Stephanie Brim
Mental Experimental.
I'd actually like to find a recipe for fixer that can be made for something like 3 bucks. 
Edit: Actually, I may try the Arista odorless fixer.
Edit: Actually, I may try the Arista odorless fixer.
Last edited:
T_om
Well-known
Stephanie Brim said:My Diafine says that it's enough to make a gallon of each solution on the front, but when I turn it over it says that I should mix the powdered solution A and B each with a quart of water. I have 176 grams of solution A and 320 grams of solution B. So which kit do I actually have?
You have the gallon kit. There was a printing problem with some Diafine boxes and they left the factory with improper instructions.
The 176 gram A tin and the 320 gram B tin, only come in the gallon kit so that is what you have.
Tom
jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
Stephanie Brim said:I'd actually like to find a recipe for fixer that can be made for something like 3 bucks.![]()
How about this?
- Two-pound bucket of sodium thiosulfate from this site: $3.97
- Water to make 2 gallons, using formula from this site (scroll down a ways)
Not quite three bucks, but close...
Stephanie Brim
Mental Experimental.
Also, another thing. I *am* going to be dunking some Pan-F in Diafine. What would be the best way to rate it? Rate it at 50 or rate it at 80 like it says on the back of the Diafine box? And how grainy is it? I've heard people say this, but I'd like to know what kind of grain I'll be dealing with. Scans of negatives to give me an idea would be nice. 
W
wlewisiii
Guest
Don't. Buy the smallest bottle of Ilford's stuff that you can instead.
Seriously? Rate it at 25 and you _might_ get some usable negs.
It really is that bad in diafine. I love diafine, pure and simple, but Ilford does not play nice with diafine. If you intend to seriously use diafine, then use Kodak till the bas*@#ds kill the company and only then shift to Ilford. That's my approach - I'll buy Tri-X and Plus-X till the either the day I die or the day they can no longer be bought. Only then will _I_ switch to FP4 & etc. They are not the same, especially if your dev of choice is diafine. I can not say why Kodak plays so much nicer, but it does. Sometimes it really is that simple.
William
Seriously? Rate it at 25 and you _might_ get some usable negs.
It really is that bad in diafine. I love diafine, pure and simple, but Ilford does not play nice with diafine. If you intend to seriously use diafine, then use Kodak till the bas*@#ds kill the company and only then shift to Ilford. That's my approach - I'll buy Tri-X and Plus-X till the either the day I die or the day they can no longer be bought. Only then will _I_ switch to FP4 & etc. They are not the same, especially if your dev of choice is diafine. I can not say why Kodak plays so much nicer, but it does. Sometimes it really is that simple.
William
T_om
Well-known
wlewisiii said:I love diafine, pure and simple, but Ilford does not play nice with diafine. If you intend to seriously use diafine, then use Kodak till the bas*@#ds kill the company and only then shift to Ilford. That's my approach - I'll buy Tri-X and Plus-X till the either the day I die or the day they can no longer be bought. Only then will _I_ switch to FP4 & etc. They are not the same, especially if your dev of choice is diafine. I can not say why Kodak plays so much nicer, but it does. Sometimes it really is that simple.
William
...and that is what makes horse races.
I happen to like the Ilford HP/FP films in Diafine. It all depends upon the look you are after.
Tom
Share: