mcgrattan
Well-known
I've been experimenting with Diafine with a couple of different films -- Plus X, Delta 3200, Tri-X and Agfa APX100. So far, grainy disappointing results from all of them except the Agfa. The tri-x wasn't bad [spoiled slightly by bromide drag] but the APX gave me exactly the sort of tones I like.
What do you think? [sorry about the dust]
What do you think? [sorry about the dust]
kully
Happy Snapper
I've only tried 35mm APX100 in Diafine and I liked the results too.
Did you meter at 200 or 100?
Did you meter at 200 or 100?
mcgrattan
Well-known
I metered at 200. Compensating by a stop or so because I had an orange filter on the lens, for those shots.
Ronald_H
Don't call me Ron
I don't know what you expected, but Tri-X and Diafine is normally wooooooonderful... How did you rate it?
Morca007
Matt
I like it. My favorite combo right now is APX 400 in Diafine.
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
i also liked apx100 in diafine, although i only had one single roll, and the lens was misaligned 
but the film behaved nicely
Better than FP4+, for that matter.
I do like tri-x in diafine, but it's a totally different category. I wouldn't compare them; there's a good 3 stops difference.
but the film behaved nicely Better than FP4+, for that matter.
I do like tri-x in diafine, but it's a totally different category. I wouldn't compare them; there's a good 3 stops difference.
mcgrattan
Well-known
Ronald:
The tri-x shots came out OK but they needed a bit more post-processing after scanning than I'd normally do.
The negs just had a grain and contrast I don't like. Neither stark, sharp grain and high contrast nor smooth gradations with low-grain but something just in the wrong place in the middle [for me]. I'll definitely try it again, and see if I can get better results next time.
The tri-x shots came out OK but they needed a bit more post-processing after scanning than I'd normally do.
The negs just had a grain and contrast I don't like. Neither stark, sharp grain and high contrast nor smooth gradations with low-grain but something just in the wrong place in the middle [for me]. I'll definitely try it again, and see if I can get better results next time.
MarK @ BKA Photo
Newbie
Regarding Diafine and specifically Tri-X, I would like to repeat a message I posted in anther thread to Lazar.
"Our company, BKA Group, manufactures Diafine and many other darkroom products. I have always believed that Diafine was misunderstood as a developer that was only good for low light level photography. In truth, Diafine was developed in the mid 60’s as a low contrast, compensating developer and it was then that Tri-X should be rated at 1600.
With the improved quality of contemporary films we find that Tri-X may now work better at 1250 although as always, film speed is highly subjective. Most curiously, we have tested the Diafine/Tri-X combination down as low as 400 with acceptable result but extremely low contrast.
Many Black/White photographers are now scanning their negatives for digital printing and scanning is precisely where you need a lower contrast negative. Regarding film speed….. with Diafine, film speed affects contrast. Diafine is a “compensating developer” which means that it develops to completion without burning out the highlights and to determine the best film speed (contrast) for your shooting style and post processing technique, you might try this experiment.
Place your camera on a tripod, set the set the ISO to 1600 and meter manually. Take the first shot, drop the ISO down one step to 1250 and take the next shot at the same shutter speed and f-stop as before. Repeat this process at each ISO down to 200. Process your roll of film in Diafine as usual with gentle agitation, 2 inversions each minute, wash and fix.
Scan these negatives and the frame that gives you the best print is the ISO you should be shooting at!"
I hope this will provide you with new ideas in the usage of Diafine. The huge range of mid-tones as noted by mcgrattan, while you may not be accustomed to the look, is exactly what you need in post scanning processing. The expanded mid-tones mean that your highlights are not blown out, the shadows are not blocked and you are able to use "Levels" to adjust contrast to your liking. You now have complete Zone System control of your negative to a degree never before possible. If Photoshop is not your friend then Diafine might be overkill. Standard developers, such as D-76 or Edwal FG-7, will provide a more typical, average negative.
Diafine begs experimentation and perhaps provides more creative control than you ever thought possible.
__________________
"Our company, BKA Group, manufactures Diafine and many other darkroom products. I have always believed that Diafine was misunderstood as a developer that was only good for low light level photography. In truth, Diafine was developed in the mid 60’s as a low contrast, compensating developer and it was then that Tri-X should be rated at 1600.
With the improved quality of contemporary films we find that Tri-X may now work better at 1250 although as always, film speed is highly subjective. Most curiously, we have tested the Diafine/Tri-X combination down as low as 400 with acceptable result but extremely low contrast.
Many Black/White photographers are now scanning their negatives for digital printing and scanning is precisely where you need a lower contrast negative. Regarding film speed….. with Diafine, film speed affects contrast. Diafine is a “compensating developer” which means that it develops to completion without burning out the highlights and to determine the best film speed (contrast) for your shooting style and post processing technique, you might try this experiment.
Place your camera on a tripod, set the set the ISO to 1600 and meter manually. Take the first shot, drop the ISO down one step to 1250 and take the next shot at the same shutter speed and f-stop as before. Repeat this process at each ISO down to 200. Process your roll of film in Diafine as usual with gentle agitation, 2 inversions each minute, wash and fix.
Scan these negatives and the frame that gives you the best print is the ISO you should be shooting at!"
