Diafine is a two bath developer right ? I should give that a try, I always push. How would you compare it to Xtol ? That's been my main process for a while now
Most Americans who've visited like the Old Port. 😀 There's some other really interesting parts of the city though, even now I still don't know and want to explore.
Jerome,
Let's explore Montreal together one day or weekend in the future. Montreal is no small city. The Amtrack trainride is only about $65.00 one way.
Because I shot up to a hundred rolls of film a month in bursts (summer months) the cost of one shot developers like ID-11 was a major expense, even if I diluted one to one. Mixing ten to twenty liters of developer every month was also a pain. I was compelled to make Diafine work for me just due to the fact that Diafine gets reused and has an extended shelf life that some say is indefinate. In this manner is is just the opposit of Xtol which is known to have "sudden death syndrome."
I found a lot of the information on this forum and on the internet to be wrong, and that even includes the instructions that came from Diafine. Rated film speeds are way too aggressive, especialy for wet printing unless you like really thin negatives. Take note that I expose for wet printing and I like denser negatives that are easy to straight print.
Diafine is a two part compensating developer. Part "A" is the developer but very little development actually happens during the part "A" soak. Part "B" is the activator where almost all the development takes place. Because I reduced aggitation I got two effects: one was less film speed; and secondly less grain. With Tri-X I have to use an 8X loupe to A-B Tri-X against Arcos on a light table to see that the Tri-X has slightly bigger grain, and I would say Arcos in Diafine has no grain. BTW Tri-X and Acros are the only two films you need with Diafine. HP-5 has less midrange and noticible grain.
I shoot Tri-X at 800-650 ISO with a 3X yellow filter and develope in Diafine 3+3 (with FF this means I'm really shooting at box speed meaning 400-320 ISO). I found that if you don't boost the contrast range with a yellow filter with Tri-X you end up getting irratic results like ultra thin negatives, but the strong compensating effect unwinds the boost in contrast from the filter. The results are a bit like "stand development" where a long tonal range is exhibited and highlight and especially shodow detail is of a larger format.
I once showed Christian from the NYC Meet-Up some 6x9 negitives that I developed in Diafine and his remark was, "With negatives like these you don't need a 4x5."
Arcos I shoot at 100 without any filters. The really great thing about Arcos in Diafine is that there is no recipocy failure so long bulb exposures are easy. Tripod bulb exposures exhibit mucho mid tones almost like HDR but its just one exposure with film processed to perfection.
Shooting Tri-X at 1250-1000 gets you some grain, but this is enough film speed to shoot at night hand held with remarkable results. I tried "Diafine Time Two" which is 3+3, a thorough rinse and then 3+3 again, but this was a lot of work. I found that my 4+7 worked a lot better and did not present the danger of killing my part "A" which will happen if even the smallest drop of Part "B" contaminates Part "A".
Anyways if you like the expanded tonality of medium format in your small format try what I prescribe above. Also know that Diafine gets reused indefinately, but I tend to remix a gallon when the volume gets to 2 liters (Due to spillage and especially Part "A" due to wetting the film. I also tend to dump the bottom which collects some black particles that I suspect is silver.
Good Luck.
Cal
