Choice of single bath developer

[SolaresLarrave]

I used to develop my film. After some experiences, I settled on T-Max and Ilford Fixer (both liquid). Now... I haven't done it in a long time and my chemistry must be expired and useless.

However, I want to do it again and want to try a monobath. What do you recommend, Cinestill df96 or Ultrafine? I have a general idea of how they work, the conditions (adding 15 seconds per roll for each subsequent use, for instance) and results. I probably would keep using some of chems I still have (like to wash and prevent bubbles)...

Thanks in advance!

 

[Freakscene]

Monobaths produce pretty much the same (poor) results which ever one you use. They are niche products for a reason. Buy any decent developer and some fix.

Marty

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

I agree with Marty. Stick to a standard developer and processing method. Your old combination of Tmax Developer and Ilford Rapid Fix is fine. Definitely replace your old chemicals, they (especially the developer) are probably not good anymore due to aging.

Something you can try with Tmax Developer is diluting it 1+7 instead of the normal 1+4 dilution. Image quality is the same, but it saves some money since Tmax is one of the more costly developers. It also gives longer developing times, which is nice because the 1+4 dev times for most films in Tmax are fairly short, which makes uneven developing more likely. Especially if you process at higher temperatures.

I just developed some film today at 72 degrees instead of the normal 68 because the water coming out of my tap was 72 degrees (you need the water used for the wash to be the same as the temperature you use for your chemicals, so if the tap water you'll wash with is hotter than 68 degrees you'll need to raise the temp of your developer and fix and adjust developing times).

To find the time for the 1+7 dilution, take the time you use for the 1+4 dilution and multiply is by 1.5. So if the normal time is 6 minutes, you would use 9 minutes for the 1+7 dilution. I use the 1+7 dilution for all of the work I do with Tmax Developer.

 

[Benjamin Marks]

I agree with Chris generally, but I don't think you have to be too worked up about the temp of your wash water. Just make sure that it isn't tooooo different. But I developed at 68 and washed at 55 for a long time, tens of thousands of exposures, with no ill effects. A real jump and you can crack the emulsion (ask me how I know), but we are talking 30 degrees or more.

 

[KenR]

Having heard stories of ruined negatives, I try to keep the temperature of the rinse water and fixer to within 5 degrees (F) of the developer. It takes an extra minute or two to get everything up or down to that level, but so far I have no developing disasters related to temperatures (lots of others though).

 

[neal3k]

I've used Cinestill and FPP monobaths and have had mixed results, with some surprising good, and some so-so.

Now I just use monobath for testing cameras for focus and shutter speeds. For my important photos, I use HC-110.

 

[SolaresLarrave]

Thanks for your answers, gentlemen! 🙂 I had the feeling that these products (and the hype around them) sounded too good to be true. My experience with T-Max was really good. I used it for a long time and when I needed to push film the results (at least when I scanned it) were surprising: almost no grain when exposed the old Agfa ISO 400 emulstion at ISO 1600.

Well, looks like it's time to shop again... and to figure out how to get rid of my old chemistry. I just don't feel comfortable pouring it down the drain.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

Thanks for your answers, gentlemen! 🙂 I had the feeling that these products (and the hype around them) sounded too good to be true. My experience with T-Max was really good. I used it for a long time and when I needed to push film the results (at least when I scanned it) were surprising: almost no grain when exposed the old Agfa ISO 400 emulsion at ISO 1600.

Well, looks like it's time to shop again... and to figure out how to get rid of my old chemistry. I just don't feel comfortable pouring it down the drain.

Check with your city or county government's trash collection or waste management department. Here in Fort Wayne, the city government has a "Tox-Away Day" several times a year.

On those days, city residents can bring in toxic chemicals like photo chemistry, paint, pesticides and herbicides, used motor oil and other automobile fluids, etc. The chemicals are either recycled or disposed of safely (depending on the chemical). This prevents people from pouring dangerous stuff down the drain or putting it in normal trash where it can contaminate landfills.

The place you live may do something like that.

