Macbeth
Hello fellow analogue photographers!
I usually use the Atm49 fine-grain developer as a single-use developer at ratios of 1+1 and 1+2, and with the latter dilution I haven’t achieved entirely satisfactory results in terms of fine grain.
I now have no idea whether the slightly coarser grain was caused by incorrect development – or is typical of the 1+2 dilution.
My question: Can the Atm49 fine-grain developer compete with traditional fine-grain developers?
Examples:
Agfa/Ansco 12
Agfa/Ansco 14
Agfa/Ansco 15
Agfa/Ansco 17
Agfa/Ansco 17M
Defender 5-D
DS-10
Dupont ND-3
Dupont 21-D
Dupont 5-D
Edwal 12
FX-5
Germain's Finegrain
Gevaert G.207
Gevaert G.224
Harvey's 777
Kodak D-25
Sease No. 3
Best regards,
Macbeth
HenningH
Hello Macbeth,
Most of the developers you mentioned contain large amounts of sodium sulphite, which, in addition to its preservative effect, also forms the silver grain, making it a crucial factor in achieving a fine grain. A49 also contains up to 100g per litre (depending on the source of the unofficial recipe...). If you perform dilution of the developer, the sulphite concentration drops and the grain is less affected, allowing it to stand out more clearly. However, this often results in the ‘mushy grain’ that so many people dislike, and so the sharpness suffers.
As is so often the case, you can’t have it all...
I haven’t made any precise comparisons with the developers you’ve listed. At some point, I realised that the 50 Efke/ADOX in A49 1+1 produces results very similar to those in D76 1+1 (which also contains a lot of sulphite...) and so that’s currently my standard developer.
Swinging regards
Henning
Beef
Hi Macbeth,
Have you only ever used ATM49 up to now? That’s the developer I started out with myself back in the day… and all I can say is, it’s anything but a ‘fine-grain’ developer :rolleyes: And I always stuck strictly to the temperature, dilution, and so on.
I was a bit disappointed at first when I saw what even a FINE-GRAIN developer can get out of a film.
I tested the following films with ATM49:
Ilford FP4+, Ilford HP5+, Fomapan 100, Fomapan 400, Agfa APX100, ADOX CHM 400 (=Ilford HP5+)
So, even though the ADOX CHM 400 is an HP5+: I got grain with that film, I don’t even want to think about it anymore :lol:
After that, I tried other products that are very commonly used by other photographers: Agfa Rodinal, Kodak XTOL
I’m telling you, you’ll get a far better result with BOTH of these than with the ATM49.
Agfa Rodinal is brilliant to use, lasts almost indefinitely and produces super-sharp negatives. I’ve always used it at 1+50 at 20°C and, as far as I can remember, the grain has always been finer than with the ATM49 (with the same films, and it’s NOT a fine-grain developer)... plus the image (contrast and everything else) simply looked better (it finally looked like a proper photo :lol: ) <_< With the ATM49, it’s hard to get high levels of sharpness and the images look all smudged. Rodinal at 1+100 is also supposed to give ultra-fine grain. And at low temperatures (16°C) it’s ultra-fine too. So just imagine what you’d get with a combination of the two (1+100 at 16°C). But these are just tips I’ve been given... never tried them myself.
Well, and as for XTOL: it simply blows you away when you develop a film with it :lol: And it’s also very, very fine and has yet another kind of tonal reproduction that really appeals to you (looks very professional)...in my opinion.
I don’t necessarily want to slag off the ATM49... but that was my experience with it. Everyone has a different idea of what a photo should look like, though. Maybe it produces fine grain if handled differently... but for me, with about 10–12 rolls, that wasn’t the case :lol:
Cheers
Andi
cfb_de
Amidst all the discussion about A49, however, one thing must not be forgotten: nearly sixty years have passed between Xtol and A49.
Of course, photographic chemistry has also undergone development. Of all the ‘classic’ developers, only two remain: Rodinal and A49 (formerly ‘Agfa Atomal’). Since Tetenal discontinued the Neofin range, Beutler’s developer is no longer commercially available, which is why only these two remain.
Today, for fine-grain results, I would use either Diafine or HRX (or, with HP5+, Rodinal at below 16°C, but that’s another matter). Both contain just enough sulphite to avoid falling into the ‘muddy grain’ trap of classic fine-grain developers (A49, ID11, Ultrafin plus), and thus deliver not only fine grain but also excellent sharpness.
The only advantage that sulphite-based developers such as A49, ID11 or D76 have comes into play in large-format processing using continuous development: at temperatures above 30°C, every film is developed equally poorly given the same processing time.
Best regards,
Franz
Klaus_H
Come on, Franz! :rolleyes:
I think you’re underestimating what A49 is capable of. My own painful experiences with modern fine grain and high-resolution developers (Version II) when processing Delta 100 (8x11) and Delta 400 (135) brought me back to A49. This developer makes D76 / ID11, XTOL and the aforementioned developer look old (very old) in terms of grain size – provided A49 is used undiluted. I have only encountered the ‘mushy grain’ effect with higher dilutions. Admittedly, if you want to achieve reproducible results, A49 cannot be described as ‘cheap’, but it is certainly good value for money.
For medium format, I primarily use PMK.
Best regards,
Klaus
Beef
Hi Klaus,
Well, I’ve always used ATM49 undiluted (just this 2-litre batch). I don’t know exactly what you mean by ‘muddy grain’, but for me, undiluted it sometimes produced very heavy grain and the sharpness left a lot to be desired <_<
It sometimes looked like it had been printed on an inkjet printer from the mid to late 90s :rolleyes:
Once or twice, however (with Fomapan 100), I did get very fine grain... but the lack of detail in dark areas and the out-of-focus nature of the grain completely ruined the joy of the fine grain (when it did actually appear :lol: ).
