huehnerhose
Hello!
I recently treated myself to a pack of Fomatol PW, mixed it up and was delighted with the image tone (I’d previously used Eukobrom, both on FomaSpeed Variant). I developed four 9x12 prints in the first batch. Afterwards, I poured the developer – just as I’d done with the Eukobrom – into a Jobo bottle and sprayed Protectan on top. Today I poured the solution into the tray and it’s turned an extremely yellow colour; it actually looks like freshly mixed Ilfostop with an indicator. The photos I’m developing somehow lack contrast. In other words, everything’s a sort of dull grey/brown, but there aren’t any really bright areas anymore.
The exposure times were also extreme when I compare them to the previous ones in Eukobrom. Out of sheer desperation, as I had finally lost faith in myself, I prepared another litre of Eukobrom. Then the images came out as usual.
My thoughts then turned first to the exposure time. The test strip in Eukobrom came out properly at around 2 seconds; in Fomatol, blackening (or browning) only started to appear from around 18–20 seconds. (I stuck pretty closely to the instructions on the packaging for the development times: Fomatol 3–4 minutes and Eukobrom quite short at 60 seconds; I’ve just forgotten what it says on the bottle).
In the end, I simply used the Eukobrom exposure time for one image, which I then developed in Fomatol. The result was an image that doesn’t actually look in need of underexposure, but rather as if it hadn’t been fully developed.
So now I’m left with the following questions:
Has the Fomatol somehow ‘oxidised’, been stored incorrectly or ‘gone off’? (The bottle was kept, like all my chemicals, in the darkroom in the attic. It’s dark in there and relatively cold when I’m not in it)
Are the different exposure times normal? (Unfortunately, I no longer have a clue how long I exposed for in my first session with the Fomatol)
Is there a fault in my processing or is it really the developer? (I think that’s the main question)
Thanks in advance for reading
Addendum: I’d rule out stray light or incorrect darkroom lighting, as I’m getting everything right using Eukobrom at the same time (just not a warm image tone).
MirkoBoeddecker
How long has it been sitting there?
If the paper develops well in the Eukobrom but not in the PW solution, then it’s most likely the developer that’s gone off.
Normally, the solution lasts at least 3–4 weeks if stored correctly.
Best regards,
Mirko
huehnerhose
What does ‘proper storage’ mean, and is Fomatol more sensitive than Eukobrom?
The solution was prepared on Sunday or Monday (20th/21st); I bought the powder from you on Saturday.
I kept it in a 1-litre Jobo bottle – which previously contained Eukobrom and which I rinsed thoroughly beforehand – in a cupboard in my darkroom (it’s always dark in there, no windows or anything). The darkroom is in the loft, so the temperature there averages around 8–12 °C. The bottle wasn’t quite full, so I sprayed some Tetenal Protectan on top.
As Eukobrom has always kept perfectly well in this way, I didn’t think anything of it.
MirkoBoeddecker
That all sounds very strange.
It shouldn't be like that.
Did you perhaps suspect the developer?
Best regards,
Mirko
huehnerhose
No, nothing like that... I mixed everything up according to the instructions and then just used it; I thought I could always try dilution and adjusting the tone later on :) . Well, who knows what happened there.
I really like the light brown tone; I’ll probably just make another batch and see how it goes.
So far, (almost) everything has worked straight away for me with darkroom work; this was my first time using powder chemistry. Let’s just give the developer a second go.
cfb_de
Hello Seb^H^H^H huehnerhose,
There’s one very simple source of error that’s often overlooked: the water used in the developer solution.
Eukobrom is – like N113 or PaperDur – an extremely stable developer that survives just about anything and can last a very long time. My last batch was nearly three years old (I’d made 12 litres of it back then), dark brown and still working.
It’s like Rodinal for paper processing. Except that the developer solution lasts almost forever.
But: it contains so many complexing agents that the water doesn’t matter. Your warm-tone developer is much more sensitive in that respect. Do you live in an old building? Then, regardless of the state of the building’s renovation, you should assume that your tap water contains quite a lot of iron or copper ions. Sensitive developers don’t really like either of those.
With Xtol as a film developer, this leads to ‘sudden death’; it may well be that the same applies to Fomatol.
My suggestion: make a fresh batch with distilled water and then see how it goes. You clearly haven’t made any of the other possible mistakes.
By the way: I think the pictures I’ve seen, which are presumably yours, are good!