 

[madNbad]

Two years ago I went back to developing my own black and white because of the disappointing, expensive results from the local lab. Over time the only changes I have made were done to save water. Portland has some of the highest water bills in the country so anything to save a few gallons helps. At first there was a prewash, I used a running water stop bath and washed for longer than needed. Using water for a stop bath was replaced with an indicator acid stop. The prewash went away and I’m using a modified Ilford water saver wash. Since I’m only doing one roll at a time, I fill a couple of beaker at the same I’m mixing the developer and set them aside as my wash. By the time the film is finished, I’ve used about two liters of water for the whole process. It’s much different for those of you that print at home or doing larger formats. I just need negatives I can scan.

 

[SolaresLarrave]

Check with your city or county government's trash collection or waste management department. Here in Fort Wayne, the city government has a "Tox-Away Day" several times a year.

On those days, city residents can bring in toxic chemicals like photo chemistry, paint, pesticides and herbicides, used motor oil and other automobile fluids, etc. The chemicals are either recycled or disposed of safely (depending on the chemical). This prevents people from pouring dangerous stuff down the drain or putting it in normal trash where it can contaminate landfills.

The place you live may do something like that.

I think I know where to go ask about this in my town. I just intend to get rid of the bottles of old chemicals. They do have something like a day in which they'll pick up paint and other things. Thanks for the suggestion!

 

[SolaresLarrave]

Two years ago I went back to developing my own black and white because of the disappointing, expensive results from the local lab. Over time the only changes I have made were done to save water. Portland has some of the highest water bills in the country so anything to save a few gallons helps. At first there was a prewash, I used a running water stop bath and washed for longer than needed. Using water for a stop bath was replaced with an indicator acid stop. The prewash went away and I’m using a modified Ilford water saver wash. Since I’m only doing one roll at a time, I fill a couple of beaker at the same I’m mixing the developer and set them aside as my wash. By the time the film is finished, I’ve used about two liters of water for the whole process. It’s much different for those of you that print at home or doing larger formats. I just need negatives I can scan.

I learned from an employee at Central Camera in Chicago about a wash aid that I started using. It did save time and water. I used to run my rolls under water for 5 minutes (as you know, that's a LOT), but the wash aid reduced it significantly. Now... I think it's a matter of rinsing the film in it and then in water a couple of times. Gotta check again how it's used. Thanks for the tip!

 

[agentlossing]

People who say monobaths can't deliver good results are those who are so entrenched in their traditional developing knowledge that they screw up something like DF96 and then blame the chemicals instead of their own inexperience with them.

DF96 is quite good and if you don't think it is, look at Huss's photos (here or Pentax User forum where he is now). I've gotten great results from DF96, but you have to get a real feel for agitation and be very careful with temperature. On the other hand, time doesn't matter. These are the things that seem counterintuitive to many, and why their results are often not great at first (myself included, though I started with DF96 so I hadn't learned the quirks of other developers yet).

 

[Freakscene]

People who say monobaths can't deliver good results are those who are so entrenched in their traditional developing knowledge that they screw up something like DF96 and then blame the chemicals instead of their own inexperience with them.

DF96 is quite good and if you don't think it is, look at Huss's photos (here or Pentax User forum where he is now). I've gotten great results from DF96, but you have to get a real feel for agitation and be very careful with temperature. On the other hand, time doesn't matter. These are the things that seem counterintuitive to many, and why their results are often not great at first (myself included, though I started with DF96 so I hadn't learned the quirks of other developers yet).

The photos that Huss posted here that were developed using monobath show exactly the problems that monobaths cause - strange tonal relationships, poor shadow detail and inconsistent results. If you like them, great, but if monobaths were clearly superior they would have become standard a long time ago just because of simplicity. Haist went into the chemistry and the sensitometric problems in detail. And yes, I’ve tried almost all of his variants.

To see what consistent process control looks like, see what Erik van Straten, Chris Crawford or Dourbalistar post here - all different, all very well controlled and with a familial look that is consistent in different types of light. If you can do that with monobath, please show us.

Marty

 

[agentlossing]

The photos that Huss posted here that were developed using monobath show exactly the problems that monobaths cause - strange tonal relationships, poor shadow detail and inconsistent results. If you like them, great, but if monobaths were clearly superior they would have become standard a long time ago just because of simplicity. Haist went into the chemistry and the sensitometric problems in detail. And yes, I’ve tried almost all of his variants.

To see what consistent process control looks like, see what Erik van Straten, Chris Crawford or Dourbalistar post here - all different, all very well controlled and with a familial look that is consistent in different types of light. If you can do that with monobath, please show us.