I hope this will provide you with new ideas in the usage of Diafine. The huge range of mid-tones as noted by mcgrattan, while you may not be accustomed to the look, is exactly what you need in post scanning processing. The expanded mid-tones mean that your highlights are not blown out, the shadows are not blocked and you are able to use "Levels" to adjust contrast to your liking. You now have complete Zone System control of your negative to a degree never before possible. If Photoshop is not your friend then Diafine might be overkill. Standard developers, such as D-76 or Edwal FG-7, will provide a more typical, average negative.
Diafine begs experimentation and perhaps provides more creative control than you ever thought possible.
__________________
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
Mark,nice to see you here. I have a question.
Some of the Diafine box labels indicate that neopan 1600 should be rated at 2400 when developed in Diafine.
But some other labels indicate e.i.1200 for Neopan1600.
Why is there a full stop difference?Did Diafine change?did Neopan1600 change?Or is the truth somewhere in between (as i noticed, neopan at 1600-2000 gives me the best tones)?
Some of the Diafine box labels indicate that neopan 1600 should be rated at 2400 when developed in Diafine.
But some other labels indicate e.i.1200 for Neopan1600.
Why is there a full stop difference?Did Diafine change?did Neopan1600 change?Or is the truth somewhere in between (as i noticed, neopan at 1600-2000 gives me the best tones)?
MarK @ BKA Photo
Newbie
Pherdinand,
I cannot give you a definitive answer on the speed changes. At some point in the past we had our chemistry tested with the then current films and the lab may have suggested the change. Use the ISO that gives the result you are looking for.
I am having Diafine tested now with the most current emulsions and have not found any reason to adjust the speeds on the box. I welcome input from all Diafine users however.
Regarding my earlier post, I was involved in a couple of conversations at the time and messed things up a bit.
Correction:
Place your camera on a tripod, set the set the ISO to 1600 and meter manually. Take the first shot, drop the ISO down one step to 1250 and take the next shot at the same shutter speed and f-stop as before. Repeat this process at each ISO down to 200.
This should have read :
Place your camera on a tripod, set the set the ISO to 1600 and meter manually. Take the first shot, drop the ISO down one step to 1250, re-meter the scene and change the speed / f-stop. Repeat this process at each ISO down to 200.
Sorry for the confusion!
I cannot give you a definitive answer on the speed changes. At some point in the past we had our chemistry tested with the then current films and the lab may have suggested the change. Use the ISO that gives the result you are looking for.
I am having Diafine tested now with the most current emulsions and have not found any reason to adjust the speeds on the box. I welcome input from all Diafine users however.
Regarding my earlier post, I was involved in a couple of conversations at the time and messed things up a bit.
Correction:
Place your camera on a tripod, set the set the ISO to 1600 and meter manually. Take the first shot, drop the ISO down one step to 1250 and take the next shot at the same shutter speed and f-stop as before. Repeat this process at each ISO down to 200.
This should have read :
Place your camera on a tripod, set the set the ISO to 1600 and meter manually. Take the first shot, drop the ISO down one step to 1250, re-meter the scene and change the speed / f-stop. Repeat this process at each ISO down to 200.
Sorry for the confusion!
Fotohuis
Well-known
Interesting to see a representative from BKA on the forum.
Diafine is a very interesting two bath compensating developer. It's almost fool proof, easy in use and in a wide range temperature independent.
It's a speed enhanced developer and works pretty nice with the following film combinations:
Tri-X (400), HP5+, Neopan 400/1600, APX100/Rollei Retro 100, Acros 100.
Best fit we tested with classical wet photo prints in combination with the Heiland Split Grade system:
Tri-X (400): iso 1250
HP5+: iso 800
Neopan 400: iso 640
Neopan 1600: iso 1600
APX100/Rollei Retro 100: iso 200
Acros 100: iso 160, extended 5+5 min. dev.
The one quart (950ml) package is able to develop 30-40 films till the minimum of 500ml volume is reached with the loss of 10-12ml/film development, especially the A solution.
Tests of the working solutions can guarantee about 1 1/2 year life time.
Together with our local Amaloco AM74/Rollei H.S. and Rodinal (Agfa/A&O) developers, Diafine is also one of our best sold negative developer in our Dutch sales program.
Best regards from the Netherlands, Ravenstein to Chicago USA,
Robert Vonk
Diafine is a very interesting two bath compensating developer. It's almost fool proof, easy in use and in a wide range temperature independent.
It's a speed enhanced developer and works pretty nice with the following film combinations:
Tri-X (400), HP5+, Neopan 400/1600, APX100/Rollei Retro 100, Acros 100.
Best fit we tested with classical wet photo prints in combination with the Heiland Split Grade system:
Tri-X (400): iso 1250
HP5+: iso 800
Neopan 400: iso 640
Neopan 1600: iso 1600
APX100/Rollei Retro 100: iso 200
Acros 100: iso 160, extended 5+5 min. dev.
The one quart (950ml) package is able to develop 30-40 films till the minimum of 500ml volume is reached with the loss of 10-12ml/film development, especially the A solution.
Tests of the working solutions can guarantee about 1 1/2 year life time.
Together with our local Amaloco AM74/Rollei H.S. and Rodinal (Agfa/A&O) developers, Diafine is also one of our best sold negative developer in our Dutch sales program.
Best regards from the Netherlands, Ravenstein to Chicago USA,
Robert Vonk