Dektol, Dektol, Dektol.

[awbphotog]

Hello all!

Last night I used a mixture of Dektol 1:1 to process a roll of TMY400 and it came out extremely dense and chunky. Was a neat experiment and I'm satisfied with the results. I then tried to process a roll of TX400 in a similar mixture and it COMPLETELY WIPED THE FILM! There aren't any signs of exposure, not even frame numbers. Does anyone know why, short of...not exposing the film, Dektol would wipe Tri-x and not T-max? I'm only using Dektol because it was given to me and I've used it before for both film and paper with favorable results...but this has never happened to me. It must be that I didn't actually shoot the roll, but that makes no sense seeing as it was wrapped up and ready to be processed. 😕😕😕 Thanks in advance guys!

Andy

 

[timor]

Hello all!

Last night I used a mixture of Dektol 1:1 to process a roll of TMY400 and it came out extremely dense and chunky. Was a neat experiment and I'm satisfied with the results. I then tried to process a roll of TX400 in a similar mixture and it COMPLETELY WIPED THE FILM! There aren't any signs of exposure, not even frame numbers. Does anyone know why, short of...not exposing the film, Dektol would wipe Tri-x and not T-max? I'm only using Dektol because it was given to me and I've used it before for both film and paper with favorable results...but this has never happened to me. It must be that I didn't actually shoot the roll, but that makes no sense seeing as it was wrapped up and ready to be processed. 😕😕😕 Thanks in advance guys!

Andy

Andy, using Dektol for film is nothing new, just in somewhat lesser concentration. I am using Polymax T quite often if I want a specific look of my, usually, Eastman 5222, which is a very close cousin to TX. By my calculation your concentration is 1+19, mine 1+49. In 20C (68F) I develop for 6-7 min. Same should be OK for TX. Didn't try it with TMY, but in even smaller ratio like 1+74 it should give nice results.
In case of your "wiped out" TX I am sure you mixed up the developer with fixer (Dektol is colorless, so is fixer) and used fixer first, thus removing all silver halides, frame numbers included.

 

[ChrisN]

Yep - you dunked it in the fixer first. I did that once.

Paper developer is very active compared to film developer (has to be as paper is about ISO 6). Try a thinner dilution.

Here's what I got with twenty year old HP5 (Ilford 617 35mm motion picture stock), exposed at EI 200 with an OM2n in auto-exposure mode, developed in Ilford Multigrade (paper) developer (15ml in 300ml) at 20c for 2 (yes two) minutes with initial 10s agitation and another 10s after one minute.

 

[Photo_Smith]

Yes fixer was used first.

Dektol as a developer of film is not unusual, there have been many products over the years known as 'Universal' developers that can be used with both film and paper just vary the dilution.
Kodak have times for Tech Pan in Dektol for use as a high contrast material.

Most of these developers have short development times, quite high contrast and much more grain.
They tend to have more hydroquinone than pure film based developers and are much more active for shorter times, less effective for higher dilution longer development times where grain will become more obtrusive.

 

[awbphotog]

Ah. Honest mistake I suppose, albeit a noobie one! Here's a result from the roll that DID come out.

 

[Nokton48]

Back in my photojourmalist days in the 70's I used to use Dektol straight and had hundreds of successful runs using it. In straight Dektol, the reel was dropped into a tank of straight Dektol, and agitated vigourously (lift and twist) for exactly -one- minute. Then stop and fix, and usually printed the negative while it was still wet. After a while, the residual fixer in the pretty-much unwashed film erodes the negative carrier 🙄

I first learned about this technique from Bill Pierce, in his "Nuts & Bolts" column in the old photo periodical CAMERA35.

I was using vintage 70's Tri-X, and with the hot development in Dektol, rating it at EI 800. Always worked just great.

 

[Rob-F]

Here's the clue: If the film had been developed normally, the edge numbers would still be there, even if the film had not been exposed. Totally blank film implies that development didn't happen.

 

[timor]

Back in my photojourmalist days in the 70's I used to use Dektol straight and had hundreds of successful runs using it. In straight Dektol, the reel was dropped into a tank of straight Dektol, and agitated vigourously (lift and twist) for exactly -one- minute. Then stop and fix, and usually printed the negative while it was still wet. After a while, the residual fixer in the pretty-much unwashed film erodes the negative carrier 🙄

I first learned about this technique from Bill Pierce, in his "Nuts & Bolts" column in the old photo periodical CAMERA35.

I was using vintage 70's Tri-X, and with the hot development in Dektol, rating it at EI 800. Always worked just great.

It is very interesting, thanks for sharing, will try this one day.