fotomas Posted May 5, 2022 Share #21 Posted May 5, 2022 Advertisement (gone after registration) vor 7 Stunden schrieb Ornello: FX-15 was designed as a solvent developer to be used stock or 1+1 with fast films. Why not do that? I cut the sulfite in half because I don't think it is necessary to use so much with today's better films. So, at 1+1 dilution the concentration is 25g/l. Are you using my variation? Are these scans or wet prints? What kind of enlarger, etc. Are you sure you mixed up FX-15 and not some other FX formula? Yes - I'm sure I mixed up FX-15 according to the original formula. I couldn't know your modification when I mixed it up a few days ago. So if you cut sulfite to the half and use it 1+1 we end up with the same amount of sulfite as if I dilute the original 1+3. As you wrote modern films shouldn't need so much sulfite any more. It would be much more helpful if you let us participate on your findings and show us some examples pictures here. Guess they must be much better then mine. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 5, 2022 Posted May 5, 2022 Hi fotomas, Take a look here HP5 + vs Tri-X Pan. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Ornello Posted May 5, 2022 Author Share #22 Posted May 5, 2022 14 hours ago, johnwolf said: This is a little OT, but I'm curious how much one needs to shoot to make bulk rolling sensible. I was considering it but ran some numbers and now question if it's worthwhile for me. I figured 25 rolls to break even on the ro[ler and casettes. After that I figured a saving of about $70 on each subsequent 25 rolls. 25 rolls is a lot for me. Seems like you'd have to shoot pretty high volume for bulk rolling to make sense. Your thoughts? John Try here: Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einst_Stein Posted May 5, 2022 Share #23 Posted May 5, 2022 You mean his many roll per year? It’s easier if no time limit and if it’s B&W. The chemical last forever, same if you freeze the films. When I shot color, E6 or C41, I prepared small amount of chemical so that raw chemical can last longer. Doing so 40 rolls of E6 or 80 rolls of C41 roughly matches the chemical life (5 liter). Now you can’t get bulk load color film, but home developing C41 still makes sense. Sp the question changes to justification of color films instead of bulk load B&W. More on C41, the most economical is Rollei C41 kit, 80-roll quantity , about $80. Shooting Kodak Ektar 100 then costs about $9 (film) + $1 per roll, 120 format or 136/36exp. => yearly spending is $800. I no longer shoot B&W because I can get both color and B&W results from C41, and I like C41 converted B&W better. Adjusting color channels for B&W is much more controllable. After I run out of the current chemical and films, I think I am done with film . Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ornello Posted May 5, 2022 Author Share #24 Posted May 5, 2022 6 minutes ago, Einst_Stein said: You mean his many roll per year? It’s easier if no time limit and if it’s B&W. The chemical last forever, same if you freeze the films. When I shot color, E6 or C41, I prepared small amount of chemical so that raw chemical can last longer. Doing so 40 rolls of E6 or 80 rolls of C41 roughly matches the chemical life (5 liter). Now you can’t get bulk load color film, but home developing C41 still makes sense. Sp the question changes to justification of color films instead of bulk load B&W. More on C41, the most economical is Rollei C41 kit, 80-roll quantity , about $80. Shooting Kodak Ektar 100 then costs about $9 (film) + $1 per roll, 120 format or 136/36exp. => yearly spending is $800. I no longer shoot B&W because I can get both color and B&W results from C41, and I like C41 converted B&W better. Adjusting color channels for B&W is much more controllable. After I run out of the current chemical and films, I think I am done with film . Please discuss film prices and cost saving approaches here: Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einst_Stein Posted May 5, 2022 Share #25 Posted May 5, 2022 1 hour ago, Ornello said: Please discuss film prices and cost saving approaches here: My personal practice to save film costs is stop shooting film. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ornello Posted May 5, 2022 Author Share #26 Posted May 5, 2022 18 minutes ago, Einst_Stein said: My personal practice to save film costs is stop shooting film. Why shoot it when it's cheaper to use a knife? