jrong
Too many cameras
I'm just about to break into my box of Diafine to develop an expired roll of Tri-X (rated at ISO 1000), using the times of 3+3 on Digitaltruth. I've had a look at lots of photos taken on various films and developed in Diafine, and I must say, the results vary enormously. So enormously that I am having second thoughts and cold feet.
What agitation methods do you use with Diafine? I tend to be a gentle swirler myself, as opposed to an aggressive inverter.
Does it work with low-contrast situations? How about high contrast situations? What is the grain like?
Most importantly, how does it work with 35mm Neopan 400 film? I've seen some nice results with this film, I just want to find out how others are souping their Neopan 400 and getting nice tonality with Diafine.
Jin
What agitation methods do you use with Diafine? I tend to be a gentle swirler myself, as opposed to an aggressive inverter.
Does it work with low-contrast situations? How about high contrast situations? What is the grain like?Most importantly, how does it work with 35mm Neopan 400 film? I've seen some nice results with this film, I just want to find out how others are souping their Neopan 400 and getting nice tonality with Diafine.
Jin
tom_f77
Tom Fenwick
For what it's worth...
-I'm a gentle inverter with a bit of a roll, once a minute.
-I give it four minutes in each bath but just to make it less of a rush.
-I haven't done much neopan 400 but it's definitely ok at ASA800.
-You will not always get as much contrast as you might like but you can make up for this later
-If you expose for the shadows you will get a fully detailed negative; it might be easier to get a print you like if you can play with levels in PS rather than having to do it all in the darkroom.
-DO NOT POUR ANY B BACK IN THE A BOTTLE!
-It's also very nice with Acros (160ish) and the Efke films (more contrast than most in this developer).
Have fun,
Tom
-I'm a gentle inverter with a bit of a roll, once a minute.
-I give it four minutes in each bath but just to make it less of a rush.
-I haven't done much neopan 400 but it's definitely ok at ASA800.
-You will not always get as much contrast as you might like but you can make up for this later
-If you expose for the shadows you will get a fully detailed negative; it might be easier to get a print you like if you can play with levels in PS rather than having to do it all in the darkroom.
-DO NOT POUR ANY B BACK IN THE A BOTTLE!
-It's also very nice with Acros (160ish) and the Efke films (more contrast than most in this developer).
Have fun,
Tom
bmattock
Veteran
No inversion, no agitation. The developer works by absorbing into the emulsion (part a) and then by reacting with that until exhaustion (part b). The directions say you can agitate very gently solution a - but that's just a sop for those who absolutely have to agitate - it does nothing. Does a paper towel absorb water better if you shake it while you wipe?
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
Wayne R. Scott
Half fast Leica User
Bill,
What are air bells on film? And where do they come from?
wayne
What are air bells on film? And where do they come from?
wayne
jrong
Too many cameras
I think "air bells" are air bubbles that are usually caused by inversion agitation. They may stick onto the negative surface and cause uneven development. A good thump or two on the developing tank after inversions should dislodge the air bells.
Thanks for the info.
Thanks for the info.
markinlondon
Elmar user
I think Wayne was suggesting that no agitation would lead to air bells. While this is true when the film is dry it shouldn't be a problem with the second bath of a 2 bath developer as the emulsion has already been wetted. I'd give the tank a turn or two with Diafine just to be on the safe side. I won't be using Diafine again myself, I just didn't like the results on either HP5 or FP4.
Mark
Mark
Stretch out our time, 4 to 5 or 6 minutes is fine, three seems too little, and ultimately 5 ish won't hurt.
Solution A, aggitation is not that big of a deal. I do it in the first few seconds and one other time. In Solution B I will disagree with Bill, though you don't want to wash the developing agent away from the film, you do want to slightly aggitate the film to avoid bromide trails. I gently aggitate for 10 seconds or so at first and then once about 2 minutes or so into bath B. Follow each aggitation with a bump to loose those air bubbles.
Solution A, aggitation is not that big of a deal. I do it in the first few seconds and one other time. In Solution B I will disagree with Bill, though you don't want to wash the developing agent away from the film, you do want to slightly aggitate the film to avoid bromide trails. I gently aggitate for 10 seconds or so at first and then once about 2 minutes or so into bath B. Follow each aggitation with a bump to loose those air bubbles.
markinlondon said:
I love Diafine with Plus X and Tri X, though I think Tri X has a better character in a standard developer. But with Plus X it is a real winner.
tom_f77
Tom Fenwick
Bill, I'm sure you're right about paper towells, but like Rover I've found some agitation necessary to avoid trails. I agree that it's probably not necessary in the first bath but just like to keep things simple.
