Dual development - which one to use first?

[Martin B]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello all,

 

I am currently exploring ways to decrease grain size and to increase sharpness in the film development process. I read about it online, and it seems that many prefer a dual development. The opinions differ a lot when it comes down to which developer should be used first - and I don't mean mixing two developers but instead using them separately with (or without) wash after the first development cycle ended.

 

My question is which developer should be used first? For example Rodinal and then Xtol or vice-versa? I understand that Rodinal can increase the grain size but also improves edge contrast whereas Xtol leads to smaller grain accumulation. I also read that others use Xtol first followed by D76.

 

Which method and order is better and why? Which kind of concentration should be used for each developer? Any advice how long and under which amount of agitation? I am currently using HP5+ 400 B&W film (35 mm format). Of course photos as examples would be great to demonstrate effects and differences in dual developments.

 

Thanks,

Martin

Edited April 5, 2016 by Martin B

[Michael Hiles]

I guess I haven't been around long enough - I have never heard of anyone using two developers sequentially.

 

There are two-bath formulas, whereby the developer has two separate baths. These can have some advantages in certain limited circumstances. As I remember Diafine was/is a two-bath system, and there are old formulas that must be made up from raw chemicals. The point was that one bath had the "energetic" ingredients, which the other (second) bath had buffering ingredients. Someone else with more chemistry knowledge can comment. 

 

Modern developers are designed to do the whole job. I can't see any advantage to using(say) D76 and following it up with Rodinal or whatever. The development has been done by the first soup - I can't see the second soup doing anything useful.

 

But I have been wrong before.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[adan]

There are three ways to achieve fine grain in development.

 

1) Don't use #$^&* HP5 in the first place!

2) underdevelop, sometimes with a small amount of over-exposure to partially compensate (depends on subject contrast - not always needed)

3) Include a "grain solvent" in the developing step, that will nibble away at the silver grains as they emerge, and make them smaller.

 

Usually, the solvent is sodium sulfite, because it also acts as a preservative (cf: wine and salad bar warning labels: "Sulfites used as a preservative.") Two birds with one stone, etc.

 

Formulated fine-grain developers (Microdol-X, Ilford Perceptol) just have an extra dose of sulfite built-in.

 

Rodinal has very little sulfite, which is further reduced to ineffectiveness through the high dilutions at which Rodinal is usually used (1:50, 1:100). Thus it is grainy, but sharp (no "nibbled edges" to the grain). Some photographers for decades have added extra sodium sulfite to Rodinal as they mix it for use, if they like its other characterisitics, but want slightly less prominent grain. (I was just in the darkroom section of a store today, and right next to the Rodinal, they had the jars of sodium sulfite for sale).

 

X-Tol has a fairly hefty dose of Na₂SO₃ - 10g in part A, and 75g in part B (plus another 3.5g of Na₂S₂O₅ - metabisulfite) in 1 liter total of developer. So it kinda sorta makes sense that combining it with Rodinal in some way would do the sulfite "party-trick" of reducing grain. Although it seems unnecessarily complicated, unless one just enjoys paddling around in the chemicals.

 

In that case, I would think Rodinal first (to produce the grain) and X-Tol second (to dissolve the grain the Rodinal created) would be the logical order. Sulfite can't dissolve grain that doesn't exist yet.

 

However, if the developers are used immediately back-to-back, with no intervening wash, I suppose a bit of X-Tol (used first) would "carry over" or contaminate the Rodinal with some sulfite, to take the edge off its grain.

 

Not sure that either would produce a significant difference over just adding some sulfite directly to the Rodinal in the first place.

 

Now I have to go run some nice, simple, fine-grain "TMax 400 through HC-110" to get rid of my headache!

Edited April 6, 2016 by adan

[Martin B]

Thanks, Andy, very good advice form you as always, much appreciated! Before reading your reply, I did my first dual development yesterday using Rodinal (1:100) first followed by Xtol (1:2) with 3x washing with water in between them. The result was outstanding - also with HP5+ film (in fact I made very good experience with this film so far). I will post some pictures later, but the grain is very fine but sharpness is very good. Clearly I can see a huge difference compared to my development just using D76 developer. I am really happy that my first experiment worked out so well resulting in this very visible difference in sharpness and grain size. 

 

I know that others suggest to use a dual development starting with Xtol followed by D76. Any idea about this and why on a chemical basis? For the same reason you mentioned above?

Edited April 6, 2016 by Martin B

[adan]

Hmmm -

 

I would have thought that Xtol and D76 had similar solvent effects (the one has 88g of sulfite per liter, the other 100g) - but at least one source says Xtol has noticeably more solvent effect (lower grain, lower actance/resolution) than D76 (even with less sulfite) - so it could be the same effect.

 

We (or at least I) are probably getting to the point where either one just experiments, and records empirical effects, or goes to RIT for 4 or 6 years to get a degree in photo chemistry.

[fotohuis]

80% of the grain is coming from the type iso film.

Only 20% you can influence by the developer.

It is clear that grain in 35mm is getting bigger when enlarging further instead of a 6x7cm roll film which is in size 4,5x larger hence in grain 4,5x less.

