Get rid of old developer per recommnedations what next?

[scottyb70]

Ok I am not going to use the old developer and fixer to what you guys recommended. I also read through the threads and still can't figure out what would be the best products for my situation.

I called up my local camera shop in Michigan and the said they have kodak and ilford products. Could you recommend which type I should get ? I am looking for alot of contrast and sharp results. I found a hay field in my area with the rolls still not removed and I think b & w would be best for the situation. I may be using my franka solida jr or the perkeo III to take the pictures. I like landscape & still life photography if that makes a difference in a particular type of film or developer to use.

 

[bmattock]

Ok I am not going to use the old developer and fixer to what you guys recommended. I also read through the threads and still can't figure out what would be the best products for my situation.

I called up my local camera shop in Michigan and the said they have kodak and ilford products. Could you recommend which type I should get ? I am looking for alot of contrast and sharp results. I found a hay field in my area with the rolls still not removed and I think b & w would be best for the situation. I may be using my franka solida jr or the perkeo III to take the pictures. I like landscape & still life photography if that makes a difference in a particular type of film or developer to use.

Fixer is fixer, it won't affect the look of the negative.

Developers vary, but if your choice is between brands (Kodak and Ilford) then I'd say they are quite similar. What matters is the type of developer. Kodak has several - so does Ilford. I'd find out what kinds they have.

Where in Michigan are you?

 

[rlouzan]

Fuji Neopan 400 - in a high acutance developer like Rodinal or Kodak HC110B.

 

[scottyb70]

I live in plymouth mi and I was going to goto Adray Camera in dearborn.

 

[bmattock]

I live in plymouth mi and I was going to goto Adray Camera in dearborn.

Adray is an excellent place. Given what I know of their inventory, I would suggest either Kodak HC-110 or Kodak D76. HC-110 has the advantage of being a developer you can mix when you need it, just the amount you need, and the rest will keep (it is a one-shot developer). D76 is mixed from powder and stored in a jug - it has a definite shelf life, so if you're not going to be shooting much, it may go bad before you can use it all up.

Adray tends to have Ilfosol-S and ID-11. ID-11 is the same stuff, basically, as Kodak K76. I don't have any info on Ilfosol-S, never used it.

If I were new and not knowing if I were going to keep at it, or shoot B&W very much, I believe I'd go for the HC-110 for its keeping properties.

However, any of them would most likely do for you very well.

 

[scottyb70]

Thanks for the info I will try the hc 110, will that be good to develop my ilford fp4 plus 125? Is there anything else I need chemical wise? I have the kodak photo flo 200, kodafix and kodak 28% acetic acid. I think I am going to throw out the kodafix and photo flo due to I don't know how long its been. There is a date on the label that says "kodak 1997" at the bottom.

 

[bmattock]

Thanks for the info I will try the hc 110, will that be good to develop my ilford fp4 plus 125?

I have never shot FP4+, but according to the Massive Dev Chart:

http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.html
FP4+ HC-110 B 125 7-9 7-9 7-9 20C

That means HC-110 dilution B (read the instructions for HC-110), for 7 to 9 minutes at 20 degrees C.

Is there anything else I need chemical wise? I have the kodak photo flo 200, kodafix and kodak 28% acetic acid. I think I am going to throw out the kodafix and photo flo due to I don't know how long its been. There is a date on the label that says "kodak 1997" at the bottom.

You will need a fixer, and that's a lot less critical. I like Kodak Rapid Fix, but really, any will do. Some people say you need a 'hardening' fixer and some people say no, but I think it's down to personal preference, as I've never seen a difference.

You don't need acetic acid. For getting started, you don't need much of anything. Photo Flo 200 is nice to have, it stops negative spotting due to uneven drying. I doubt it went bad, I'd use it. It's pretty inert.

You will need a good thermometer, a changing bag or completely dark room, a tank, running water, and something to measure your chemistry and a way to hang your negs when you're done with them until they dry.

 

[rlouzan]

Rapid fixer is a good idea, but 'hardening' fixer will make washing time longer. Just remember to fix for, at least, twice the clearing time.
I use distilled water as a final rinse - Photo Flo tends to leave gunk.

 

[Al Kaplan]

Photo Flo, once diluted, tends to GROW junk after a week or two but starts out junk free. It mostly depends on what "junk" is in your water supply to begin with. You can always run it through an ordinary coffee filter.

 

[bmattock]

Photo Flo, once diluted, tends to GROW junk after a week or two but starts out junk free. It mostly depends on what "junk" is in your water supply to begin with. You can always run it through an ordinary coffee filter.

Not sure what you're referring to here. I've been using Photo-Flo for decades, none of my films have any 'junk' growing on them. I don't dilute Photo-Flo until I use it, and then dispose of it, and I can't imagine why anyone would dilute large amounts of it and hang onto the stuff.

Did I just not understand what you said?

 

[rlouzan]

I use one-shot chemistry, and I´ve seen spots on stored negatives that where imposible to remove with Lighter fluid, alcohol, ... since I switched to distilled water - problem solved!

Al is talking about a stored working solution.

