Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,993   Posts: 1,524,255   Online: 999
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 20 of 20
  1. #11

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Valley Stream, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,216
    Quote Originally Posted by jwalton View Post
    ...All these three dilutions will have "min. required development agent" no doubt. By the way, I think that using stock ID11 makes it about as costly as DDX.
    Maybe, but stock ID-11 like its kissing cousin D-76 can be reused a number of times with adjustments to the development time to compensate for developer exhaustion. It can also be replenished and used repeatedly over a long time; but that only makes sense if you run a lot of film.
    Frank Schifano

  2. #12
    RalphLambrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    the villages .centralflorida,USA and Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,375
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by jwalton View Post
    ... For instance Ilford give these three options for FP4 (at ISO125) souped in ID11: 8.30 in stock, 11 at 1+1, or 20 at 1+3. They say that "best overall quality" is to use stock. All these three dilutions will have "min. required development agent" no doubt. ...
    Doesn't that depend on how much of it is used per roll of film?
    Regards

    Ralph W. Lambrecht
    www.darkroomagic.comrorrlambrec@ymail.com[/URL]
    www.waybeyondmonochrome.com

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    1,122
    For ID-11 with,say,FP4+, you could plot the times from the massive development chart versus concentration 100%(1+0) 50%(1+1) and 25%(1+3).
    I presume these would give the same density but as dilution is increased there would be an increase in acutance and grain due to lower sulfite content.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Sheffield
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    5
    Ralph
    Perhaps we're getting closer to what I'm trying to understand. Clearly, if used more than once, the developing agent would eventually be used up, but used as a one-shot developer one would assume that Ilford are happy that 1+3 gives sufficient development agent.

    So I'm back to trying to understand what the difference in quality actually is between stock at one extreme and 1+3 (in this case) at the other extreme. Then I'd like to have a minimal understanding of why these differences happen. In the meantime I've been reading Michael Langford's Basic Photography (1997 edition), Barry Thornton's Edge of Darkness, and John P. Schaefer's Basic Techniques of Photography, though, as I suffer from M.E. (Chronic Fatigue Syndrome) I'm struggling to absorb all of it yet.

    Alan - sorry I hadn't seen your post until just now. Thanks, I think that this is the sort of answer I'm looking for. So, using at stock I'd get an overall "smoother" neg? Using at 1+1 is a reasonable compromise between different (not necessarily "better") characteristics?

  5. #15
    RalphLambrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    the villages .centralflorida,USA and Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,375
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by jwalton View Post
    Ralph
    Perhaps we're getting closer to what I'm trying to understand. Clearly, if used more than once, the developing agent would eventually be used up, but used as a one-shot developer one would assume that Ilford are happy that 1+3 gives sufficient development agent. ...
    Don't make that assumption, because you still need a sufficient quantity of it.

    Let's say you are using a Jobo UniTank holding 240 ml for rotation processing and you are trying to develop the maximum number of 35mm films this tank holds, which is two.

    At 1+3 that leaves 60 ml of stock solution to develop two rolls of film. That's not enough, and don't blame Ilford for it. They didn't tell you to go below the minium stock solution per roll, which is, depending on who you ask, at least 75 - 100 ml per roll of film. So, in the example above, I would not go below 1+1.
    Last edited by RalphLambrecht; 08-26-2010 at 10:47 AM. Click to view previous post history.
    Regards

    Ralph W. Lambrecht
    www.darkroomagic.comrorrlambrec@ymail.com[/URL]
    www.waybeyondmonochrome.com

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    1,122
    Noting ID-11 and D-76 are very similar,there is some dicussion of dilution here:
    http://groups.google.com/group/rec.p...f3c108a4bb9a26
    For solvent developers containing a lot of sodium sulfite dilution increases grain but for non-solvent developers the grain may be reduced as pH is decreased and emulsion swelling is less.
    Just try for the MA to start with.

  7. #17
    RalphLambrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    the villages .centralflorida,USA and Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,375
    Images
    1
    ... and don't ignore the issue of minimum developer quantities with high dilutions!
    Regards

    Ralph W. Lambrecht
    www.darkroomagic.comrorrlambrec@ymail.com[/URL]
    www.waybeyondmonochrome.com

  8. #18
    Andrew Horodysky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Northern New Jersey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    220
    If you're consistently overdeveloping (with normal times/dilutions according to manufacturer directions), perhaps another factor may be to re-adjust EI rated on your camera. Shoot a couple of test rolls, bracketing the same subject, develop (Normal) in the chemistry of your choice -- the suggestions, above, of D-76/ID-11 are perfect, stock or 1:1 -- and see where the adjustments in exposure need to be made, prior to playing around with various developer dilutions.

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Sheffield
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    5
    Ha! I feel that I'm being cleverly toyed with here - and that's no bad thing. You are gently nudging me towards thinking around the subject so that I find the answer myself without being spoonfed. So I thank you for that and hope that you will continue to indulge my slow fumbling towards enlightenment.

    It may be no surprise to you that this is my first experience with discussion groups on the web. So far, so interesting, on lots of levels.

    Back to the books methinks - any more suggestions? I've already looked to see if I can order Adams' The Negative (and some other titles) from the library.

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    1,122
    http://www.amazon.com/Film-Developin.../dp/0240802772
    Read the reviews,it depends on your field of interest.

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