Massive development chart ???

[Mikep996]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Since I got back into film recently I've been intrigued by the "massive development chart" that seems to be the current reference to which almost all the internet pundits refer. Back in the day I developed film based on the guidelines of  Kodak for whichever developer I was using - typically D76, Microdol X, or HC110.  

With the Massive chart I see all sorts of development times that are not shown in any of the Kodak data for Kodak developers. Where does this info come from?  My impression is that anyone who tried anything can have their process times/temps included in the chart, regardless of whether they produced anything useful.  Is this correct?  I guess my real question is, Why would I pay any attention to that chart when there are specific instructions for developers from the manufacturers?  

FWIW, what got me looking at the chart in the first place was my interest in trying Rodinal (which seems to be out of stock everywhere).  

[LocalHero1953]

I usually use the manufacturer's recommendations as my starting point, but those are not available for every combination of film, developer and dilution. If so, the MDC is a good alternative starting point. I can't answer your question about how stuff gets added to the MDC.

Edited December 31, 2022 by LocalHero1953

[250swb]

1 hour ago, Mikep996 said:

Why would I pay any attention to that chart when there are specific instructions for developers from the manufacturers?  

 

Pay attention to the Massive Dev Chart when the manufacturers instructions aren't working for you. 

While everything starts with 'rules', like temperature, dilution, time, there are also a lot more variables with their own rules around exposure, and people make decisions about exposure based on equipment or preference and these variable aren't factored into the manufacturers instructions. So Ilford's testing setup may not replicate how I use a meter in real life, or the circumstance such as scenes with high or low contrast, in fact Ilford's instructions have never been anywhere near and I've never followed any manufacturer instructions after an initial try with new film, my times are invariably modified. 

I often double check with the MDC just to see what other people have tried, but I don't always believe it, the times and techniques have to seem believable and that belief comes from personal experience.

 

Edited December 31, 2022 by 250swb

[fotomas]

Yes - one could sent whatever he likes to the MDC and it gets public without any proof. I did so too. But I would guess that about 90 % or more are trustworthy. If there are enough records for a film/developer combination it is mostly pretty obvious if there are not plausible informations.

A great tool for me, who does a lot of testing with different kind of films and developers. At least much better as to make a guess on it's own.

But if you want to be on the safe side just follow the recommendations from your film manufacturer*.

*as mentioned before even this mustn't be the best for your setup. If one e. g. has a foggy lens it might be better to develop a bit longer.

[spydrxx]

IMHO it is a good source of info for a starting point. Your style will invaribly have a modification, based on time, temp, dilution, agitation and anticipated outcomes.

[Pyrogallol]

Rodinal seems to be about right at 8 or 9 minutes at 1:25 with most films.

That chart is a good starting point but is open to anyone offering new suggestions, which I did once.

[logan2z]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Adox actually points to the MDC for Rodinal development times, so presumably they have some faith in the data there.

I've been using 12 minutes for Rodinal 1:50 when developing FP4+ shot at EI100.  I'm pretty happy with the results.  

[TheGodParticle/Hari]

Ilford are referencing back to the MDC for some info, with a caveat that they have not verified the times:

https://www.ilfordphoto.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Film-processing-chart-.pdf

See the last line in red at the bottom of the page 

 

[BradS]

MDC is a mixed bag. There’s a lot of unverified garbage.  I refer to the manufacturer's data sheet and do my own tests. 

[sblitz]

My biggest issue with MDC is the agitation. MDC has it continuous for the first minute, and then 4x for the first 10sec of the following minutes (starting min 2). Ilford has it 4X in first 10sec of each minute. Kodak is 4x every 30sec. I ignore MDC on the agitation.