 

[bmattock]

I use one-shot chemistry, and I´ve seen spots on stored negatives that where imposible to remove with Lighter fluid, alcohol, ... since I switched to distilled water - problem solved!

Distilled water is always a good idea, especially depending upon what kind of tap water one has. There is no reason a person can't use Photo-Flo in distilled water, for that matter.

The purpose of treatments like Photo-Flo is to reduce surface tension of water, like soap does. This is supposed to cause the water to run off your negs when you hang them to dry, as opposed to forming beads. Once the beads dry, the minerals within them cause spots. If the water did not have a great deal of particulate matter floating in it to begin with, the spots are less of an issue.

I'm not sure how far I can go here without being 'argumentative' according to the great wakka-wakka in the sky. All I can report is that I use Photo-Flo and I do NOT have spots on my negs, nor do I have things growing on them. If you guys do, bummer, sorry, etc. However, the product is sold to reduce spots, not cause them, and it seems to have a good reputation in that regard. Whatever, do what you want. I will contribute no more to this thread, don't want to be 'argumentative'.

 

[rlouzan]

No problem, we are just chatting and exchanging experiences.
Some people will tell you to avoid using stop bath, to avoid pinpricks on negatives. The importante thing is if problems arise - there are solutions.

Happy New Year!

 

[marke]

No problem, we are just chatting and exchanging experiences.
Some people will tell you to avoid using stop bath, to avoid pinpricks on negatives. The importante thing is if problems arise - there are solutions.

Happy New Year!

Now this is something I've never experienced, either with or without using stop bath. I used it 35 years ago when I first began developing my own film, and never noticed pinpricks. But since I got back into it this past year, I haven't used stop bath once. That's just because I was told by the university teacher that I didn't really need it. And I haven't had a problem just using a water bath with constant agitation for one minute. So, is there actually any advantage to using a stop bath that I'm missing here?

 

[troym]

I'm not sure how far I can go here without being 'argumentative' according to the great wakka-wakka in the sky. All I can report is that I use Photo-Flo and I do NOT have spots on my negs, nor do I have things growing on them. If you guys do, bummer, sorry, etc. However, the product is sold to reduce spots, not cause them, and it seems to have a good reputation in that regard. Whatever, do what you want. I will contribute no more to this thread, don't want to be 'argumentative'.

Al was talking about gunk growing in diluted Photo-Flo, which is something that has been reported before (I, like you, don't keep diluted Photo-Flo hanging around, so I have no experience with this phenomenon). He didn't say gunk grows on negatives treated with Photo-Flo.

 

[rlouzan]

We are talking about zone system practitioners, who make really large prints - most photographers aint that picky🙂.

Now this is something I've never experienced, either with or without using stop bath. I used it 35 years ago when I first began developing my own film, and never noticed pinpricks. But since I got back into it this past year, I haven't used stop bath once. That's just because I was told by the university teacher that I didn't really need it. And I haven't had a problem just using a water bath with constant agitation for one minute. So, is there actually any advantage to using a stop bath that I'm missing here?

 

[troym]

Now this is something I've never experienced, either with or without using stop bath. I used it 35 years ago when I first began developing my own film, and never noticed pinpricks. But since I got back into it this past year, I haven't used stop bath once. That's just because I was told by the university teacher that I didn't really need it. And I haven't had a problem just using a water bath with constant agitation for one minute. So, is there actually any advantage to using a stop bath that I'm missing here?

A stop bath is particularly useful with very short development times to end development immediately (and evenly).

 

[JoeV]

I've thought for a long time that the sudden pH change going from developer to stop bath was responsible for pinholes in film. This is especially a problem in thin-emulsion films like APHS graphic arts film, which I occasionally use in LF cameras.

So I started using a water-bath-only stop with APHS film, in a attempt at eliminating pinholes in the film; I still got them, intermittently.

Now I'm thinking the cause of film pinholes, at least with APHS, are temperature differences between the developer and stop bath. I've been pretty sloppy with temperatures in this process, since the film is ortho and developed-by-inspection in the tray, temperature was relatively unimportant from a development perspective.

~Joe

 

[scottyb70]

Ok I am going to use distilled water when I do the rinse stage. Now what is it photoflo or no photoflo. I know my tap water has high minerals because the glass shower door are spotted and the spots are not from the soap.

 

[venchka]

Distilled water can't hurt. If you have it already, use it for the final rinse. Try Photo-Flo at a higher dilution that Kodak says. I think the bottle says 1:200. Try 1:300 or 1:400. I use my Photo-Flo rather weak.

Kodak Rapid-Fix comes in two bottles. The fix and the hardener. With modern films, mix the fixer concentrate per directions. Omit the hardener. If you use Efke or other old style emulsion films, you can add some hardener to the fixer. Personally, I use half of the hardener so I can use Efke 25 along with more modern films.

I agree with Al. I used to mix up 2 liters of Photo-Flo for 4x5 film. I would keep the mixture in a clear bottle. After a week or two there was junk floating in the Photo-Flo soution. Now I use it one shot.

Good luck.