Best regards,
Franz
huehnerhose
Hi Franz :)
I live in a five-year-old detached house with copper pipes; only the final section of the supply line to the darkroom is made of flexible plastic tubing. Is there a way to measure the iron/copper ion concentration (in a practical and cost-effective way)? This issue also affects me when developing negatives. (So far, I’ve been using Ilfosol and Rodinal for that)
I’m just popping in again – there was a discussion recently about negative developers and water issues. Opinions were divided, with some saying distilled water is fine and others thinking it’s not really the best option. Is this ‘not such a big deal’ when it comes to paper developers?
Or does the idea of Brita filtration help me, given that this is probably primarily about copper, whereas back then calcium and magnesium were mentioned? (Or is (East) Berlin tap water generally higher in iron content? Is there anywhere I can find that out?)
Right then, thanks to both of you for now!
Oh, and Franz, if the images were on deviantart, then yes, they’re mine (but they’re quite old and I haven’t printed or developed almost any of them myself yet).
cfb_de
Hello huehnerhose,
Trace analysis in tap water is possible, but unfortunately not with simple methods and certainly not on a shoestring budget. ‘Cost-effective’ still means shelling out a sum in the hundreds; that’s what the lab charges for three hours’ work, equipment hire and signing off on a reliable report.
Regarding the distilled water question: don’t take Manfred’s advice as gospel. If you’ve tested with distilled water, then any developer will work. If you mix things up, switch ingredients or do anything else in between, then negative development can easily go pear-shaped. That’s why I made it so clear what I think of Manfred’s mixing shenanigans.
Rodinal and water... I reckon that stuff would even work in subtropical brackish water, if you could manage the temperature somehow.
I haven’t come across any problems with positive processes so far, which is why I find your description of the fault so intriguing. Please take my suggestion as just a ‘suggestion’ or ‘idea’, not as a solution to the problem. Nevertheless, the approach using distilled water or Brita-filtered water could be worthwhile. If the developer behaves as expected, everything is fine. And if not: look for the next source of error...
You can actually get an analysis of the water leaving the Berlin waterworks for free. However, that doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with what comes out of your tap: the waterworks’ product liability ends where the pipe branches off onto your property.
Best regards,
Franz
p.s.: Yes, I meant the images on deviantart.
huehnerhose
Hi Franz,
I’ll just give it a go. If the developer remains stable in distilled water, I’ll simply make a second batch using tap water to compare the results and narrow down the source of the problem, and stock up on more distilled water if necessary. (At the moment, I’m only using it for the final development of negatives with a wetting agent.) Perhaps I’ll test Xtol again as well to confirm my suspicions.
At least I know the pipes in the house (though that still leaves the question of what’s actually in them). A plastic pipe branches off from the street connection, but I don’t know what’s in the street or what source it comes from. Well, I already had a hunch about the analysis :) (Maybe a keen student will come forward :( )
And Rodinal produces nice grain; I like that for certain subjects – at least it produces more grain than Ilfosol. I haven’t tested any other developers yet.
Regards
huehnerhose
SamuliSchielke
Could the working solution have been exposed to significant temperature fluctuations? The following happened to me recently: I developed a print on Fomabrom in Fomatol. It produces lovely cool brown tones, but takes half an hour at 20 degrees. So I heated the developer to 30 degrees for the next print to speed things up. Result: The image came out in a few minutes, but it was neutral black – not a trace of a warm tone! This is, of course, the exact opposite of your problem, where hardly anything happens (after a few weeks this happens with Fomatol PW anyway, but in my experience not as quickly as in your case), but apparently the developer is quite sensitive to temperature or other environmental changes.
Oh, and what paper did you use? In my experience, Fomatol works reasonably well with Fomatone right to the end, and the specified 2–3 minutes are enough, but with Polywarmtone it needs to be freshly prepared, otherwise you’ll soon be at it for half an hour. Polywarmtone, especially baryta, often takes over 5 minutes in Fomatol even when freshly prepared, but it comes out very nicely.
Without contrast, the prints suffer from overexposure, and when the developer runs out, they turn grey-brown without highlights instead of warm black without highlights. Exposure times should not differ drastically from those for Eukobrom. 1/3
stop for Fomatone and 1/2 to 1 stop for Polywarmtone and Fomabrom compared to the same paper in a cold/neutral-tone developer should suffice (you can of course use more if you want an extremely warm tone).
Samuli
huehnerhose
Yes, the darkroom is in the attic, which means that when I’m developing, the room heats up to around 20–23 °C. And when I’m not in there, it cools down to around 10 °C, and the chemicals do too.
