon with a little hand written "post it?" note...yes they seemed to be nice people back in the day. I can copy it and mail to anybody that is interested.

    I used this for quite a few years, late 60s, 70's and really liked it. Then it got hard to find (before internet) and the local photo joint started putting new price stickers on really old bottles. There were also rumors that the shelf life had deteriorated somewhat. I liked the stuff and would probably still use it if the supply had not been interrupted by corporate buyouts or whatever. Now I use pyrocat. I miss FG7 but I'm not going back.
    Best,
    Jim

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Los Alamos, NM
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,075
    I used FG-7 a quite a bit during the 70s. It's convenient and effective - an easy to use liquid. They list several variants of dilutions and adding sulfite for various purposes. Most of my experience was with plain vanilla dilutions. It was OK, but in later comparisons, I found I liked D-76 a lot more. HC-110 is probably more to my tates as a liquid.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    204
    I use XTOL 1+1 as a one shot developer. It delivers extra "film speed/shadow detail," it's environmental friendly, and I find that it's very easy to work with. I'm just starting out in film developing, and I'm already getting very nice results, with practically no previous experience.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    North Carolina
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    46
    Thanks everyone. This is just the type of info I was looking for. I'll have to read up on Pyrocat. Thanks again.
    "Fall Seven Times, Stand Up Eight"

  9. #9
    Anscojohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,727
    Images
    13
    Anyone interested in the current FG-7 dev times and dilutions for their tested Zone I exposure indexes let me know and I will scan that info from the Edwal technical data sheet the manufacturer graciously sent me. jaykhill@aol.com
    John, Mount Vernon, Virginia USA

  10. #10
    bowzart's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Anacortes, WA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,219
    Images
    15
    FG7 was Minor White's favorite developer in the mid 1960's because it was very versatile in expansion/contraction. I've started mixing my own Edwal 12, which I like better, at least for some things, but 7 without sulfite is very nice stuff, and I keep it around. E12 isn't the greatest for contractions, so I may settle on 7 for that. Looks like we're going to need more contractions around here in the future, with the temp going up to 100°F in an area generally known for its overcast and rain.

    When I first started using it, I used it with sulfite, because I had heard that fine grain is good, and they claimed that the sulfite produced finer grain. Unfortunately, though, the grain is made fine by mushing it, since the sharp edges are dissolved. I like it a lot better with no sulfite added. Also, the sulfite is messy stuff... If the grain isn't fine enough, I prefer to mix a developer that gets it without a silver solvent.

    Since FG7's formula is proprietary, I can't mix it myself. I prefer to mix my own developers from scratch. I have noticed that an opened bottle having been stored for a year or so may lose some of its energy. To avoid that, I guess the answer would be to shoot more film and use more of it.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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