Marty

He uses his past the recommended date and/or number of films by quite a lot, I would say his inconsistencies are using exhausted developer. I have no idea what "strange tonal relationships" means, but I don't really agree with your views. It might not do everything you can think of, but it's one way to develop and has good results for being as approachable as it is. For someone like me it offered a great stepping-stone, but it's one I keep wanting to come back to, and will probably use some more in the near future.

 

[randy stewart]

Wash water temp

Wash water temp

I agree with Chris generally, but I don't think you have to be too worked up about the temp of your wash water. Just make sure that it isn't tooooo different. But I developed at 68 and washed at 55 for a long time, tens of thousands of exposures, with no ill effects. A real jump and you can crack the emulsion (ask me how I know), but we are talking 30 degrees or more.

Long aged studies show that reducing the temperature of wash water below 68 degrees very quickly reduces the efficiency of the wash process, inhibiting the ion exchange which removes fixer from the film emulsion. At 55 degrees, you must substantially increase the wash time and water usage. The other historical reason for maintaining wash water temp was that in films from and before the 1950s, the emulsions would crack and split in large temp changes. Modern films have hardened emulsions which are very resistant to doing this.

 

[DownUnder]

In my many years in the darkroom - I developed my first roll of film as a school kid in 1961, imagine that! - I've experimented with almost every brand and type of developer for both film and paper, known to the industry. And always went back to my same-old.

Kodak DK60A did the trick for us back then, with 120 film in the '60s and '70s. For the fun of it, I recently mixed up a batch of this venerable oldie and found it still produces good negatives, even if much better is now available.

Kodak D76 became my go-to in the '70s when I went over to 35mm and Nikkormats. I still have my FT2s and still use D76. Diluted 1-1 has always given me the negatives I want for enlarging or scanning. It isn't too fussed with exact temperatures but I've always tried to do my developing within the range of 20-24C for consistent results, which hasn't been all difficult even when I've had to process my films in hotel bathrooms. A good thermometer is essential.

In 2000 I lucked into Barry Thornton's two bath developer which I found gives exceptional results with B&W negatives taken in harsh Australian or Asian light. The trick with Thornton's, I found, is not to overdevelop, but this is probably the most standard rule of play in the darkroom anyway, applying to film and paper.

Monobath processing had no thrill for me. A lazy darkroom way to produce inferior results.

Buying a Jobo Duolab in 2004 was a sensible move. It lets me get very uniform results with economy of use. I can even save on wash water, which is worth the price of gold in dry Oz, by using a modified Ilford method of film washing and the rotary system.

Nowadays I live in a regional town and don't get to Melbourne as much as I used to. Rather than spend pension money paying expensive shipping for bottled chemistry, I mix my own. I've owned a manual scale (with brass weights) since the '70s and recently invested in a coffee weight scale that lets me measure chemicals in tenths of a gram. Chemistry costs a bit, but the positive is you get big volumes and it lasts ages, my hydroquinone, metol and Phenidone are almost 20 years old and still as potent as ever.

Nowadays I do more scanning than enlarging. I'm getting on a bit and I prefer to be in bed at night with my partner and our cats, not hovering over an enlarger and trays until sunrise as I did even a few years ago.

Mixing my own developers and processing my films still stimulate my creative juices. I've never ever loss the basic thrill of opening a Jobo tank and checking my negatives. Long may it go on.

 

[SolaresLarrave]

Thanks for all the comment and advice here! I think I'll leave the monobath stuff for later, and, if I ever get to use it, it'll be to test film or cameras only... although that'd be a somewhat pricy choice.

See... I just never developed large numbers of rolls. My very first dev was D-76 and I mixed it poorly (same with the Kodak fixer I bought that time). That's why I switched to a liquid form (also on the advice of a local photographer). As for temps, I am very careful to stay always at the same, for developing and washing. Only once did I have problems with developing film (a line across the negs).

Soon enough I'll figure out what to do with my old chemistry and order some new stuff. Who knows? I may switch from T-Max to Ilfosol just to keep it under one roof (the fixer I found the most reliable is Ilford).

Again, thanks for your advice! 🙂 Be sure it won't be forgotten or dismissed!