Dopaco Posted March 7, 2019 Share #1 Posted March 7, 2019 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi good day: I have a problem with the chemical developers of my photos, it turns out that, as I now do few analog photos, when I have to use such chemicals, some have already expired. To try to correct this problem, I thought about acquiring developer chemical powder and, at each moment, make the more or less exact amount according to the work that must be revealed. What chemical developer powder do you recommend? ... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 7, 2019 Posted March 7, 2019 Hi Dopaco, Take a look here If you make few reels. Which developer do you recommend? .... I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
M.Hilo Posted March 7, 2019 Share #2 Posted March 7, 2019 Are talking about film development? Or printing? For film developer, I would use a one-shot developer like Rodinal. Then you always have fresh developer and it is famous for keeping well (easily 10 years) For the concentrated paper developer you could consider to get brown glass bottles of 1 liter and use vacuvin corks with the small vacuvin pump that removes the air inside the bottle. It works very well for at least one year. Concentrated stop bath and concentrated fixer keep well in their original bottles . . . 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
105012 Posted March 7, 2019 Share #3 Posted March 7, 2019 (edited) Ilford Ilfotec HC or Kodak HC-110 (similar formulations) are good choices for this situation in my experience. Great for one shot, last forever. Of course, these are not powders... Edited March 7, 2019 by 105012 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobitybob Posted March 7, 2019 Share #4 Posted March 7, 2019 (edited) You didn't mention if you are developing B&W, but on the assumption you are then I would agree with Rodinal as it last for a very long time, uses a small amount each time, you can get smaller amounts like 250ml and so if it does go off you haven't wasted a whole bottle. You don't necessarily need a stop bath just rinse with lots of water. Unfortunately, you do need a fixer, although I believe (it's what was used for some of the first photography processes) you can use very concentrated salt water but it takes between 24 and 48 hours to work. As an alternative you could try this https://cinestillfilm.com/products/df96-developer-fix-b-w-monobath-single-step-solution-for-processing-at-home. Edited March 7, 2019 by Bobitybob 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrogallol Posted March 7, 2019 Share #5 Posted March 7, 2019 Rodinal, as suggested, will keep for a long time and still work right down to the last dregs in the bottle. Using Tetenal Protectan spray helps as well. For print developer use a similar concentrated liquid. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dopaco Posted March 7, 2019 Author Share #6 Posted March 7, 2019 Hace 2 horas, Bobitybob dijo: No lo mencioné, sino que no creo que sí, sino que también lo mantendré en contacto con Rodinal, y que durará mucho tiempo, Estados Unidos. una botella entera. No es necesario un baño de parada, solo enjuague con mucha agua. Desgraciadamente, sí necesita un fijador, aunque creo que (es lo que se usó en algunos de los primeros procesos de la fotografía) puede usar agua salada muy concentrada, pero tarda entre 24 y 48 horas en funcionar. Como alternativa, puede probar este https://cinestillfilm.com/products/df96-developer-fix-bw-monobath-single-step-solution-for-processing-at-home . Yes, it is for B & W The CineStill D76f is very fast, but the chemical life once the bottle is opened is short 2 months: Chemistry lifespan:Expected shelf life for mixed chemistry is 1 year in a sealed bottle, and once used should be reused within 2 months. Film will still finish processing as chemicals age but will eventually produce thin negatives when developer is exhausted. Store in a tightly capped, full container. Thank you all for your prompt information. It seems that everyone agrees with the rodinal fluid and they last a long time. I take note to buy it, although there are several derivatives: Rodinal Alfa, Adox Rodinal, Fomadon R09, etc. Which is good and has a long duration? ... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted March 7, 2019 Share #7 Posted March 7, 2019 Advertisement (gone after registration) FWIW, I had a litre of Rodinal and dispensed it all into 2oz brown bottles that have an expressed cap that displaces air upon closing. Then I forgot about it for ten years. It was still perfectly good when I finally used it. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
105012 Posted March 8, 2019 Share #8 Posted March 8, 2019 Rodinal and HC-110 are both fine choices. Results with HC-110 tend to be finer grained than Rodinal (assuming equal negatives and conditions). On the other hand, Rodinal tends to produce results with higher accutance than HC-110. There are interesting differences in tonality and highlights, and these are dilution dependent. Finding your preference is worth some experimentation. HC-110 is incredibly long lasting in my experience. I'm still on a bottle that is quite dark in appearance, but produces consistent densities to when it was first opened (by visual inspection with a Peak anastigmatic loupe, not via densitometer). 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dopaco Posted March 8, 2019 Author Share #9 Posted March 8, 2019 11 hours ago, pico said: FWIW, tomé un litro de Rodinal y lo dispensé todo en botellas marrones de 2 oz que tienen una tapa expresada que desplaza el aire al cerrarse. Luego lo olvidé por diez años. Todavía estaba perfectamente bien cuando finalmente lo usé. That's very good. Where can you buy those brown bottles with that special closure? ... Thanks .. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrogallol Posted March 8, 2019 Share #10 Posted March 8, 2019 15 hours ago, Pyrogallol said: Rodinal, as suggested, will keep for a long time and still work right down to the last dregs in the bottle. Using Tetenal Protectan spray helps as well. For print developer use a similar concentrated liquid. Also, I have got to like using Moersch Tanol recently. It is a two part concentrate in small plastic bottles that you squeeze out the amounts you want, 1+1+100, so only 3ml of each to make up 300ml for a 35mm film in a Patterson tank. It is a “staining” developer and very good for handling high contrast scenes and shadows. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted March 8, 2019 Share #11 Posted March 8, 2019 (edited) 12 hours ago, Dopaco said: That's very good. Where can you buy those brown bottles with that special closure? ... Thanks .. I bought them so long ago when it seemed simple to find them. I can only suggest you google for some. You fill the Rodinal to the very top of the bottle then screw on the top, a tiny bit of Rodinal is squeezed out, no air remains. So good!They look like this. Perhaps another contributor could help. Edited March 8, 2019 by pico 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richardgb Posted March 22, 2019 Share #12 Posted March 22, 2019 On 3/7/2019 at 10:05 AM, Dopaco said: Hi good day: I have a problem with the chemical developers of my photos, it turns out that, as I now do few analog photos, when I have to use such chemicals, some have already expired. To try to correct this problem, I thought about acquiring developer chemical powder and, at each moment, make the more or less exact amount according to the work that must be revealed. What chemical developer powder do you recommend? ... As a rule, it is not advisable to subdivide manufacturers' packets of developer powder as there is a risk of the contents not being equally distributed. In other words, taking a sample from a larger packet would not necessarily give the same proportions of each constituent. Go for liquid concentrates - stoppered bottle should last some while. Film development is more critical than paper as there's not usually a chance to repeat the shot, so it would be unwise to economise there. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dopaco Posted March 22, 2019 Author Share #13 Posted March 22, 2019 1 hour ago, Richardgb said: Como regla general, no es recomendable subdividir los paquetes de polvo de revelador de los fabricantes, ya que existe el riesgo de que el contenido no se distribuya equitativamente. En otras palabras, tomar una muestra de un paquete más grande no necesariamente daría las mismas proporciones de cada constituyente. Ir a los concentrados líquidos - botella tapada debe durar algún tiempo. El desarrollo de la película es más crítico que el papel, ya que generalmente no existe la posibilidad de repetir la toma, por lo que no sería prudente economizar allí. Understood, I have it in mind. Thank you. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.