 

In chemicals there are no developers which are giving full box speed, ultra fine grain, highest sharpness and acutance.

In the past two developers were combining above parameters best:

Promicrol from May & Baker

Atomal from Agfa

 

Both B&W film developers were containing the HEAP, a very carcinogenic material so it was stopped somewhere in the 70's.

 

The last real research in this optimum mix was done by Kodak. In 1995 Xtol was born. A best mix of above parameters however the storage and keeping quality of the Ascorbic Acid type developers are not so good. Alternative Foma made a copy: Fomadon Excel W27  and Pat Gainier made a simple alternative with better keeping qualities PC-TEA however not so fine grained as original Kodak Xtol.

 

Most all other type developers have their own disadvantages or advantages just what you want to reach with your film development.

If you want minimum grain you can choose several Ultra Fine Grain type developers but they all give less sharpness and you are loosing film speed (Perceptol, Microdol-X, CG-512/R.L.S., Windisch W665).

 

In high acutance type developers the other way around: Very sharp negatives but emphasized grain: R09/Rodinal, Beutler, FX-1, Tetenal Neofin Blue, just to mention some.

 

For example I am using FX-1/Beutler in 35mm only for my Efke 25/Rollei Pan 25 films. Slow speed films with a minimum of grain.

 

As already said: How bigger the film format how less critical about grain. And there is also a difference in a scan and a print done via optical enlargement.

 

All in between developers like D-76/ID-11, HC-110, Fomadon P W37.

 

In my photo gallery you can see several examples how the result was made:

http://gallery.fotohuisrovo.nl/

[fotohuis]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Two extreme examples here:

Fomapan 200 (E.I. 160) in R09/Rodinal (high acutance) and Fomapan 200 (E.I. 80) in Windisch W665 (Ultra fine grain). Same camera M7+ Summicron 50mm.

 

 

 

 

In R09

 

 

 

 

 

In W665.

[Martin B]

So far I made good experience with my dual development using Rodinal and Xtol. I can clearly tell comparing the sharpness and grain amount on the same type of film which is Ilford HP5+ 400.

 

 

 

[bruscwillis]

Hi Martin, 

 

I know the thread it's silent for two years but I was looking these days for a formula of split development with Rodinal and Xtol. I have a 100 feet roll of HP5 at home and I developed it until now in Rodinal , D76 and Xtol. Rodinal at 1:50 gave me an ugly grain (I read later about this combo HP5 +Rodinal as being not pleasant all the time). D76 1+1 was ok. Xtol stock gave me fine grain, detail in shadows and also a flat look which was difficult to correct without ruining the skin tones (film is not digital, you can't push those sliders like on a 7D raw file). So.. I was realized that I liked the shadows of Xtol stock and Rodinal 1:50 highlights and I was thinking that maybe I could do a split development. Your images posted for HP5 split development looks amazing! Sharp, nice grain, very good separation between light, mid-tones and shadows, nothing mushy (like HP5 in straight Rodinal 1:50). Maybe can you share your recipe of split development? 

Something like Xtol stock or 1+1 for some% of total development time AND Rodinal 1:50/1:100 for rest of development time. Or maybe in the reversed order, I really have no idea.

 

I hope you still have an account here and you will read this post at some time.

 

Many thanks,

 

Bogdan

[pico]

With respect, I believe mixing developers is a lost effort. One should expect that those who create developers have thoroughly investigated the same for their own product line.

 

Have you considered intentional designed two part developers? That is developers in which we immerse in one chemical, dump it and follow with the final developer. One advantage is that they process to completion without us having to worry much about time and temperature. IMHO it is worth pursuing.

Edited April 4, 2018 by pico

[Martin B]

With respect, I believe mixing developers is a lost effort. One should expect that those who create developers have thoroughly investigated the same for their own product line.

 

Have you considered intentional designed two part developers? That is developers in which we immerse in one chemical, dump it and follow with the final developer. One advantage is that they process to completion without us having to worry much about time and temperature. IMHO it is worth pursuing.

 

Have you tried two step developments? Do you understand the chemistry involved why it is advantageous? I can tell you for sure that it makes a big difference. 

[Martin B]

Hi Martin, 

 

I know the thread it's silent for two years but I was looking these days for a formula of split development with Rodinal and Xtol. I have a 100 feet roll of HP5 at home and I developed it until now in Rodinal , D76 and Xtol. Rodinal at 1:50 gave me an ugly grain (I read later about this combo HP5 +Rodinal as being not pleasant all the time). D76 1+1 was ok. Xtol stock gave me fine grain, detail in shadows and also a flat look which was difficult to correct without ruining the skin tones (film is not digital, you can't push those sliders like on a 7D raw file). So.. I was realized that I liked the shadows of Xtol stock and Rodinal 1:50 highlights and I was thinking that maybe I could do a split development. Your images posted for HP5 split development looks amazing! Sharp, nice grain, very good separation between light, mid-tones and shadows, nothing mushy (like HP5 in straight Rodinal 1:50). Maybe can you share your recipe of split development? 