Re the character of tri-x and no doubt many other films yes, there are lots of developers that will get finer results, but there are none so idiot proof (apart from the thing about pouring b into a...).
Use it if you want an easy life, use something else if you know exactly what you want and want to do loads of testing to get it. Just my opinion...
Tom
Re the character of tri-x and no doubt many other films yes, there are lots of developers that will get finer results, but there are none so idiot proof (apart from the thing about pouring b into a...).
Use it if you want an easy life, use something else if you know exactly what you want and want to do loads of testing to get it. Just my opinion...
Tom
bmattock
Veteran
Wayne R. Scott said:
According to the NY Institute of Photography:
There is no 'pre-soak' with Diafine, because then the emulsion would be saturated with the water used to pre-soak and could not absorb the solution A developer. However, the act of putting in solution A and letting it soak in (3 minutes) eliminates air bells just as a pre-soak would do. As the article mentions, a tap or two just to be sure would be fine.
Solution B merely adds the accelerant to the tank - as it comes into contact with the developer in solution A that has been absorbed into the emulsion, they begin to work together to develop the film - which they will do to exhaustion (no more developer left). This is not how traditional single-solution developers work, where you don't want the developer nearest the film to exhaust itself, so you agitate and/or invert to bring fresh developer into contact with the film.
Agitation in the case of Diafine can serve no purpose, to the best of my knowledge. This would also be why they say not to agitate solution B right on the label.
But we were all taught to agitate and invert and it goes against our grain not to. No pun intended.
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
Berk Sirman
Member
Rover, What do you rate Plus-x with diafine? Can you post an example? How is the costrast?
I need an easy developer for the summer where I'll be someplace pretty warm. It gets way over 25C indoors and I find it hard to control temperature. I will do Tri-x at 1250 w/diafine (which I like a lot) but I thought I might add something else to my diafine films. I tried FP4 but didnt like it.
I need an easy developer for the summer where I'll be someplace pretty warm. It gets way over 25C indoors and I find it hard to control temperature. I will do Tri-x at 1250 w/diafine (which I like a lot) but I thought I might add something else to my diafine films. I tried FP4 but didnt like it.
rover said:
bmattock
Veteran
Berk Sirman said:
There are other 'panthermic' developers, mostly two-part. Not all of them give a speed increase, so it is worth looking around. I've also found that here in North Carolina, in the summer the tap water only gets about 72 deg F - no way to get 68 deg F without putting it in the fridge!
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
bmattock said:
Based on my results I will simply disagree and go on my happy way. The only poor results I have had have been in the few cases that I did not agitate ever so slightly. And yes, I don't do well following instructions, they take the fun out of life.
Berk Sirman said:
320, I think it is a great match, sharp, smooth, excellent contrast to my taste. I am at work so I can't post anything here, but all of the Plus X shots in my gallery were developed in Diafine.
bmattock
Veteran
rover said:
If it works for you, it is hard for me to say it doesn't. I don't understand why it would work for you, but there you go.
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
rover said:
Not funny, I just looked and I don't think there are any Plus X/Diafine shots in my gallery. I must have attached them all to threads.
APX at 500 is pretty sharp in Diafine too. More defined consistent grain than Tri X in Diafine if you like grain.
K
Kin Lau
Guest
rover said:
It makes sense. I'm mostly a no-touch in Solution B with Diafine, but if what you've shot has large areas of light, such as sky, then a bit (very little, just a roll or a tip) is needed to avoid bromide drag.
titrisol
Bottom Feeder
DOS:
- Agitate and rap the tank slightly on solution A.. You can agitate in A doesn't make much difference
- After poruing out A and pouring in B "swirl" tank to mix slightly and rap the tank to dislodge air bubbles again
- Pour B out after 3 minutes
- Use a water stop bath (2 quick changes of water)
DONT'S:
- Presoak
- Agitate in B
- Agitate and rap the tank slightly on solution A.. You can agitate in A doesn't make much difference
- After poruing out A and pouring in B "swirl" tank to mix slightly and rap the tank to dislodge air bubbles again
- Pour B out after 3 minutes
- Use a water stop bath (2 quick changes of water)
DONT'S:
- Presoak
- Agitate in B
matti
Established
tom_f77 said:
Tom, what do you rate the efke-films at?
/matti
K