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ornello Posted May 9, 2022 Author Share #27 Posted May 9, 2022 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) On 5/4/2022 at 5:09 PM, fotomas said: Here now my results from TRI-X and HP5+ with FX-15, diluted 1+3. One might get an idea why Crawley recommended FX-15 for low and medium speed films. The grain becomes a bit coarse and clumpy. For comparison another 100% detail with TRI-X in an home brew two bath developer similar to Diafine. This developer is usually more for sharpness then for fine grain. Overview with the whole image (here TRI-X in FX-15): And now the details. TRI-X in FX-15: HP5+ in FX-15: and now TRI-X in my two bath: I was a bit astonished about the coarse grain since FX-15 has as much sodium sulfite as D-76. Maybe the combination from the three developing agents forces this. Would be interesting to see how the modified version worked. Have you tried FX-15 stock yet? You should get results superior to D-76. Edited May 9, 2022 by Ornello Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotomas Posted May 9, 2022 Share #28 Posted May 9, 2022 vor 1 Stunde schrieb Ornello: Have you tried FX-15 stock yet? You should get results superior to D-76. Have you tried it yourself or is this an assumption? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ornello Posted May 9, 2022 Author Share #29 Posted May 9, 2022 2 hours ago, fotomas said: Have you tried it yourself or is this an assumption? It's a claim by Crawley. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ornello Posted May 19, 2022 Author Share #30 Posted May 19, 2022 Latest tests of HP5+ show a developing time for FX-39 diluted 1+14 of 8.5 (condenser) to 9.25 (diffusion) minutes. Same for Delta 400. I'm not sure I can see much difference between them, actually. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ornello Posted May 19, 2022 Author Share #31 Posted May 19, 2022 HP5+ vs Delta 400: I'm not sure I can see a whole lot of difference between them. Has anyone her critically tested them? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted May 19, 2022 Share #32 Posted May 19, 2022 3 hours ago, Ornello said: I'm not sure I can see a whole lot of difference between them.? I think I can see a difference, but then I only have my imagination to go on based on your results. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted May 20, 2022 Share #33 Posted May 20, 2022 So many posts, so few pics....... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ornello Posted May 20, 2022 Author Share #34 Posted May 20, 2022 (edited) 1 hour ago, LocalHero1953 said: So many posts, so few pics....... I have said repeatedly that I don't have access to a suitable scanner. After conducting numerous tests, I can offer my recommendations. First off, I don't see much need to use more than two or three films (though availability remains an issue). T-Max 400 (TMY-2) is so sharp and fine-grained that there is hardly any need for anything slower unless huge enlargements are planned, and you are using first-class lenses. The developer I recommend for TMY-2 is FX-21, because it tames the tendency for excessive highlight contrast. 10.5-11.5 minutes @ 68F/20C. Dilution 1+9 (from 15x concentrate). At present you have to mix FX-21 from scratch. Otherwise, I would suggest D-76 1:1 for 7-8 minutes or so. HP5+, Tri-X, and Delta 400 are all similar in grain and sharpness, and FX-39 II is the developer I recommend. FX-39 II 1+14 at around 8.5-9 minutes. FP4+ is wonderful stuff, but I don't use much of it. FX-39 II is the developer I recommend. FX-39 II 1+17 at around 7.5 minutes. Pan-F + is hard to deal with. The developer I recommend for Pan-F + is FX-21, because it tames the tendency for excessive contrast. 13.5 @ 68F/20C. Dilution 1+14 (from 15x concentrate). At present you have to mix FX-21 from scratch. Otherwise, I would suggest D-76 1:2 for 7-8 minutes or so. Acros is excellent. Data not yet ready. FX-39 II 1+14 for 7-8 minutes is a starting point. Delta 3200 is best in FX-39 II diluted 1+9 for 12 minutes or so. T-Max 3200 does well in FX-39 II diluted 1+14 for 10-11 minutes. Edited May 20, 2022 by Ornello Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ornello Posted May 20, 2022 Author Share #35 Posted May 20, 2022 (edited) 2 hours ago, Ornello said: I have said repeatedly that I don't have access to a suitable scanner. After conducting numerous tests, I can offer my recommendations. First off, I don't see much need to use more than two or three films (though availability remains an issue). T-Max 400 (TMY-2) is so sharp and fine-grained that there is hardly any need for anything slower unless huge enlargements are planned, and you are using first-class lenses. The developer I recommend for TMY-2 is FX-21, because it tames the tendency for excessive highlight contrast. 