Is there actually a developer out there that produces an extremely fine grain and is also very sharp and rich in detail? According to my information, it’s Xtol that combines all these properties. Is there a recommended alternative (Xtol is really ‘nasty’ when it comes to storage)?
Regards
Andi
Klaus_H
Hello Andi,
From your description, it sounds as though you have over-developed the films. As with other developers, over-development with A49 results in coarse, slightly blurred grain.
When it comes to the impression of sharpness, A49 cannot compete with Rodinal. It is a matter of deciding what is more important: absolute fine grain or razor-sharp sharpness. I think every photographer must make this decision for themselves. I am not aware of any miracle solution that combines both qualities. I would not use A49 for technical photography, just as I would not use Rodinal for portrait photography.
In short: the right tool for the job.
In the 1990s, the magazine ‘Foto & Labor’ published film tests in which films were developed using D76, Rodinal, A49 and CG512. A49 consistently outperformed the reference developer D76; Rodinal and CG512 always produced ‘more pronounced’ levels of sharpness. A49 scored particularly well in terms of overall image quality with 400-speed films.
For medium format, I use PMK. This developer is on a par with Rodinal in terms of sharpness. However, it is not particularly gentle on the silver halide. The grain is, however, masked by the “stain” – a greenish-yellow discolouration of the negative that forms in proportion to the amount of silver halide – and is only visible to a limited extent. "Grain-free" enlargements of HP5 are thus possible up to 50 x 50 cm. As for what "grain-free" means, every photographer probably has their own definition. How else can so many forum users talk about "grain-free 50 x 70 cm" enlargements from 35mm negatives?
Best regards,
Klaus
Beef
Hi Klaus,
Yeah, I think you’re right. Some of the photos really did turn out great in terms of grain. And most of them are just awful. I reckon I must have messed up somewhere during the development process...that was still my bit-by-bit development phase :rolleyes:
And when I compare the portraits from ATM49 with the Rodinal, I completely agree with you... A49 really is superior (if you can do without a bit of sharpness)... I think it would also produce great results in art photography.
With Rodinal, even on prints of about 11x7cm, I sometimes get such a dreadful grain that I’d often really love to have a different developer :lol: But I’ve noticed that it depends very much on the film... the Ilfords give me this dreadful grain with Rodinal, even on the smallest prints...The Fomapan series, however, give me results comparable to my A49 images that turned out beautifully... so ultra-fine grain.
But when I look at the old pictures again now, I notice that this awful grain from A49 is particularly noticeable with the Ilford films... and the ones that turned out beautifully are the Fomapans <_< That’s probably also the reason why I opted for Fomapan......they simply produced the most beautiful, finest and most sharp images with the films I mentioned in this thread...even though it’s the cheapest film.
I think I’ll order another pack of ATM49 and get a proper idea of it by testing it properly again :lol:
Regards
Andi
ChrisZ
Since Tetenal discontinued the Neofin range, Beutler’s developer is no longer available commercially.
Best regards,
Franz
According to Tetenal.de, Neofin Blaue is still available, but Neofin Rot and Neofin Doku are no longer available.
http://www.tetenal.de/index_c.htm?AKT=0102...200010&L=DE
Or do you know something that the website doesn’t mention?
See you soon... Chris Z.
cfb_de
Since Tetenal discontinued the Neofin range, Beutler’s developers are no longer available commercially.
Best regards,
Franz
According to Tetenal.de, Neofin Blaue is still available, though; Neofin Rot and Neofin Doku are no longer available.
http://www.tetenal.de/index_c.htm?AKT=0102...200010&L=DE
Or do you know something the website hasn’t mentioned yet?
See you soon... Chris Z.
That’s right. Neofin Blaue is still available. Even here at the host’s...
Thanks for pointing out my mistake! When I hear ‘Neofin’, I immediately think of ‘Doku’ (even though that isn’t a classic Beitler) and my brain just short-circuited.
Best regards,
Franz
Macbeth
A big thank you to everyone who contributed! I’ve taken your comments to heart—
I’m actually mostly a fan of Kodak Tri-X 35mm film – when used with the ATM49 at a 1+1 dilution, it actually produces results very similar to those in D76 at 1+1. In my opinion, at the recommended dilution, the ATM49 produces an even finer grain and is much, much more balanced than D76.
Do you prefer balanced or high-contrast negatives for printing? Which do you find easier to work with? Which is better suited (in terms of fine grain) for large enlargements?
Best regards,
Macbeth
Beef
Hi Macbeth,
Tri-X is a brilliant film!!! If you mainly use this film, I’d really recommend the XTOL developer.
Here are some examples on Flickr from “The Toymaker”:
Link to the photo collection
Have a look at the black-and-white photos... they were all shot on Tri-X 400 and developed in XTOL. Have a scroll through the rest too; there are loads of photos there. Right at the bottom, under the ‘Tags’, you can always see what was involved, how the photo was taken... If you click on Tri-X, for example, you’ll see all the images shot on that film... but also other developers. This guy, however, actually only uses XTOL.
Oh, and I prefer negatives with higher contrast :)
As for fine detail: I think XTOL will give you the best compromise for your large prints. It has a bit of everything: it develops sharply and with fine detail. Perhaps not quite as sharp as Rodinal, or quite as detailed as A49... but a perfect combination.
Regards
Andi
