</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Jorge @ Jan 30 2003, 04:52 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> </span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Les McLean @ Jan 30 2003, 05:58 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
I was given a sample of Diaxtol by Barry Thornton but the results were appalling and I followed the instructions to the letter. I know of other photographers who had the same experience. However and in fairness I have spoken to photographers who swear by it.
I'm getting lots of good and encouraging replies in this forum and it seems as though PMK is coming out tops. I'll give it a try when I get the chemistry. Thanks for the tip about Ed's web site. </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
Les, was this the two step or the one step procedure you tried? I have heard the two step is very unreliable and that most people just went and settled for the one step. I have not tried it, and at the prices the stuff is selling for I probably never will.
David, There really is not much more to it, as with most developers you have to experiment a little to get the results you wish. After most of the experimenting is done I find I am back to the same original stuff I was using. One thing is for sure I never would go back to a "regular" developer for my films. </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
I am not a big fan of grain except that grain creates greater accutance and makes a photo appear sharper - usually. So for 4x5 - I am no longer experimenting with film developer - It is PMK. Now - for 120. I am an avid DiXactol convert. The times published are rubbish - so - after I figured out the correct times for my... geographic location, I found that DiXactol has all the benefits of PMK (tanning, restraining - local contrast control, staining) and SMALLER grain. Which makes a huge difference when making an 11x14 from a 6x6cm negative. It IS more expensive and it also works great with 4x5 and IMO too grainy for 35mm. I use mostly the monobath method - It pushes and pulls very well. 1.6ml A, 11.6ml B and 488ml water at 68F. For 6x6cm film, it is the magic bullet. The two bath configuration really does work - BUT it is N-2 in my darkroom and you can really ruin a portrait - I makes an average scene very flat - But if you screw up a roll and don't know what to do - the 2 bath will give a pritable image if there is any latent image at all. I am back to Metol for 35mm now. I use a split D-23. The 2 bath gives bot a solvent action fine grain effect and also increases accutance in the very weak second bath. Kind of like having my cake and eating it too.