10.5-11.5 minutes @ 68F/20C. Dilution 1+9 (from 15x concentrate). At present you have to mix FX-21 from scratch. Otherwise, I would suggest D-76 1:1 for 7-8 minutes or so. HP5+, Tri-X, and Delta 400 are all similar in grain and sharpness, and FX-39 II is the developer I recommend. FX-39 II 1+14 at around 8.5-9 minutes. FP4+ is wonderful stuff, but I don't use much of it. FX-39 II is the developer I recommend. FX-39 II 1+17 at around 7.5 minutes. Pan-F + is hard to deal with. The developer I recommend for Pan-F + is FX-21, because it tames the tendency for excessive contrast. 13.5 @ 68F/20C. Dilution 1+14 (from 15x concentrate). At present you have to mix FX-21 from scratch. Otherwise, I would suggest D-76 1:2 for 7-8 minutes or so. Acros is excellent. Data not yet ready. FX-39 II 1+14 for 7-8 minutes is a starting point. Delta 3200 is best in FX-39 II diluted 1+9 for 12 minutes or so. T-Max 3200 does well in FX-39 II diluted 1+14 for 10-11 minutes. FX-21 developer formula 15x concentrate for 1+14 dilution to make 1 litre Component Amount in grammes Rounded Amount Metol 2.1495 2.15 Sodium Sulfite 30.0 30.0 Hydroquinone 1.0995 1.1 Phenidone 0.1245 0.13 Sodium Metabisulfite 6.15 6.2 Potassium Carbonate (monohydrated) 22.035 22.0 Sodium Bicarbonate 3.9 3.9 Sodium Citrate 3.9 3.9 Potassium Iodide 0.0825 0.1 Potassium Bromide 0.33 0.3 Sodium Hydroxide 5.0 5.0 Edited May 20, 2022 by Ornello Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ornello Posted May 23, 2022 Author Share #36 Posted May 23, 2022 Latest results show HP5+ and Delta 400 developed in FX-39 II diluted 1+14 for 8.5 minutes @ 68F/20C to be close to perfect. Prints look great! Tri-X may need closer to 9 minutes. I am not sure that Delta 400 is much better than HP5+ in either sharpness or fineness of grain. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted May 23, 2022 Share #37 Posted May 23, 2022 3 hours ago, Ornello said: Latest results show HP5+ and Delta 400 developed in FX-39 II diluted 1+14 for 8.5 minutes @ 68F/20C to be close to perfect. Prints look great! Tri-X may need closer to 9 minutes. I am not sure that Delta 400 is much better than HP5+ in either sharpness or fineness of grain. My imagination thinks you have got it wrong, prove me wrong. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ornello Posted May 24, 2022 Author Share #38 Posted May 24, 2022 22 hours ago, Ornello said: Latest results show HP5+ and Delta 400 developed in FX-39 II diluted 1+14 for 8.5 minutes @ 68F/20C to be close to perfect. Prints look great! Tri-X may need closer to 9 minutes. I am not sure that Delta 400 is much better than HP5+ in either sharpness or fineness of grain. Latest results show Tri-X and Delta 400 developed in FX-39 II diluted 1+14 for 9.25 minutes @ 68F/20C to be close to perfect. Prints look great! HP5+ needs only 8.5 minutes. I am not sure that Delta 400 is much better than HP5+ in either sharpness or fineness of grain. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted May 24, 2022 Share #39 Posted May 24, 2022 4 hours ago, Ornello said: Latest results show Tri-X and Delta 400 developed in FX-39 II diluted 1+14 for 9.25 minutes @ 68F/20C to be close to perfect. Prints look great! HP5+ needs only 8.5 minutes. I am not sure that Delta 400 is much better than HP5+ in either sharpness or fineness of grain. Still can't see in my imagination what you are seeing in your prints, actually the results look worse. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ornello Posted May 28, 2022 Author Share #40 Posted May 28, 2022 Recommendations: Develop Tri-X in FX-39 II diluted 1+14 for 9.75 minutes @ 68F/20C. Develop Delta 400 in FX-39 II diluted 1+14 for 9.25 minutes @ 68F/20C. Develop HP5+ in FX-39 II diluted 1+14 for 8.5 minutes @ 68F/20C. Develop T-Max 400 in FX-39 II diluted 1+14 for 9.5 minutes @ 68F/20C. Develop T-Max 400 in FX-21 diluted 1+9 for 11 minutes @ 68F/20C. 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.