Questions about SW negative development

Anginapectoris · 2006-11-20T13:38:54+00:00

Hallo, ich habe noch einen Ilford FP4 PLUS 125 als KB-Film und möchte diesen Entwickeln. Einige Chemikalien sind auch noch vor Ort wie Dokumol, Ultrafin, Ul...

Anginapectoris

Hello, I still have a roll of Ilford FP4 PLUS 125 35mm film and would like to develop it. I also still have some chemicals on hand, such as Dokumol, Ultrafin, Ultrafin Plus, A49, Variospeed Superfix, 60% acetic acid and A300 fixing salt. It’s all getting a bit old but still unopened. Can I use any of this for development? What agitation rate should I use, at what temperature should I pre-rinse, and is a stop bath required after the developer? So many questions. Contrast should be good, although colour is of secondary importance. Kind regards, Detlef

skahde

I still have a roll of Ilford FP4 PLUS 125 35mm film and would like to develop it. I also still have some chemicals on hand, such as Dokumol, Ultrafin, Ultrafin Plus, A49, Variospeed Superfix, 60% acetic acid and A300 fixing salt. They’re all a bit old now, but still unopened.

With film, that’s obviously a bit of a risk. There’s not much room for manoeuvre. One thing that should definitely still be fine, provided the packet is undamaged, is the A49 powder developer. I wouldn’t worry too much about the fixer and stop bath. As long as there’s no white or slimy sediment in the fixer, it should be fine. As a first step, I’d definitely get hold of some more film; otherwise, you’d be better off giving the lot away to someone who can use it. Best regards Stefan

cfb_de

Hello Detlef, > Dokumol A hardener for paper, completely unsuitable for film. Except for embossing ortho-emulsions, but that’s not what you want. > Ultrafin Powder? Mix it up and use it if there are no brown streaks. Liquid? More than three years old? From my own experience: bin it. Pouring it down the drain is environmentally acceptable. > Ultrafin Plus How old? Opened? How was it stored? Without further details, I can’t advise. Pour it down the drain? > A49 If the powder is still free-flowing and white: use it. But I don’t like the grainy texture it leaves on the films. > Variospeed Superfix Clearly unsuitable as a fixer for development. The solution comes just before rinsing and well after development. *Fixer*! > Acetic acid 60% When developing film, a water bath of the finest Kraneburger in between is sufficient. You could perform dilution of the concentrated acetic acid to approx. 1–2% and use it as a stop bath, but you don’t have to. Concentrated, it at least descales the toilet (in the toilet; the coffee machine can’t handle it). > Fixing salt A300. Standard fixer. For a standard solution, the times for sodium thiosulphate baths apply. Provided the powder is still white and free-flowing. Otherwise: bin it. No stop bath is required after the developer; you can also rinse with water. With FP4+, no pre-rinse is required and the standard times from the literature are mostly suitable. You have to adapt them to your own lab process, which is why “oh, I’ll just quickly develop a black-and-white film at home” usually goes wrong. Never mind. The same thing happens in large-scale labs too. Doing it yourself means learning. From books, courses, forums, through personal observation and practice. That’s how it should be, and it’s never been any different in the last nearly 180 years. No matter which imaging process was used. Best regards, Franz

Anginapectoris

Hello, Thanks for the replies. I’ve had a look at Tetenal as well. Looks like I can bin the lot. I’ll be buying some new chemicals. But which ones? Rodinal, Neofin Blaue, Ultrafin – and what about a fixer? Up until now, I’ve only developed medium-format colour negatives, so I never had to worry about which developer to use. I’ve always used the Tetenal kit, and that was included in the starter pack too. It’s only with B&W that there’s such a massive range on offer. Then there are the discussions here on the forum about which developer suits this film and which one suits that film – who’s supposed to keep track of it all, especially as a newcomer? I’d really appreciate a few tips. Best regards Detlef

SamuliSchielke

Hi Detlef, the choice of developer depends on what you want to get out of the film. One developer brings out more speed in the film, another produces a fine grain; one is more forgiving of mistakes, whilst another performs the development exactly as you want it. Generally speaking, an all-round developer is actually recommended – one that offers a bit of everything and where minor exposure and processing inaccuracies don’t make much difference. Rodinal is very good, reliable, and has an almost indefinite shelf life, provided a bit of grain doesn’t bother you and you don’t want to push the film. Apart from Rodinal, from my own experience I can recommend D76 (identical to ID-11) and Fomadon LQN, but the others you mention are certainly just as good. Fixer: anything available on the market should actually be equally good. Regards, Samuli

skahde

I’d really appreciate a few tips.

You should first choose a film, as that will largely determine the characteristics. The developer then only tweaks it slightly. Based on the format (did you mention medium format up there?) and your requirements (I need maximum resolution, sharpness, at least a real 640 ASA, etc.), you should first choose the film and then the developer that suits the film and your requirements. Let me know what you’re planning. Best regards Stefan

Anginapectoris

You should choose the film first, and then the developer that suits both the film and your requirements. Let’s hear what you’ve got in mind. Hi Stefan, What am I planning? Good question. Actually, I’d like to get back into black-and-white photography. I want to play around with the light, contrast, sharpness and out-of-focusness to, for example, capture character in portrait shots or simply convey a mood. I actually started experimenting with split-process years ago, but never finished it. If I remember correctly, exactly three individual positives were made from a black-and-white negative. I think one had underexposure, one was normal and the third had overexposure on orthochromatic film, and a negative was then produced from that. Unfortunately, I no longer remember exactly how that was done. Exactly, that’s what I’d like to tackle again. Perhaps you know more about it. Best regards, Detlef

skahde

Exactly, that’s what I’d like to get back to. Maybe you know something about it.

Hi Detlef, I’m sorry, but I haven’t the faintest idea about that particular application. I’d rather just keep my mouth shut on that one. :spudnikwaving: Best regards Stefan