Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,470   Posts: 1,570,918   Online: 855
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18
  1. #11
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,370
    Images
    65
    If there was a significant difference, I think that the manufacurers would be moved by the commercial and professional photographers to publish this fact and the data. As is, they support one "aim" from each developer and do not mention the seasoned state for the most part.

    I think that Fotch has a point that cannot be dismissed. Many of the "well known" sources are years old and many had single tests, that they said were lower in quality. They did no have side-by-side adjusted comparisons.

    PE

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Greenville, SC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    4,813
    Images
    5
    I am just curious about this. How many laboratories in the world are still processing B&W film in systems that require replenishment. My assumption was that service was already history virtually everywhere. It certainly does not exist in my home town.

    Sandy King

  3. #13
    BetterSense's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    North Carolina
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,881
    Next time I mix up a fresh batch of d23, I should shoot two identical negatives of a contrast ramp (which I don't have, but I could use a 'real' scene or something else) and develop one of them for X minutes at Y temperature in the old, replenished developer. Then after my fresh batch is done, I should develop the other negative in the fresh batch using the same time/temp, and make a straight print using the same time on the enlarger. Anyone want to make any bets as to what differences I observe?
    f/22 and be there.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,018
    Quote Originally Posted by sanking View Post
    I am just curious about this. How many laboratories in the world are still processing B&W film in systems that require replenishment. My assumption was that service was already history virtually everywhere. It certainly does not exist in my home town.

    Sandy King
    Well, the replenished tanks last for ages with floating lids, and the cost is minimal if any volume at all of black-and-white film comes in to be processed. The last lab I worked in used then, and still uses, replenished D76 controlled with test-strips to control the amount of replenisher.

    The rolls and sheets went up to 10"x8" and got dunked using stainless-steel frames and cages. All very standard stuff for decades.

  5. #15
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,370
    Images
    65
    Sandy;

    There is a fairly big operation in NYC that does a lot of custom B&W. It is called SixtyeightDegrees. Another is an APUG sponsor doing custom B&W work. So, this is by no means a vanished type of process.

    PE

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Los Alamos, NM
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,063
    [QUOTE=...

    In other words, fresh D-76 and replenished seasoned D-76 should give close to the same results. I know that there are some differences, but this is due to unavoidable leaching of development byproducts and chemistry into the developer by the wide range of films being put through the process and which cannot be perfectly compensated for due to the variety of films one may use.

    ...

    PE[/QUOTE]

    Most replenishers were formulated many years ago, when films were quite different. I'm not sure how much difference it would make, but the byproducts leached into the developer by modern films may be significantly different than those for which the replenisher was designed. My guess is that D-76R is tuned for photofinishing use that was typical at around 1937 - probably a mix of old Verichrome and old Plus-X. Someone who shoots Ilford HP-5 or Delta 3200 exclusively might experience some significant changes over the replenishment life of the developer. Once again, I'm not sure that this would actually happen.

    In general, I can't see the practicality of using a replenisher unless you process a lot of film - at least 10 rolls a day, or maybe even a higher threshold. For just a few rolls, the developers have sufficient capacity so the changes without replenishment may be less than with. Aside from that, many developers that amateurs use are best used as one-shots. For the occasional heavy developing session, it is generally easier and probably cheaper to mix up a fresh batch of developer as needed.

  7. #17
    BetterSense's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    North Carolina
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,881
    In general, I can't see the practicality of using a replenisher unless you process a lot of film - at least 10 rolls a day
    Replenishment is eminently practical even for the hobbyist, because it's cheap, and convenient. 1 liter of d23 can develop 25 rolls of film, and costs only about $2 making for a very cheap per-roll cost of like 5 cents. D76 used one-shot was costing me 25-60 cents per roll, and I had to mix up the powders and so on.

    If you think there is some disadvantage in quality, I can see how you would come to that conclusion. But since I feel there is NO quality penalty to do this it seems rather practical to me even though I only shoot a couple rolls a week. Next on my list to try is replenished Xtol; I hear it works out pretty well too.
    f/22 and be there.

  8. #18
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,370
    Images
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by nworth View Post
    Most replenishers were formulated many years ago, when films were quite different. I'm not sure how much difference it would make, but the byproducts leached into the developer by modern films may be significantly different than those for which the replenisher was designed. My guess is that D-76R is tuned for photofinishing use that was typical at around 1937 - probably a mix of old Verichrome and old Plus-X. Someone who shoots Ilford HP-5 or Delta 3200 exclusively might experience some significant changes over the replenishment life of the developer. Once again, I'm not sure that this would actually happen.

    In general, I can't see the practicality of using a replenisher unless you process a lot of film - at least 10 rolls a day, or maybe even a higher threshold. For just a few rolls, the developers have sufficient capacity so the changes without replenishment may be less than with. Aside from that, many developers that amateurs use are best used as one-shots. For the occasional heavy developing session, it is generally easier and probably cheaper to mix up a fresh batch of developer as needed.
    This is a very important statement. My reply is rather easy though.

    1. D-76 is old, but in spite of that replenishsment with it still works by giving the same (or virtually the same, depending on POV) observed results with modern films and with old type films in spite of the differences in chemistry. In fact, that caveat in prens above may be due more to the mixes of film in commercial operations than for any other reason. I might add that many other developers do as well or better. XTOL does the job by being its own replenisher, and that is the result of a modern formulations with modern films. So, this addresses one point.

    2. Your comment seems to feel I am suggesting replenishment, but in fact, I was answering some threads and posts here and elsewhere, and also some e-mails and PMs which indicated to me that there were some people who did not understand the way the replenishment process worked. I am not advocating that anyone change. If it works, use it!

    PE

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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