I use Fomaspeed Variant. This produces particularly lovely warm brown tones at low temperatures, though it does take a little longer, of course. The first time I used it, it was at about 12–15 °C. It took about 2 minutes for anything to happen at all, and after about 5–6 minutes the image was developed really nicely. (I’m now comparing the image tone with what came out when I first mixed the developer directly and simply tested it with a print. Back then, it was 20° after mixing.)
I’ve just made a fresh batch in distilled water. I’ll be making prints again tomorrow or the day after; let’s see how long the developer lasts.
A report will follow to wrap up this chapter (hopefully)
Regards
huehnerhose
Gast
Hi Huehnerhose,
I’ll give that Fomaspeed in a washing machine at a low temperature a go this very evening. Sounds interesting.
So, to recap: you tested the developer at 20 degrees and got good results at 12–15 degrees during the first session, but not a few days later. Was the developer also at 12–15 degrees or 20 degrees?
Samuli
arothaus
Hello,
Even with N113, you can get photos with a slight warm tone at lower temperatures; I’ve had that happen with Foma Variant before.
Best regards,
Andreas
PhilippReichmuth
Hi Andreas,
Philipp has just shown me a print he made using Fomaspeed in N133 at a low temperature. It looks lovely. No wonder Fomatol PW didn’t produce a warm-tone effect at 30 degrees – cool = slow = warm tone; I could have worked that out sooner...
Samuli (from Philipp’s account)
PhilippReichmuth
Although ‘low temperature’ here means something like 16–17 degrees in my unheated attic bathroom, the tone is actually lovely and warm. Conclusion: N113 produces a warm winter tone. :rolleyes:
Philipp (from Philipp’s account)
huehnerhose
Hello!
Samuli: Yes, just as you said. On the day it stopped working, the temperature was low to begin with. When I simply couldn’t fix the problem, I brought the developer up to 20°C – the ‘standard temperature’. So I tried everything.
I’ve just used the new batch this morning, the one in distilled water. The development times are a bit longer. But the pictures turned out quite nicely; it’s just that the first negatives were rubbish… but that’s not the developer’s fault.
I’ve just got one small question: when I poured the developer into the tray at the start, it was almost clear. When I poured it back after the session, it was already quite yellow again. With Eukobrom, I’m used to the colour change happening quite slowly, hence my surprise. It develops wonderfully. The times stayed stable today too. Just the colour? Is that normal, or do I have a problem again?
Regards, huehnerhose
SamuliSchielke
Hello!
That’s never happened to me with Fomatol PW before. It does gradually turn more yellowish as it oxidises, until eventually it turns brownish and is only effective with great difficulty. But that happens slowly over weeks, not all at once. The question remains: was there anything else in the tray, or did something get in during development that could have accelerated the oxidation process or shifted the pH towards the acidic side? A classic source of error is a stop bath, which lowers the pH in the developer so much that it no longer develops, or barely does so. Otherwise, it really is a mystery. I’m curious to see if it works better this time.
Samuli
huehnerhose
So the new solution has already turned a nice yellow after just one session (about 2–3 hours). (It now looks just like my Ilfostop with Indicator when freshly prepared... except that the indicator in that one is yellow B) )
My Eukobrom was in the bowl just before that... but I actually washed it out properly... And there shouldn’t have been any stop or fix on the tongs, I’m careful about that. (E on the tongs and separate ones for stop and fix)
Well, I’ll probably get some new paper today or tomorrow and then make the Christmas prints...
Report to follow tomorrow.
Cheers, Hühnchenhose
Gast
Right, here’s the report:
I carried on developing with the Fomatol solution today. It’s extremely yellow and is now starting to take on a brownish tinge. The photos are still coming out fine, though, even though the development time has gone up to about 7–9 minutes for the solution without dilution.
So I reckon the fault with the first batch was down to the water, or perhaps some other mysterious reason that hasn’t cropped up again this time.
Thanks to everyone who’s contributed here :)
By the way, I’m really surprised at how brilliant the Polywarmton RC looks in the Fomatol. I think I’ve fallen in love with this mixture today B)
Cheers, Huehnerhose
SamuliSchielke
Nice, isn't it? Personally, I prefer Fomatone in Fomatol, especially if you plan to tone the print afterwards. Untoned, Fomatone has an extremely warm tone and is quite greenish-black – not to everyone's taste. But pop the print into the selenium toner – wow!