Something like Xtol stock or 1+1 for some% of total development time AND Rodinal 1:50/1:100 for rest of development time. Or maybe in the reversed order, I really have no idea.

 

I hope you still have an account here and you will read this post at some time.

 

Many thanks,

 

Bogdan

 

Hi Bogdan, here is my recipe for HP5+ 400 at ISO 400:

 

20 deg C water temperature

1. Rodinal diluted 1:100 for 10 minutes. Agitate every 2 minutes.

2. 3x rinse with water for 30 seconds each time

3. Xtol diluted 1:2 for 6 minutes. Agitate every minute.

4. Stop solution for 1 minute, agitate.

5. Fixer solution for 10 minutes, agitate every minute.

6. 2x rinse with water 

7. Hypo Clearing Agent wash for 2 minutes, agitate every 30 seconds.

8. Final water rinse.

[pico]

Have you tried two step developments? Do you understand the chemistry involved why it is advantageous? I can tell you for sure that it makes a big difference. 

 

That is exactly what I wrote of. Did you not read?

[Pyrogallol]

If you really want finer grain, use a slower film, Pan F or FP4 and something like Perceptol. Though I did make some big prints (20x30 inches) years ago with Tri X in D76 1+1 and use FP4 in Rodinal all the time now.

If that is not enough, move to a larger format negative ! 5x4 or bigger depending on the size of print you want to make, but that might not suit a Leica Forum.

[Martin B]

If you really want finer grain, use a slower film, Pan F or FP4 and something like Perceptol. Though I did make some big prints (20x30 inches) years ago with Tri X in D76 1+1 and use FP4 in Rodinal all the time now.

If that is not enough, move to a larger format negative ! 5x4 or bigger depending on the size of print you want to make, but that might not suit a Leica Forum.

 

Two different pairs of shoes. I am also using PanF+ and FP4+ for low grain, but these films are slower than HP5+ at ISO 400. Of course large film size also reduces grain but this requires change of the camera system. The point here is that the dual development as shown above achieves much lower/finer grain for an ISO 400 film than it would with a regular developer which either increases micro contrast and at the same time grain accumulation or finer grain with lower sharpness like Xtol. The dual development combines the best properties of each developer with finer grain. 

[Martin B]

That is exactly what I wrote of. Did you not read?

 

Sorry, my bad, I misunderstood your post - I read it first that you referred to the mixing of developers as the two step process, but you actually meant mixing in the same batch two developers (which I agree, this doesn't help). 

[bruscwillis]

Hi Martin, 

 

Thank you for your answer! It seems that you are using diluted Rodinal for 2/3 of total development time recommended for HP5 and diluted Xtol for another 1/3 of total development time recommended for this developer. Did you noticed any speed loss? I noticed that Rodinal is usually losing some speed of film.

I will make some tests with some strips of HP5 using your recipe and, also, the same recipe but with Xtol stock (and shorter time, of course) because if this works too giving nice images, I will be able to re-use the stock solution of Xtol.

[Martin B]

Hi Martin, 

 

Thank you for your answer! It seems that you are using diluted Rodinal for 2/3 of total development time recommended for HP5 and diluted Xtol for another 1/3 of total development time recommended for this developer. Did you noticed any speed loss? I noticed that Rodinal is usually losing some speed of film.

I will make some tests with some strips of HP5 using your recipe and, also, the same recipe but with Xtol stock (and shorter time, of course) because if this works too giving nice images, I will be able to re-use the stock solution of Xtol.

 

Not sure what you mean as "speed loss". The diluted amounts are quite normal in development processes and lead especially in the Xtol case to better highlight effects. I adjusted the times accordingly to the dilution. I have never used Xtol in stock solution, always diluted it 1:2 or 1:3. Also keep in mind that at higher developer concentration the development time is reduced which can be a bit tedious in this two-step development process when switching developers. You want to give it a bit of lead time - if you are a bit over for example 10 minutes with Rodinal (1:100) when rinsing, it is not as critical as with half of the time at double the concentration. 

[bruscwillis]

Oh, you are right, of course, about timing. 

Regarding speed loss.. Rodinal is losing some speed of film (at least for HP5). If I should make an analogy, I would say that HP5 400 exposed at EI 400 developed in Rodinal 1:50 looks like HP5 exposed EI 800 developed in D76. It looks pushed. Probably, HP5 exposed at EI 200 and developed in Rodinal 1:50 looks like and HP5 400 developed in D76 or Xtol (in terms of shadow details, not grain). So, from this perspective, Rodinal is losing a stop from film speed for me (more or less). 

I noticed also when shooting in low light that I had to overexpose a stop an HP5 (if I knew that I am going to develop in Rodinal) in order to get some shadow details and exposed normally after I bought some Xtol.

I attached 2 pictures to exemplify. You will see that the shadow details is good in Rodinal, but it comes with a stop overexposure. First picture is Xtol, second is Rodinal

 

 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[otto.f]

https://www.fotoimpex.de/shopen/chemistry/diafine-diafine-two-bath-powder-developer-to-make-2-x-38-liter.html