Developing in Diafine: which film ??

[Joao]

Hello
After a disappointing experience with developing TMax 100 in Diafine I consider that it was not a good choice: Burned whites, halo and glow around some bright areas. I must say that other factors may have contributed to the bad results (camera, light conditions, etc).

We usually see questions about choosing a developer for a certain film, but now I am asking the other way around:

Question : If you only had Diafine as a developer, what film(s) would you choose ?? And what films would you definitely not choose - if any ??

Thank you for your opinions and sugestions

Joao

 

[presspass]

I use Diafine with Tri-X every month or so. It's not my regular developer, but when I need ISO of 1000 or 1250, it works well. I have been using it regularly for years - it's very long lasting and gives predictable results for me with this film and ISO. I haven't tried it with other films.

 

[lawrence]

I would tend to choose traditional films since they have thicker emulsions. The way Diafine works is that the developer (A) is absorbed by the film emulstion and then activated in the second bath (B). For this to be effective you need a thickish film base that can absorb enough of A, which tends to rule out thin emulsion films like TMX, Pan F etc. although I would say that of the medium speed films I have had good results with Fuji Acros.

Traditionally Tri-X is the recommended film for use with Diafine, however I have to take issue with any claims that film speed is increased by much more than two thirds of a stop with this combination. In other words, the claim on the Diafine box that you can rate Tri-X at 1600 is in my view pure fantasy; if you do this you will end up with some very thin negatives (at least by my own standards). What Diafine is actually useful for is taming high contrast, such as stage lighting, but my personal view is that Tri-X should still be rated in the range EI 400-640.

 

[anerjee]

Tri-x, fp4+, APX 100 ... traditional emulsions.

definitely not - Acros 100.

Hello
After a disappointing experience with developing TMax 100 in Diafine I consider that it was not a good choice: Burned whites, halo and glow around some bright areas. I must say that other factors may have contributed to the bad results (camera, light conditions, etc).

We usually see questions about choosing a developer for a certain film, but now I am asking the other way around:

Question : If you only had Diafine as a developer, what film(s) would you choose ?? And what films would you definitely not choose - if any ??

Thank you for your opinions and sugestions

Joao

 

[WJJ3]

Shot Tri-X at EI1000 and developed in Diafine for about 6 months before. Negs were a bit thin but that wasn't really a problem for scan and photoshop workflow. I was really pretty happy with Diafine's no nonsense, but I could never get even development in large areas with no detail ie sky etc. In retrospect I think I may have not had enough airspace in my dev tank to allow proper agitation, but after doing some research I thought bromide drag may have been an issue with that combo as well. I would actually like to revisit it...

 

[jamin-b]

I have started using Diafine as my primary developer (for convenience reasons) and had good results IMHO with a variety of flms - FP4+, HP5, Tri-X, Foma films, even Polypan F + XP-2.

See for yourself and see if it suits you...https://www.flickr.com/search/?user_id=96319283@N08&sort=date-taken-desc&tags=diafine&view_all=1

 

[Fotohuis]

FP4+ E.I. 200
HP5+ E.I. 800
Tri-X E.I. 1000
Fomapan 100 E.I. 160
Fomapan 200 E.I. 200
Fomapan 400 E.I. 400
Rollei RPX-400 E.I. 800
Rollei RPX-100 E.I. 160
Fuji Acros 100 E.I. 160 but 5+5 minutes.

Watch about the Diafine temperature between 21C-28C range.
Normally regular cubical type films 3+3 minutes. Exception see the Acros 100 film.
The effective speed enhancing is 2/3F stop, the rest real push processing but you can not control the density of the negatives.

 

[Joao]

Thank you !
Tri-X up to EI 1000 seems a favourite, but reading some positive opinions about other emulsions is reassuring.
I am grateful for your input
Joao

 

[Bingley]

I don't think TMax films work terribly well in Diafine. I've had very good results, however, with Tri-X and its cheap variant Arista Premium 400. Either way, I rate the film at 800 and expose accordingly.

If you can find any Plus-X, it produces beautiful results in Diafine when rated at 320.

I've also gotten acceptable results with Fomapan 100, rated at 200.

 

[Pherdinand]

Neopan 400 and 1600 also worked fine in Diafine (good luck finding any!)

And there was this iso100 Fuji...what was it called... not the Acros but
ah yes the Neopan 100SS. I exposed it at 400 and it looks just fantastic. I did it first time by accident, thinking i have tri-x, then noticed upon removal that it's 100SS. So i just brewed it in Diafine hoping. Got it out very nice so i used SS in Diafine after that, at 400.

 

[mfogiel]

It is basically a Tri X developer. Make sure to agitate every 30 secs, as too little agitation causes serious streaking. The good thing about Tri-X in Diafine, is that if you scan, anything from EI 50 to EI 2000 will be usable.

 

[Calzone]

My faves are Tri-X at 800 and Acros at 100. I minimize agitation to only two inversions per minute for added kids and even finer grain. Also know that I make negatives for wet printing that have added density.

Cal

 

[lawrence]

My faves are Tri-X at 800 and Acros at 100.
Cal

It's strange that Acros is so good in Diafine but that's my experience too 🙂

 

[Ronald M]

Tri x is decent at honest 1250 iso. If you want speed.

Since it went thin emulsion, the old developer are not so good.

I settled on home brew D76, T Max 100 and 400.

I am more interested in Quality than Diafine provides