Found film help needed

[rover]

I read that although the Diafine box recommends higher speeds, because it is a low contrast developer to rate film at the recommended ISO for better shadow detail without blowing out the highlights. Really interesting.

www.dunnamphoto.com/diafine_developer.htm

Gene, I am going to call, or click Adorama now. I called the local retailers who would be some what convenient for me, and no one has it. 🙁
The most likely shop says they occationally have it in stock, but not today. I wonder if it can be shipped through the mail? I will find out I guess.

 

[Doug]

But, getting to the current found-film situation... the reason Tom's suggestion is so reasonable is in the nature of the way Diafine works. Developing agent soaks into the emulsion in Part A, but no development occurs. Part B activates the development process, but of course the only developer present is carried over by the film. When it's exhausted, development must stop. Minimal agitation in Part B is best. That's because you want to localize Diafine's activity, such that denser areas of the image exhaust their local supply of developer and then stop developing to keep the highlights from blocking up. At the same time, low-density (shadow) areas can keep developing to completion, when there's no more exposed silver salts to work on. Too much agitation undermines the localization of this compensating activity.

So, here Diafine is a good choice because it will operate pretty well on the image regardless of the exposure... When the highlight or overexposed areas exhaust their developer, they stop developing. Where the film got less exposure, it gets continued development to compensate, bringing up whatever detail is possible. For the found film it may not give ideal results, but it's the best chance for decent usable results for an unknown film with unknown exposure.

 

[rover]

Not in stock at Adorama. I never trust their web site, I called and they don't have it.

 

[rover]

Diafine found, and it may be availible in Canada too.

It seems this is a Canadian Company.

http://www.freestylephoto.biz/sc_main.php?cat_id=301

 

[FrankS]

I'd love to get me some of that.

 

[rover]

I called and confirmed that it is in stock, and just ordered two gallon packages. If it last forever, then I should be set.

 

[GeneW]

Diafine found, and it may be availible in Canada too.

It seems this is a Canadian Company.

http://www.freestylephoto.biz/sc_main.php?cat_id=301

Their mailing address is Hollywood ... I wonder why this developer is so hard to come by?

Gene

 

[rover]

They list Canadian shipping charges.

http://www.freestylephoto.biz/c_pol.php

I wonder if they retail in CA but warehouse in Canada? They do ship internationally so you should be able to purchase it here.

I wasn't able to find a web site for Acufine or Diafine, must be made in small batches by a chemical company.

 

[T_om]

Wow, this Diafine sounds great, now I have to find some.

Ok, from my lunch time reading, do you shot your films at the film box speeds or at the speeds recommended on the Diafine box?

Has anyone developed fast film, Delta 3200 or TMax 3200 in it?

I have never done the 3200 speed films in Diafine.

Use the Diafine box speeds to give you a starting point, but I found that Tri-X exposed at 1250 always got it spot on for me. By the way, IMHO Diafine is the best developer for Tri-X there is.

Diafine has two weaknesses. Actually, one and a half. 🙂 The second weakness is actually a benefit in lots of situations.

The only "shooting" drawback to Diafine is that you cannot re-rate the film you shoot by adjusting the developer time. For example, with Tri-X you shoot it at 1250 and that is that. No "pushing" can be done with Diafine although some old newspaper shooters will tell you tricks about "double developing" film in Diafine.

I think you will end up liking Diafine. Especially if you are doing the final print prep work in a digital darkroom where Diafine's single "darkroom" drawback (low contrast in some lighting situations) is not a factor.

Tom

 

[GeneW]

Rover, the website is a little confusing. I wonder if Diafine comes under the mantle of 'hazardous materials'. I hope not, since that adds a lot to the shipping price. Yes, they'll ship to Canada but I'd rather buy locally and avoid the shipping charge.

Gene

 

[T_om]

I wonder why this developer is so hard to come by?

Gene

It is old and out of fashion at present.

Us old farts that shot for newspapers remember it though.

Another benefit. If you shoot in 'theatrical' lighting (contrasty, stage lighting) Diafine will produce the best negatives you ever saw. REALLY helped control that tough lighting along with just about any nighttime, wide luminosity situation.

Last, and returning to the thread subject, unknown film may have been exposed any old way. You don't know. With Diafine, what was exposed will be automatically developed to its maximum potential without over development. And that is how it can save your bacon, since you don't know how the film was shot to begin with. With almost ANY B&W film, I can guarantee you will get a usable negative when developed in Diafine, provided the exposure was even close to correct. That was another reason it was so loved by news shooters (and photo editors).

Tom

PS: Betcha can't tell I am a BIG fan of Diafine, huh?

 

[Doug]

I read that although the Diafine box recommends higher speeds, because it is a low contrast developer to rate film at the recommended ISO for better shadow detail without blowing out the highlights. Really interesting.

www.dunnamphoto.com/diafine_developer.htm

Decent link with good info. But on the film speed issue, he may be running into the same effects I was several decades ago with low shadow detail, meaning low effective film speeds. I kept lowering the EI until I got down to box speed, and even then I wasn't really happy with the results and switched to Edwal FG7 for Tri-X.

It's only in recent years I've realized what the problem was: excessive agitiation, about what I commonly do with other developers. I think the Diafine instructions don't sufficiently caution the user to employ very gentle, minimal, agitation.

I believe what happens is that agitation to the degree that would be normal with other developers tends, in Part B, to wash the Part A developer out of the emulsion and off the film surface, and dilutes it into the overall volume of fluid where it's ineffective. The result is thin negatives having run out of developing agent far too early, especially noticeable in the darker areas of the image. It's my view that agitation in Part B (it's irrelevant in A) should be kept extremely gentle, only enough to let the byproducts of development drift away from the surface of the film. Similar to what happens in "stand development", though that's more extreme.

 

[T_om]

I think the Diafine instructions don't sufficiently caution the user to employ very gentle, minimal, agitation...

Bingo.

Diafine needs hardly ANY agitation in the normal sense of the term.

Dump in part A. Whack the tank to loosen bubbles and LEAVE IT ALONE.

3.5 to 4 minutes later, drain part A, pour in part B and whack the tank again. ONCE during the 4 minutes in part B, do an inversion. That's it. No more is necessary... indeed, more is harmful.

As I said earlier, truly the lazy man's developer. No watching a stop watch twiddling with a tank. If you forget to invert, no big deal. If you forget it is in the soup for 10 or fifteen minutes, no big deal.

Tom

 

[FrankS]

Gotta love it!

 

[rover]

You guys are my heros. I can't wait to get this stuff.

 

[Kin Lau]

I've been looking for Diafine for a year, and haven't found anyone in Canada that has it, and I've also known that B&H won't ship it.

Okay.. any others in the GTA want to get in on one order? There's a $25- minimum, and it's only $13.99 for 1gal.

 

[Doug]

I most recently got Diafine at a retail store (Glazers) in Seattle, but I think I recall hearing that Adorama does ship it, unlike B&H, as they use different shippers.

 

[GeneW]

I've been looking for Diafine for a year, and haven't found anyone in Canada that has it, and I've also known that B&H won't ship it.

Okay.. any others in the GTA want to get in on one order? There's a $25- minimum, and it's only $13.99 for 1gal.

Kin, I've been wanting to try Diafine for a long time. I'd be happy to join you on an order.

Gene

 

[FrankS]

I'm in for an order!

 

[FrankS]

I tried emailing the 2 big camera shops in Toronto today: Henry's and EightElm. They are unable to source Diafine in Canada. It's going to have to come from the States.